.. and they wonder why nobody buys papers

ByTrisidium

.. and they wonder why nobody buys papers

As most of you will be aware, the Guardian recently agreed to and accepted payment from CQN for an advertisement which was intended to raise awareness of the Resolution 12 issue, an issue pursued determinedly by Celtic shareholders for the last three years. Subsequently, and citing the thinnest of excuses, they decided not to run the ad. This developed hard on the heels of the Herald actually soliciting the business from the advertisers for their own paper, and then without even seeing the copy, refusing to move forward. (See CQN story here)

guardianGateA troubling aspect of GuardianGate is that CQN were lied to. They were initially advised that the ad was to be removed after editorial scrutiny. Subsequently they were advised that the decision came from an intervention by senior officials.

 

We are now focused on a media conspiracy to impose censorship in favour of a multi-million pound industry –  to the detriment of its small investors and paying customers.

So which was true – and which was the lie?

Here’s a thing about the truth; it is seldom complicated, which is why the failure by the Guardian and the Herald to deliver a straightforward answer implies that there may be more to this nonsense than any of us first imagined.

At this point, it is worth noting that the Guardian is currently running an ad campaign by Toyota, a company who have admitted lying to environmental regulatory bodies for years about emissions from their cars (the Guardian professes to be a major campaigner on environmental issues), but won’t accept a paying ad that asks some polite and important questions about the conduct of a multi-million pound industry.

The denial  of the Res 12 guys’ right to ask questions (no accusations – just bloody questions) via the once assumed to be pluralist and free press, should be ringing alarm bells all over the country, and the substantive issue has become largely irrelevant as a consequence. We are now focused on a media conspiracy to impose censorship in favour of a multi-million pound industry –  to the detriment of its small investors and paying customers.

Two so-called quality newspapers, have mysteriously, after touting for advertising business, refused that very same business, and have given no good reason for doing so. If  the Guardian refuse to accept an ad, I don’t believe that is censorship in itself, but when the dwindling number of newspaper proprietors in this country conspire to arrange an effective blackout of ideas, that is quite clearly censorship.

And for something so relatively inconsequential as football, I can only assume that we have all stumbled on to something far more serious.

Given the recent media rhetoric about Russia Today and their forthright coverage of Chilcot and Tory Election Fraud, it seems that like so many of the players in this saga, the irony circuit in the collective press brain is now as devolved as a human tail.

There are dark forces at work in our country, and they are running riot with basic freedoms.  However it is important to put the football issue into the proper perspective; if the media can go to these corrupt lengths for a game of football, what will they do to protect the capital interests of arms manufacturers, food producers and media dictatorships?

They may have lost the war, but through fix after fix at the SFA and the SPL, in the press and in the media, the authorities are winning the peace – basically by denying that any peace is possible until we all accept the notion that black is white, right is left, and wrong is right

Support for the SFA © Scotsman

Migrant fruit-pickers
© Scotsman

Back in soccer La-La-Land’s Mount Florida Fruit Factory, the football authorities most definitely lost the recent war. RFC went out of business and failed the fundamental task of any football club – to sustain itself. In allowing that to happen on their watch, the authorities failed in their most fundamental role – to keep RFC alive.

However through fix after fix, at the SFA and the SPL, in the press and in the media, they are winning the peace – basically by denying that any peace is possible until we all accept the notion that black is white, right is left, and wrong is right.

And still, even in this atmosphere, the major shareholders at all of our clubs sit and do nothing. Are they part of the problem, an integral part of the conspiracy? Or are they scared witless of the forces that may line up against them if they dare to grow a pair, like the Resolution 12 guys?

Sporting integrity has taken a back seat recently. Season ticket sales are up all over the place; Celtic provided a marquee manager; the red tops are ablaze about the ‘return’ of the Rangers; Hearts and Aberdeen are newly emerged from financial difficulty, and now enjoy the realistic prospect of new eras of success; and another competitive and exciting year beckons in the Championship.

 

In normal circumstances this would be fantastic news. But all of it is based on a Lie – the Lie that the game is run according to the rules, and for the benefit of all clubs. When the euphoria at Parkhead dies down; when TRFC are reinstalled (actually it will need to be with a shoehorn, but it will be done) as part of the old duopoly that sees the vital contribution made by the likes of Hearts and Aberdeen and others as insignificant; when the next major ‘bending’ of the regulations becomes necessary; all we will be left with is that Big Lie.

The clubs will eventually have to deal with that – and the complicit roles they played in ramming it down each and every one of our throats.

I hope we make them pay.

 

Another thing about the truth though is this;

Everyone with skin in this game, with the exception of the mentally deficient, know exactly what the truth is;

  • RFC cheated;
  • RFC evaded, avoided, and deliberately withheld payment of tax;
  • RFC failed to register players properly over (at least) a decade;
  • RFC lied to the SFA, the SPL and LNS;
  • Whilst all the above was happening, RFC won over a dozen on-field prizes;
  • The SFA rewrote the terms of LNS to better tailor their preferred outcome;
  • RFC were punished by way of a £250k fine. No other penalties were suffered by RFC;
  • RFC entered liquidation and a new club, which co-existed with RFC, began playing in competition BEFORE RFC’s SFA/SPL membership lapsed;
  • That club (TRFC for differentiation purposes) just achieved promotion to the Premiership;

As long as we keep reminding everyone of those truths, as long as we continue to give them a voice, they won’t go away.

And what if, next time, it is Hearts or Aberdeen or Celtic, who make a desperate attempt to get an edge over their rivals (an emergent TRFC perhaps)?

The irony (and I exclude the TRFC fans who frequent this site) is that TRFC, despite having the weight of the football and press establishments behind them, are being done no favours at all.

The increasing pariah status of their club is a sad but inevitable consequence of the wrong-doing by the old club, because the fans (understandably to be fair) seek to side with their own partisan interests in the face of outside hostility.

But think of this. If the initial-ism ‘RFC’ above was replaced by the name of any other club in the country, wouldn’t TRFC fans be complaining as loudly as the rest of us?

And what if, next time, it is Hearts or Aberdeen or Celtic, who make a desperate attempt to get an edge over their rivals (an emergent TRFC perhaps)?

What if they run roughshod over the same rules that were broken before but remain unfixed? What if, as a consequence, a compliant TRFC are denied an opportunity to play in Europe, or compete in a final, or win a league?

Will we then still be ‘Rangers haters’ if we protest about that or merely Hearts or Dons or Celtic haters?

This is not about revenge – it never has been – and no amount of wishful thinking will make it so. For most of us on SFM, there is no RFC to have our revenge on anyway, so the accusation makes no sense.

What we are about, what we are all about, is weeding out the clucken wort in Scotland’s football garden on level six at Hampden.

And it appears that some extraordinarily powerful individual or group, with enough muscle to bend the fourth estate to their will, wants to keep us all away from that garden..

 

About the author

Trisidium administrator

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.

1,359 Comments so far

billyj1Posted on8:11 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Excellent work, as ever.

View Comment

CrownStBhoyPosted on8:17 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Excellent article Tris.

This now has the makings of a major cover-up written all over it; SDM, RBS etc. and other players at an even higher level.

It is indeed a very worrying state of affairs.

Given the level of cover-ups elsewhere, it may take a super whistle blower of Snowden proportions to expose this corruption.

View Comment

zam1Posted on8:31 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Could the SFA already be under investigation by higher powers than UEFA ? and the media in the UK has been told to back off as to not alert them ?
I can see no reason why the media do not want to touch this, this is not global news or potentially going to bring any government down, this is about the SFA being corrupt. This matters only to a back water of world football,,, so WHY !
My only thought is this goes far far deeper than football. I can remember when “Rangers Tax Case” was on the go, there where posts on there of certain families who where putting money into RFC; if you can remember then I am sure you could remember the family/s I am speaking of.

View Comment

BawsmanPosted on8:42 pm - Jun 8, 2016


 

 Great blog Tris. 
I think Res 12 has just outed some really serious ongoing investigations. I’m a Guardian fan and don’t believe they’d snub a story like Res 12, we live in interesting times.
Bums will be getting very much more squeaky by the day, eh Darryl? ?

View Comment

TheClumpanyPosted on8:56 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Great post.

View Comment

Winning CaptainsPosted on9:04 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Tomorrow CQN will reveal the next London based media brand to ‘walk away’ from a £5000 upfront payment, and it will surprise you. 

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on9:05 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Brilliant Tris, brilliant.

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on9:19 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Great blog Tris,
it is refreshing to read something in black and white and know it is not a lie.  I do not buy papers, I subscribe to TSFM and always will till the truth (what ever it may be prevails).

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on9:20 pm - Jun 8, 2016


CROWNSTBHOY  June 8,2016  at 20.17
‘…it may take a super whistle blower…’
__________
It is now abundantly clear that the Boards of our 40 professional and one amateur senior football clubs in Scotland are guilty by their silence of collectively running a fundamentally dishonest sport. That is, they are Boards of dishonest businessmen and women.
They are taking your money and mine, and toying with our emotions, on the entirely false pretence that they are engaged in honest, unrigged, competitive sport. We know that the game was spectacularly rigged in favour of a multi-cheating club.
There is none of them principled enough even to think of whistle-blowing. And certainly not brave enough ,even if so minded, to put a whistle to their lips.They have thrown in their lot with the lying cheating officers of their ‘governing’ bodies.
Whatever the reasons, they have shown themselves to be people of straw, not at all to be trusted any more than one would trust a crooked boxing promoter or bent bingo caller.
However, each in his or her own way knows in his or her heart that they are little better than the CGs and DKs and the SDMs, and has to live with that.
And, of course, the ‘journalists’ of the print SMSM and Radio Scotland are as the sh.te on the shoes of the above.

View Comment

tonyPosted on10:37 pm - Jun 8, 2016


good post tris
something tells me there is a bigger story developing behind this refusal,or am i just over thinking

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on10:49 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Brilliant blog Tris
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Re Guardian pulling Res12 advert
I reckon this is another example of the Tory Government running scared of losing the EU Referendum
Just as
Todays decision to extend the referendum registration deadline by 48hrs. This is to make up for a problem with the registration website that lasted no more than 12 hrs 
i.e.
Downing St policy to use all arms of government to support a “Remain” vote
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
If so
IMO
The UK press have  been sent a  gagging Notice by the UK Gov covering the period leading up to the Referendum on June 23
This notice bans publication of all articles  that can be construed as criticism of Europe (But no doubt doesn`t ban articles that support  the EU
And
The Board of the Guardian  pulled the Res 12 advert because they got a referral from lower management expressing concern that it might contravene the UK Gov gagging order

And they interpreted this notice as meaning
“Lets not criticise any European Institution in case it encourages the feeble minded  to vote “Leave” because they confuse UEFA with EU
By “feeble minded” we mean of course those pesky voters we lie to in public and treat with contempt in private
and
The fact that UEFA represent more countries than  there are in the EU is irrelevant
This is not an issue about truth
Its about manipulating the masses
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I hope you are reading this Grant Russell
Some of your recent tweets imply that STV may have embarked on some investigative journalism into UEFA cooperating with our  corrupt football governing authorities during the Res 12  period in 2011
If So 
Perhaps you could  ask your top level boss at STV if the Board have any objection to you releasing some advance explosive information (even as a teaser) before the Referendum on June 23
I bet they say No

View Comment

SouthernExilePosted on10:53 pm - Jun 8, 2016


BHS: Ruthless mega rich individual has troublesome business. Sells said basket case to a patsy for a pound. Patsy duly runs the business into the ground. But look…a floating charge which gives the holder huge influence on the choice of administrators.  Duff and Phelps (big mates with the capo) duly appointed. 

Ye kidnae mak it up. 

View Comment

VeritasPosted on11:12 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Excellent blog !
Well Done !
Rangers have completely controlled the media and the football authorities from the early MURRAY years .
No other football club in the UK ,possibly anywhere, spends in relative terms so much money , time ,effort and intellectual energy in delivering and maintaining their agenda in extremis . in the US it’s called playing defense!
It is now impossible to believe anything other than there has been comprehensive and sophisticated myth management campaign and total control of the Scottish media from day 1 in this Rangers debacle all controlled centrally and all aimed at rehabilitating Rangers as if nothing had happened …from where and by whom we can all guess!
Whilst It beggars belief that a national title could possibly fall within this ‘spiders web’ I suspect there are deep relationships that spread far and wide in the UK ..but the capitulation of the Guardian exposes and brings back into view this potentially deep and sinister cover up
On the specific issue of the advert I am not actually convinced that the SFA were totally complicit in the Res 12 stuff eg looks to me more like a ‘Nelsons eye ‘ type approach bad as that is ..but that said their behaviour was completely outrageous on the LNS debacle .
The cover up of this and the related Offshore Report is now indeed becoming THE story .

It is clear that the folks bravely pursuing this have hit a very serious raw nerve or nerves eg probably on Res12 as others have posited that TRFC could well be banned from Europe for quite some time which could obviously be fatal for that club’s aspirations

Some other fascinating questions emerge for Scottish footbal from this .eg
Will CFC support them or leave their Res 12 guys out to dry on this and by definition support the cover up agenda ?
The online folks will not go away on this stuff . how long can the MSM hold out
How will the media and authorities resist constant crowd funded type barrages ?
This will run and run !
Again great blog thank you..I will donate!

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on11:16 pm - Jun 8, 2016


I’d say CQN or TSFM or more likely Phil Mac should get in touch with Roy Greenslade – their regular media columnist and ask for his take – he did cover RTC and the subsequent lack of effort from the Scottish press in previous years, now HIS paper is showing similar failings…

View Comment

bailemeanachPosted on11:17 pm - Jun 8, 2016


Sorry to hilack but this is life or death for a wee one

https://www.gofundme.com/teamerincross?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=email&utm_content=CTA_view_campaign&utm_campaign=donation_receiptv5
Please please throw a few pound at this

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on11:43 pm - Jun 8, 2016


BAILEMEANACHJUNE 8, 2016 at 23:17
Sorry to hilack but this is life or death for a wee one
https://www.gofundme.com/teamerincross?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=email&utm_content=CTA_view_campaign&utm_campaign=donation_receiptv5
Please please throw a few pound at this
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Heartbreaking

View Comment

BawsmanPosted on11:47 pm - Jun 8, 2016


OCKYBHOYJUNE 8, 2016 at 23:16

Done that earlier…….I think I was one of many.

View Comment

TrisidiumPosted on12:52 am - Jun 9, 2016


Thanks for the response folks. I tried to leave out my incredulity that the Guardian would be so easily leveraged to take the action they have taken, because my own preconceptions and fondness for that paper are largely irrelevant in the here and now.

The most suspicious thing about it is their apparent reluctance to offer a good reason for the turnabout. One would think that a rational approach from their point of view would be to assume good faith on the part of the advertisers, and engage them in some kind of dialogue to either resolve the problem or enable them to climb out of the hole they appear to have dug for themselves.

Perhaps the Guardian are themselves acting properly for reasons that will become clear soon? One can cling to that hope I suppose, but the shut-down operation on the story still seems (alarmingly) to be the Occam’s Razor answer to the question.

Winning Captain: I hope your news tomorrow, good or bad, will at least enable us to draw some intelligent inferences on what the big picture is here. Look forward to hearing from you on that.

View Comment

woodsteinPosted on1:43 am - Jun 9, 2016


Trisidium
 
Responding to a post  in “The Ministry Of  Pishery”  johnjamessite  (sitonfence) asks:
“How can these individuals earn a living without any acquaintance with the facts?”

The answer to that question  baffles me, and has done for a long time now.

I have a folder with 188 sub folders and 4,705 files (5.22GB)  listing numerous occasions over the last 7 years where almost all of the UK newspapers were factually incorrect or just plain devious.
In 2007 I created this folder, Research, to keep a record.

Occasionally I have a read back.
All I can say is the fourth estate should be utterly ashamed of themselves for what they pretend is Journalism.
All newspapers should be compelled to display this  banner headline.

Omnes relinquite spes, o vos intrantes.
07

View Comment

Johnbud78Posted on3:28 am - Jun 9, 2016


Well done Tris, great read!

As always I am, naively, disgusted with the print media! The relative unimportant nature of the subject leads me to believe there is more to this, however, I think I may be being naive again! As always with this saga, we on here and the guys active online will know all about this but it’s the others, the majority unfortunately, who will be blind to this? A few of you have said previously we need to get the message out there more, but its now patently obvious that this will not be allowed through traditional means, thinking caps on here, how else do we go about this? Reiver’s leaflets sounded like a great idea btu not sure how much of an impact they have had? I am on the other side of the world so online is how I keep up to date, not sure how much impact I can have but will certainly keep thinking and contributing to you guys!

Sickened doesn’t quite cover it201920 

View Comment

jimboPosted on7:05 am - Jun 9, 2016


A great opening article Tris.

When the Res.12 guys said they wanted to widen the net of exposure on the issues regarding Res.12 I thought it was very clever to place the ad. in the heartland of EUFA and that worked to an extent at least as far as Stuart Regan popping his head from above the Hamden bunker.

Knowing that you would never get a fair hearing here in Scotland’s press – even to the extent of accepting an advert! – the other option was to turn to the pan UK press.  It didn’t surprise me at all that the preferred port of call was the Guardian, the thinking person’s newspaper.  And certainly a paper not afraid to confront big controversy.  Not that it was going to be an Editorial piece or a columnist opinion, but a paid for (£5k) ADVERTISEMENT.  Then they pulled it.  It leaves me with grave misgivings about what is behind this astonishing decision for such an esteemed title.

It makes me remember what my father told me in the 1960s and 1970s.  The Daily Record & Sunday Mail in those days were campaigning newspapers for ordinary folk.  I always remember ‘The Judge’ in the Sunday Mail for example.

But my father had a word of caution, The Record & The Mirror will tell you to vote Labour at election times but they are owned by Tories.  They would sell their souls to make money.

So who is this mysterious person who pulled the plug on the Guardian advert?  Was it even anyone to do with the paper? 

It reminds me of films & TV when the cops have been working under the radar for months on a case, infiltrated the gang and along comes PC Plod about to blow all the good work apart. 

I know, it’s fanciful, but I’m getting desperate.  It certainly reeks of something deeply disturbing. People in very, very high places.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:08 am - Jun 9, 2016


Fantastic blog as always from Tris.

It once again raises the question of just how far the tentacles of corruption reached in 2011 and 2012, and how far reaching they still are. What the Herald does to protect the SFA and Rangers never has been and never will be a surprise, but the Guardian! The English media has long regarded Scottish football as a backwater, worthy only of a curious peek every now and then. They have had plenty to say about alleged corruption in the heavyweights of FIFA and UEFA, so why would they seek to protect the lightweight SFA?

As I said on the previous blog, a refusal to take the advert is a great endorsement. It would have been far easier to have taken the advert, then systematically destroyed its content with incontrovertible facts. Why wouldn’t the SFA and the media want to put this to bed forever, because it isn’t going to go away with their current strategy!

View Comment

fan of footballPosted on7:13 am - Jun 9, 2016


I wonder if the folks over at TOG site would be interested the story of the Herald and the Guardians decision not to run the CQN ad .

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on7:17 am - Jun 9, 2016


It’s only a couple of weeks ago that tabloids and broadsheets were venting about being prevented from publishing the names of a celebrity couple involved in some tawdry shenanigans.
Freedom of the press was cited, a right for the public to know was cited. Some even went as far as to make it a front page story complete with banner headlines.

I suspect the outrage was as much because they were denied extra sales revenue , as it was for genuine concern about censorship

The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Journalism has always been a seedy business. There are exceptions of course, but even the good guys are under pressure to be aware of commercial or political realities. 

Take the example of Graham Spiers departure from his relationship with The Herald. The whole world ( or at least anyone who has had business dealings in Central Scotland) knows what type of individual John Gilligan is. His colleague Stuart Robertson recently stated singing the Billy Boys was preferable to fans going onto the pitch. This followed on from the comments to Spiers about it being a good song . Nothing wrong with it. 

As we all know there was virtually no support for Spiers , with one much less talented weasel at The Herald going out if his way to actually undermine Spiers. Newspaper sales are plummeting for reasons unconnected to their lack of integrity. However journalism’s reputation  in Scotland is being filleted by that lack of integrity. The problem is many of these journalists are too stupid to realise it

View Comment

FinlochPosted on8:03 am - Jun 9, 2016


I’ve always seen The Guardian as just about the best of a variable bunch and was a little surprised and saddened at the news yesterday.
I don’t know who got at them, but got at they have been, and Im skeptical about it being part of anything other than someone up here with a wee bit of power under threat calling in a favour from someone at The Guardian because a lot of that goes on.
I sent a wee letter to the editor.
Against the big picture it’s irrelevant and easily ignored.
It won’t be published but I bet I wasn’t the only one and I know Roy Greenslade will be aware of what has happened and he’s not one to be trampled over.
Not for ever anyway.
Whatever the mainstream might try to do this won’t go away.

Dear Sir,
I’ve just heard that The Guardian has decided to cancel an advertisement which has already run in a Swiss newspaper on behalf of a crowd funded group of concerned Scottish Football Fans.
Many Scottish fans from all clubs have real issues with the way our game is governed and controlled and especially with the behind closed doors deals and the way our own Scottish based (biased) media are so reliant on the constant flow of free information from our top clubs and associations that they therefore the lack of any insight, debate or criticism.
It seems that someone somewhere has also now “got-at” The Guardian and that makes me as a long term and time reader (since the 70s) very wary about anything I have read in the past.
There is a very real story up here that one day will be properly covered.
This is a sad day indeed for integrity.
A very sad day.

(Name address and phone number supplied)

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on8:30 am - Jun 9, 2016


WOODSTEIN
June 9 2016 at 01.03
‘…omnes relinquite spes, o vos intrantes.’
_________
Woodstein, me, masel’, personally much prefer the (better known?) ” Lasciate ogni speranza voi ch’ entrate” of Dante Alighieri, early of a Thursday morning. What joy!
As for journalists feeling shame? Maybe real journalists might, like the rest of us, have some notion of shame.
Our SMSM football hacks would, I’m sure, have been consigned by Dante to an eleventh circle of Hell if they had as a breed been in existence at the time!

View Comment

incredibleadamsparkPosted on9:14 am - Jun 9, 2016


If I were to write a script about recent events it would open with the Ayr Utd shareholders rejecting £500,000 from David Murray to buy the club. The credits would roll after Rangers are sold to a Motherwell born billionaire, with off the radar wealth, for £1.

I’d have liked Marty Feldman for this billionaire. He would play exactly the same character as he did in Young Frankenstein (insert your own creating a monster joke here) but I haven’t settled on my Murray. 

The problem is just one film couldn’t cover everything and it doesn’t appear to stop with the handing over of that £1. Likely you’d end up rivalling Godzilla (again, insert your own creating a monster joke here) as the film franchise with the most ever sequels to get somewhere close to the whole story.

View Comment

tartantalksPosted on9:24 am - Jun 9, 2016


I certainly think people are now aware that this “story” goes way beyond football corruption. I think we need to look at links with David Murray and the financial institutions and individuals involved in them. The old adage of “follow the money” seems relevant here.

View Comment

steph1895Posted on9:26 am - Jun 9, 2016


A great read Tris, and an unfortunate turn of events to be sure.
With regards to advertisements in newspapers; what about the local newspapers such as the Metro, which has regional and national variations.
These are left freely on the buses, trains and most public transport systems throughout the UK.
To my knowledge this newspaper is still free, so there maybe an avenue there.
Failing that, what about the city newspapers such as:
The Manchester Evening News
The London Evening Standard
The Newcastle Chronicle
The Birmingham Mail
Just some of the more populated city newspapers would get at least some geographical footprint of our story in England, which could be picked up by local news agencies,  including TV and radio broadcasters.
It seems that the mantra that no one likes a cheat is only relevant if you are not rich, famous or influential.

KEEP THE FAITH

View Comment

tonyPosted on9:39 am - Jun 9, 2016


my post has vanished,any reason why?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on9:44 am - Jun 9, 2016


Great post, Tris. I particularly liked your ‘truth is not complicated’, now that’s the truth.

Well it’s not complicated unless you have an agenda, like, say, Martin Williams of the Herald. In an article using background information on Mike Ashley’s placeman on the RR board, Justin Barnes, that looks suspiciously like it was gleaned from JJ’s blog of yesterday, Williams has had to do a virtual reversal of his ‘humiliation for Ashley’ nonsense that was, no doubt, passed to him via Level5! (Sorry can’t post link)

If Williams held the least bit self awareness, or journalistic integrity, he would, today, feel very humiliated, indeed! He probably feels, though, that he was only doing his job, and that his bosses are pleased with him because he’s managed to cobble two articles out of one story, well one story if he’d got it right first time!

View Comment

steph1895Posted on10:02 am - Jun 9, 2016


Apologies I had missed off the advertising possibilities with the airline magazines, especially EasyJet, RyanAir and FlyBe for example.
If you haven’t read one of them on a boring short haul flight, then they are a sight to behold.
Whether or not this is a viable medium to pursue I don’t know, but I have noticed a swing towards some good journalistic stories on people working for good etc.
There is always the Big Issue, which from the last time I read it, has improved tenfold on content, and journalistic expression.
Just a thought……….

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on10:31 am - Jun 9, 2016


Being someone who believes in the simplest solutions to issues my guess would be that someone who spends reasonably large sums on advertising has simply gotten in touch with the paper and said that if they run that advert then they would be getting no more business from him / her or his / her associates.

Given that this relates to an “advert” rather than a news story the person making the decision could satisfy themself that this was purely an economic decision rather than a matter of integrity. We lose £5,000 now but that’s better than losing more and on an ongoing basis.

I may be making this up but am I not right in saying that it was reported that a Rangers director (possibly Mr Park) had done this previously.

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on10:41 am - Jun 9, 2016


Good blog Tris. 
   There can’t be too many people in Scotland who could tell the Guardian to STFU and get away with it. The question is who and why.? I have a feeling that the dog that was being poked with a stick, is actually only one of a pack of wolves, and it was probably the runt of the litter.
    —————————————————————————————————————————- 
 
TONYJUNE 9, 2016 at 09:39
 
my post has vanished,any reason why?
    —————————————————————————————————–
   It was an editorial decision, …Naw scrub that, Editorial and postings are two different depts, ……..Naw hold on……It was Tris’s boss, Naw his boss’s boss,…..Errrr…Imran’s maw’s bank account is behind it?……….Errrrrr, A big bhoy did it?…….Errrrrr It’s a legal problem?………..Ah Feck it ! I’m no telling ye !
    Disgraceful behaviour from SFM.  21

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on11:11 am - Jun 9, 2016


HOMUNCULUSJUNE 9, 2016 at 10:31
    “Given that this relates to an “advert” rather than a news story the person making the decision could satisfy themself that this was purely an economic decision rather than a matter of integrity. We lose £5,000 now but that’s better than losing more and on an ongoing basis.”
    ————————————————————————————————————————-
  I have no idea how much revenue the Guardian garners from anyone connected with Scottish fitba, or possibly even any other businesses they may be involved in, but the scenario you are describing would be akin to Tesco telling them to pull their “Gary’s Grocery store” adverts.  I think if that was the case, they would all be at it.
   Would Tesco really feel so threatened by Gary and his cut-price broken biscuits, as to pull such a stunt? To my mind only if there was more at stake than broken biscuits.
   Not only would the advertising differential come into play, but sales increases would need to be factored in, along with a continued reputation of credibility, and credits from other news outlets who picked up and ran with the “scoop” …What price that?
    At the end of the day, this whole matter could easily be turned on the Res 12 Bhoys, simply by the SFA saying, “You have it wrong Bhoys, Here’s why !” …..Don’t think they wouldn’t love to !.

View Comment

ProhibbyPosted on11:35 am - Jun 9, 2016


Well said Tris!  The Guardian may have blocked the ad. but fans can keep the issue alive by posting comments and links about Res12 etc on-line at the end of stories – particularly about their own clubs – as I and others have done on the Hibs/Neil Lennon story. It’s a bit like Reiver dropping fliers on train seats! 

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:42 am - Jun 9, 2016


VOICEOFREASONJUNE 9, 2016 at 10:29 
As a Celtic fan and long term “lurker” on SFM I’ve always refrained from commenting on the articles on the site despite many of them being thought provoking and well written.  The main reason for this is that my views on the major issues appear to be very different to most posters on here and I am fond of a quiet life.  I feel compelled today however to comment as I feel the site has lost track completely of what it set out to be, it’s more and more perceived to be a Celtic fan forum & as a result “conspiracy theory” blogs like today’s are used to ridicule our club’s support.The reasons for the ad being rejected seem obvious, they suggest or at least raise questions about alleged wrongdoing perpetrated by Craig Whyte who is about to stand trial for criminal offences related to his time at Rangers Football Club.  It may not be a complete crossover but it’s close enough to contempt of court that rightly no UK publication would or should touch it for fear of prejudicing proceedings.As for Resolution 12 itself it’s worth pointing out what we know:– UEFA are running their eyes over it regardless of any ads we place.– UEFA at that time ran a light touch self regulation scheme cherry picking a few clubs each year to make an example of.  If they punish Rangers or the SFA they will have to penalise the 30+ other clubs & associations who appear to have committed some sort of breach that year.– Our club have worked long and hard to establish influence at the SFA, is it in our interests to pursue a long-shot attempt to bring down an organisation that while flawed works more to our liking than at any point in it’s history?
Just some general musings, I don’t expect them to be universally popular but I do hope they are thought provoking.  As a general aside I know my views are commonly held within the Celtic support, it would be great to see this site get back to it’s original values and have more posters offering alternative views like this.  Too often when I look nowadays it seems to be consumed with childish “Rangers are dead” type stuff which used to be the forte of less highbrow forums.I look forward to full houses, decent football and ultimately Brendan leading us to 6 in a row next season which will probably end the appetite for these tedious conversations.
___________

Perhaps you will explain to us all why, if the Guardian does fear legal repercusions should it publish the advert, that they didn’t just say so when advising of their about turn, seems a very easy excuse to give. In fact, why would they wait until after taking payment before looking into any legalties?

Craig Whyte is not mentioned in the ad, there is no mention in any of Whyte’s indictments of the licencing issue, nor anything to do with the day to day running of Rangers. There is nothing in the ad that isn’t already public knowledge, anything uncovered in any investigation would initiate a completely separate case from anything currently underway. The advert, itself, has been widely read in more than one country, and yet no one from CQN has been charged with contravening any court order, so how can there be any legal impediment to publishing the advert?

You might have your own good reasons for wishing Resolution 12 to go away, but you’ll have to find a more convincing argument than that to stop it’s prominence here.

Whatever means have been used to influence the decision makers at the Guardian, someone of influence, and no little power, finds it necessary to prevent Resolution 12 finding a wider audience. I find it strange that anyone with the ability to construct a sentence wouldn’t want to debate that, at length, let alone want the debate here to stop. Unless, they, too, want it to disappear.

View Comment

KopwebPosted on11:49 am - Jun 9, 2016


voiceofreasonJune 9, 2016 at 10:29

I am neither a lawyer nor a Celtic fan, and tend to treat all conspiracy theories with extreme caution.  But if the Grauniad and the Herald pulled the advert on legal advice, surely that would have been easy for the sales people to explain to those placing the ad?

And I’m fairly sure that the SFM’s ‘original values’ have always included being both club-neutral and trying to shine a light on the murkier waters of Scottish football governance, in the absence of proper investigative reporting by the MSM.

On the subject of club loyalties, it seems very strange to infer that we should not poke the SFA nest just because it now works in Celtic’s favour…

Sorry AJ – you were making much the same points while I was typing 🙂

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:55 am - Jun 9, 2016


Voice of reason @ 10.29
Welcome aboard.
Firstly I understand where you are coming from, so this isn’t just a knee jerk “we’re right you’re wrong” response as, I suspect, you may have been expecting and preparing yourself for from us.
That said….
Fundamentally, what you are proposing, if I understand you correctly, is that RFC (or anyone else for that matter) can now run up £160m of debt (so two Gareth Bales and a Puyol!) purely and simply to avoid Brendan winning 6 in a row.  (and apparently repeat for 7,8 and 9 or even, god forbid 10)  And the only downside of subsequently dumping that investment, regardless of whether its successful or not, is now to restart in league 4 and take a £250,000 fine (0.15%), payment optional?  Oh, and for the common fan, we should sit down, shut up and stump up a comparative and relative figure (to the £160m) repayable solely in emotional satisfaction in seeing our clubs go down to a Globetrotters mercenary select if we are to expect to compete in any way shape or form?

That’s an interesting outlook for the sport.  I wish your club all the best in propagating that.  To be fair they’ve done well so far in this regard.

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on12:00 pm - Jun 9, 2016


VOICEOFREASON
JUNE 9, 2016 at 10:29
 
As a Celtic fan and long term “lurker” on SFM I’ve always refrained from commenting on the articles on the site despite many of them being thought provoking and well written. 
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
As a long term lurker you will be well aware that the Res12 issue refers to a situation in 2011 which has sufficient evidence behind it to prove the SFA guilty of corruption
Corruption stems from a lack of integrity
It leads to rules being invented, broken or bent to favour agendas that have nothing to do with sport
And it`s not a Celtic only matter
A corrupt governing authority is bad for all clubs in Scotland
Ignoring it because it would damage Celtics relations with the SFA simply highlights another issue
Celtic should have been leading the fight against the corruption underlying Res12
They didn`t
Because they are part of the problem
Which is why I gave up 3 STs

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:06 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Voice of Reason
June 9 2016 at 10.29
‘,,.the site has lost track of what it set out to be…’
_______
Cobblers!
The drive behind this blog is to howk out the unholy complicity between the Football Authorities and the old RFC (IL) and the new TRFC.
No matter how many of your club’s supporters share your peculiar views, no matter how ready PL and DD are to welcome the ‘return’ of ‘Rangers’ and to stall and frustrate the attempts by their shareholders to get at the truth of the dirty deal which saw an unentitled club be granted a European licence, the truth still stands- the game has been corrupted from the top down.
You may be happy with that. Fine.
Just go elsewhere on to club sites to find those who share ‘your’ values , and let us who still have some regard for Sporting Integrity and honest administration pursue the values we cherish.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on12:32 pm - Jun 9, 2016


CORRUPT OFFICIAL
JUNE 9, 2016 at 11:11  
HOMUNCULUSJUNE 9, 2016 at 10:31    “Given that this relates to an “advert” rather than a news story the person making the decision could satisfy themself that this was purely an economic decision rather than a matter of integrity. We lose £5,000 now but that’s better than losing more and on an ongoing basis.”    ————————————————————————————————————————-  I have no idea how much revenue the Guardian garners from anyone connected with Scottish fitba, or possibly even any other businesses they may be involved in, but the scenario you are describing would be akin to Tesco telling them to pull their “Gary’s Grocery store” adverts.  I think if that was the case, they would all be at it.

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

Likewise, I have no idea how much income they derive from the sources you mention. However I am working on the basis that they sell their advertising based on size and location, as opposed to say subject matter. So a half page in a reasonably prominent position costs the same no matter who is buying it (possibly with discounts for regulars). A one-off payment for such a thing would be of little consequence compared to daily or weekly ongoing advertising, even if it was physically smaller. 

I use Parks Motor Group(whatever they are called now) as an example, not suggesting for a second that they may actually have done this, merely speculating that it is a possibility for a company of that size to have such influence. I believe they have at least one new car dealership advertising sales of Bentleys, BMWs, Masseratis etc. They also deal in used cars, in addition to providing coach rental, vans, servicing, leasing etc.

If someone like that were to be a regular user of the Guardian, and they were to threaten to remove those adverts if the one in question did appear I imagine it would be a fairly substantial amount of cash involved, as opposed to a one off payment. They may also be able to speak on behalf of other wealthy Rangers supporters who would likewise remove their advertising. 

I don’t buy newspapers, perhaps someone could advise if that particular company advertises in the Guardian, and if so is it fairly large adverts, on a regular basis. Maybe even other companies whose owner would have a natural affinity with Rangers. 

Purely intuitively I think your Tesco v “Gary’s Grocery store” analogy is flawed. I stand (whilst sitting) to be corrected. 

View Comment

Charlie_KellyPosted on12:34 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Just saw on Alex Thomson’s (Channel 4 journalist) twitter there that he has asked the guardian why they pulled the ad on Resolution12.
The reply spanned over 4-5 tweets but essentially boils down to “We’re no tellin yae”

View Comment

ChristyboyPosted on12:40 pm - Jun 9, 2016


SMUGASJUNE 9, 2016 at 11:55

Great post. 

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on12:41 pm - Jun 9, 2016


TONYJUNE 9, 2016 at 09:39
      Tony, Obviously I was having a wee joke when replying to you earlier. But it seems the real reason the Guardian never ran with the ad was because the Res 12 Bhoys were wearing trainers. 
https://twitter.com/alextomo/status/740868257809346561

View Comment

mayanmanPosted on12:42 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Just received this from the Guardian’s Readers’ Editor regarding Ad for RES12;

Thank you for your email. The advert you refer to was booked in before copy was seen, which is not unusual. When the first advert came in (in French) it was reviewed and the decision reached was that the tone and content were not in line with our advertising terms and conditions. When a second part of this advertising campaign came in (this time in English) it was also declined.
We remain committed to impartial sports reporting; acceptance or refusal of advertising does not in any way reflect our editorial position. Readers remain free to pitch stories to our editorial desks.
Here is the Guardian News and Media statement:
“All adverts submitted for publication are considered on a case-by-case basis to assess suitability for publication according to our advertising terms and conditions. The Guardian reserves the right to reject adverts at our discretion. Either the acceptance or refusal of advertising does not in any way reflect our editorial position.”
best wishes
Helen Hodgson
Guardian Readers’ editor’s officeGuardian News & Media—–+44 (0)20 3353 4736 guardian.readers@theguardian.com—–@GdnReadersEd

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:45 pm - Jun 9, 2016


CHARLIE_KELLYJUNE 9, 2016 at 12:34 
Just saw on Alex Thomson’s (Channel 4 journalist) twitter there that he has asked the guardian why they pulled the ad on Resolution12.The reply spanned over 4-5 tweets but essentially boils down to “We’re no tellin yae”
____________

Maybe Voiceofreason should let Alex Thomson know that no one’s interested in why the Guardian pulled the ad. Imagine such a highly thought of journalist wasting his time over this…if only he was aware of those legal difficulties!

View Comment

SouthernExilePosted on1:42 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Alex Tomo has weighed into the debate: good. He is met by guardian obfuscation: shameful. 

Roy Greenslade: yes you. You are employed as a media commentator by an organisation which prides itself on journalistic integrity. You are close to pmg and are fully appraised of the facts. Write a piece on this in the guardian tomorrow. If they refuse to publish it, resign. Otherwise you are just another lickspittle. 

How can the guardian of all people shy away from tackling this corruption?

View Comment

ChristyboyPosted on1:45 pm - Jun 9, 2016


If there are newspapers out there pulling ad’s or stories due to pressure from others, their short-termism will kill them off eventually. I mean who is going to read future ad’s when no-one is buying your paper!!!!! Bonkers decision.

View Comment

Winning CaptainsPosted on1:57 pm - Jun 9, 2016


The advertising copy was NEVER translated into French, so The Guardian are now telling lies. In the CQN article yesterday we were careful to avoid adding our own opinion. We stated the facts for others to make up their own minds. 
Now they are telling lies to people. 
What a sorry state of affairs! 

View Comment

FinlochPosted on2:02 pm - Jun 9, 2016


The Guardian might not be telling Alex but they replied to me.

Here is their reply and my subsequent response.

(Guardian’s Dear Finloch Letter Thursday June 9)
 
Thank you for your email.  The advert you refer to was booked in before copy was seen, which is not unusual.  When the first advert came in (in French) it was reviewed and the decision reached was that the tone and content were not in line with our advertising terms and conditions. When a second part of this advertising campaign came in (this time in English) it was also declined. 
 
We remain committed to impartial sports reporting; acceptance or refusal of advertising does not in any way reflect our editorial position. Readers remain free to pitch stories to our editorial desks. 
 
Here is the Guardian News and Media  statement: 
 
“All adverts submitted for publication are considered on a case-by-case basis to assess suitability for publication according to our advertising terms and conditions. The Guardian reserves the right to reject adverts at our discretion. Either the acceptance or refusal of advertising does not in any way reflect our editorial position.”
 
best wishes
 
Helen Hodgson
Guardian Readers’ editor’s office
Guardian News & Media

Thanks Helen for the reply

A nice wee story and very plausible.
 
However as a Guardian reader I don’t buy it.
That is to say I buy the Guardian but not your “tone and content” cul de sac.
 
I think we both know that the reason to reject the advertisement was because of another type of nice wee story.
Someone got at someone or pulled in a favour and you have closed ranks with your Scottish MSM cousins.
 
Sad days indeed and I hope Roy Greenslade gets to hear about what is going on.
 

View Comment

CrownStBhoyPosted on2:20 pm - Jun 9, 2016


JOHN CLARKJUNE 9, 2016 at 12:06
Voice of ReasonJune 9 2016 at 10.29‘,,.the site has lost track of what it set out to be…’_______Cobblers!

Ouch!

Wish I had the eloquence of wordery to not play the ball like that  21

View Comment

CrownStBhoyPosted on2:23 pm - Jun 9, 2016


That’s a great post AJ

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on2:30 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Guardian Advertising Terms and Conditions Extract from http://www.theguardian.com/advertising/advertising-terms-conditions
Definitions and Acceptance of the Terms and Conditions1. Guardian News & Media Limited (“GNM”) accepts publication of advertisements on the terms and conditions set out below (“Terms”). 2. These Terms apply to: (i) print advertisements in the Guardian, Guardian Weekly and Observer newspapers (“Newspapers”) as well as inserts (“Inserts”);(ii) online advertisements on http://www.theguardian.com, http://www.observer.theguardian.com, the Guardian Select advertising network (“Guardian Select” – see http://www.theguardian.com/select) (together the “Websites”); and(iii) online advertising booked through the Guardian’s publisher trading desk “Guardian Response+” – see http://www.theguardian.com/guardian-response (together “Advertisements”).3. By placing an order, the Advertiser (which is the person placing the order for the Advertisement whether they are the advertiser of the product or service referred to in the Advertisement or the advertising agency or media buyer for such advertiser) accepts and agrees to be bound by these Terms in full.Content and Delivery of Advertisements4. Materials for an Advertisement must be provided no later than the deadline specified in the appropriate rate card and, for Advertisements on the Websites, in accordance with the Website technical specification at http://specle.net/uk/guardian-news-media/.5. GNM may, without any responsibility to the Advertiser, reject, cancel or require any Advertisement to be amended that it considers unsuitable or contrary to these Terms and remove, not print, suspend or change the position of any such Advertisement. GNM may refuse to publish any Advertisement for any Advertiser who has not paid any sums due for any advertising in any of the Newspapers or the Websites. The Advertiser will remain responsible for all outstanding charges.6. The publication of an Advertisement by GNM does not mean that GNM accepts the Advertisement has been provided in accordance with these Terms or that GNM has waived its rights under these Terms.7. The Advertiser guarantees to GNM that:(i) any information supplied in connection with the Advertisement is accurate, complete, true and not misleading;(ii) it has obtained the consent of any living person whose name or image (in whole or in part) is contained in any Advertisement;(iii) the Advertisements are legal, decent, honest and truthful, are not contrary to the provisions of any applicable law, regulation or code of practice (including the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing (the “CAP Code”) and all other codes under the general supervision of the Advertising Standards Authority and/or the Office of Fair Trading), are not libellous or obscene and do not infringe the rights of any person (including any person’s intellectual property rights);(iv) the Advertisement will not be prejudicial to the image or reputation of GNM or the Websites or the Newspapers, and will not contain anything with GNM in good faith considers to be offensive or otherwise inappropriate;(v) all Advertisements submitted for publication online will be free of any viruses, adware, malware, bit torrents, and no Advertisement will cause an adverse effect on the operation of the Website(s).8. Where the Advertiser is an advertising agency or media buyer, the Advertiser guarantees that it is authorised by the advertiser of a product or service to place the Advertisement with GNM and the Advertiser will compensate GNM for any claim made by such advertiser against GNM.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
IMO
Para 5 is the most significant 
5. GNM may, without any responsibility to the Advertiser, reject, cancel or require any Advertisement to be amended that it considers unsuitable or contrary to these Terms
This is a catch all which enables the Guardian to reject an advert which is not contrary to their terms without giving a reason
by simply deeming it “unsuitable”
If So
We can expect the Guardian to stonewall all requests for a reason to avoid being drawn into a debate on why the Res12 advert is deemed “unsuitable”

View Comment

ProhibbyPosted on2:38 pm - Jun 9, 2016


VOICEOFREASONJUNE 9, 2016 at 13:36 0 0 Rate This
I do understand the points in reply to my comment that if this was a huge story around Scottish football governance we should pursue it….it isn’t, it’s a UEFA issue with all FAs acting similarly and at least 30 clubs in 2011 guilty of more serious breaches than Rangers. …….
………..
When the governors of the game in Scotland behave in such a manner as to give serious reason to believe that they are conspiring or colluding with rule breaking to the benefit of one particular club, that is  “a huge story around Scottish football governance” and fans have a right to pursue it as far as they can. 

View Comment

wottpiPosted on2:54 pm - Jun 9, 2016


I am not one for conspiracies myself but it does appear to be of interest as to where the ‘French’ aspect of the Res 12 advert came from as the Guardian responses  seems pretty clear about seeing one.

This article appeared from T’Rangers social media sources on 1 June
https://exposingtherhats.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/resolution-riddy/

I understand Dear Reader that there is some tension between the intrepid Resolution 12 people today following a rather costly mishap in their attempts to re-ignite the issue.
The clever lads crowdfunded circa £4000 and even more brilliantly found an accommodating sales executive at a Swiss newspaper who confirmed he would happily print any ad which was free of offensive language.  Off to work they went and produced their piece (a standard diatribe about Rangers being deid and pyuir cheats etc).
They had been confidently assured by Paul Brennan via his “UEFA contact” that this was the English language newspaper of choice for UEFA delegates….unfortunately there was a breakdown in communication with his well placed source as the newspaper they’ve chosen is in fact a French language one.  Hilariously the Resolution 12 guys only learnt of their mistake last night and despite some frantic calls begging for a refund it was too late, the money was gone and the public embarrassment was unavoidable.
Perhaps to compensate they can publish their imminent Guardian ad on the same subject in French?
Je Suis Resolution Douze.

But was countered quickly by CQN

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/resolution-12-resolution-riddy-really/

The newspaper of choice was carefully selected and a decision was made to place the Resolution 12 newspaper statement in Tribune de Geneve. We did consider translating the Statement into journalist French and again took advice on this. However as the submission is in English, theoffshoregame.net – which is mentioned in the Statement – is in English and the submission itself is in English, it was decided to use English rather than French.

All kind of curious – eh non.!!

View Comment

shugPosted on3:05 pm - Jun 9, 2016


philmac latest http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/talking-to-mark-warburton/

View Comment

sickceltPosted on3:12 pm - Jun 9, 2016


The whole issue with the Guardians refusal to go with the advert stinks.
It stinks the same way the SMSM’s refusal to cover a huge story stinks.
It stinks the same way our governing bodies cannot be trusted stinks.
It stinks the same way the stonewall silence from EVERY club in Scotland stinks.
It seems that the res12 guys have stumbled on something far bigger than a football story.
I pray they are successful and the truth comes out however I fear we the ordinary fan will never know the truth.
The lengths people are going to suppress this story for me  reaffirms that.
I recently wrote about Celtic’s stance re junior season tickets and their longing for a return to the pre 2012 days.
Sexy new manager, season books sold, money in. Job done.
Stonewall silence on the biggest injustice in our sports history.
I stand by those comments and that breaks my heart 
I really really hope I’m wrong.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:09 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Good post Tris.

“…Given the recent media rhetoric about Russia Today and their forthright coverage of Chilcot and Tory Election Fraud…
There are dark forces at work in our country, and they are running riot with basic freedoms…”
=================
I always check out RT, and also Al Jazeera, [although it has had to shut down Al Jazeera America here, with USA cable companies either refusing to carry the channel – or dropping it for no reason, as per my own ex-provider.]

Of course both these channels are undoubtedly just as ‘impartial’ as the BBC & BBC Worldservice, but there are usually interesting stories which are simply not covered in the UK – or are presented in a totally different manner, as per e.g. Chilcot.

And what has always amazed me – and kept me ‘obsessed’ with the SFA/RFC/TRFC/SPFL/SMSM saga ;

1) We are mostly just discussing / questioning about the oversight of a sport where 22 players simply kick a ball about a     pitch for 90+ minutes.

    …so what is really happening wrt reporting – or the non-reporting – of the really important news in the UK/SMSM ?    191919

&

2) How long before the Internet is effectively censored in the ‘free world’…mibbees using ‘security/anti-terrorism’ as the useful, catch-all, default justification ?!

If the rags refuse to take the cash for the advert, could an alternative be billboards – in the vicinity of Hampden ?  14

View Comment

tonyPosted on4:14 pm - Jun 9, 2016


CORRUPT OFFICIAL
who are the GUARDIANS of this site 01

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on4:20 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Winning CaptainsJune 9, 2016 at 13:57 
The advertising copy was NEVER translated into French, so The Guardian are now telling lies. In the CQN article yesterday we were careful to avoid adding our own opinion. We stated the facts for others to make up their own minds.  Now they are telling lies to people.  What a sorry state of affairs! 
________________________

This story is growing legs, wings, too, probably. How stupid can the Guardian excuse makers be to tell at least one interested reader a complete lie and expect, in this day of the internet, that the truth will not come out? How desperate must the situation be that the efforts to cover it up just keep getting more and more desperate? Heavens above, it would have been less suspicious if the Guardian had just stated that they don’t want to get involved in a ‘Celtic/Rangers’ argument, however ridiculous that might be! Why feel the need to lie?

At first they just ignored it, and hoped it would go away, then they tell lies to cover the cover it up. Where do they go next, to what Level do they fall, to prevent whatever the truth is being exposed? And who, exactly, is it that fears this exposure?

There is surely no one at Hampden with the clout to carry this off, and surely Whyte doesn’t have this sort of influence (I’d expect the opposite to be the case), and they are the only people who could be directly affected as individuals (together with a few functionaries), by whatever Resolution 12 might expose. The same is true of Scottish football, itself! So who, or what, is this blanket censorship designed to protect?

What we believe might be the case surrounding the issue of the Rangers’ European Licence surely cannot result in this level of cover-up! Has there been something going on that, should just one improper act be exposed, could bring down someone, or some thing, of major influence in Scotland or even the UK? 

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:33 pm - Jun 9, 2016


So my ex-team mate from juvenile footie – Ian “Dodo” Durrant – has left the building ?
I remember him as being a decent guy, and certainly one of the best I’ve played alongside.

Immediate reaction is that it is first & foremost a cost-cutting exercise, as IIRC he was on a pretty hefty salary as discussed here when Super Ally was still manager.

Durrant’s inherent value though – IMO – is that he is the remaining tangible, visible link to the glory days of the old club, and available to talk about and reinforce the ‘same club’ mantra to the SMSM and reassure the bears.

He is a much bigger ‘legned’ than Weir, and he did play in the 9-in-a-row era.

I just wonder if Warburton was involved in the decision ? [Regardless of what was reported in the SMSM.]

View Comment

Charlie_KellyPosted on4:38 pm - Jun 9, 2016


30 Clubs? Would you care to name a few of them? 
Also the guys at CQN have confirmed they sent the ad in english to the Guardian (and also to the Swiss paper) and have not sent it in French to anyone.
So either the Guardian are lying or the guys at CQN are lying.
I know who my money is on.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on4:51 pm - Jun 9, 2016


ALLYJAMBO
JUNE 9, 2016 at 16:20

I would tend to go for the incompetency approach as opposed to conspiracy.

Regan et al have stuck the papers in the old rusty filing cabinet in the basement and are singing LA-LA-LA in the hope that the matter will go away.

As mentioned the other week, what I can’t understand is why the SFA aren’t just nipping this in the bud.

Given that we are getting into that time of year most of us now the only way to deal with a pesky wasp is to quickly beat it to a pulp or use one of those zapper things. Otherwise they will make your life a misery.

Clearly there are enough enough Wasps from the east end of Glasgow 🙂 and elsewhere to keep this matter on the go.

Regan could easily explain why they are in the right.

The alternative is to put his hands up and say that the regime run by Whyte duped them by providing inaccurate information and that, with hindsight, the SFA realise they only operated with the lighter touch than was required, but they have now reviewed the matter, tightened up their procedures in line with and taking cognisance of the contents of Uefa documentation to ensure that licences are dealt with in a more robust manner in the future.

It could all be over by the weekend of such an approach was taken.

Why they want to allow this to drift on into another season is beyond me. 

View Comment

SouthernExilePosted on4:53 pm - Jun 9, 2016


We waited 27 years for the truth of Hillsborough to come out. It took his local lodge one year after the tragedy to appoint David Duckenfield, match commander, as their grand master. Go figure. 

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on5:23 pm - Jun 9, 2016


wottpiJune 9, 2016 at 16:51
ALLYJAMBO JUNE 9, 2016 at 16:20
I would tend to go for the incompetency approach as opposed to conspiracy.
Regan et al have stuck the papers in the old rusty filing cabinet in the basement and are singing LA-LA-LA in the hope that the matter will go away.
As mentioned the other week, what I can’t understand is why the SFA aren’t just nipping this in the bud.
Given that we are getting into that time of year most of us now the only way to deal with a pesky wasp is to quickly beat it to a pulp or use one of those zapper things. Otherwise they will make your life a misery.
Clearly there are enough enough Wasps from the east end of Glasgow and elsewhere to keep this matter on the go.
Regan could easily explain why they are in the right.
The alternative is to put his hands up and say that the regime run by Whyte duped them by providing inaccurate information and that, with hindsight, the SFA realise they only operated with the lighter touch than was required, but they have now reviewed the matter, tightened up their procedures in line with and taking cognisance of the contents of Uefa documentation to ensure that licences are dealt with in a more robust manner in the future.
It could all be over by the weekend of such an approach was taken.
Why they want to allow this to drift on into another season is beyond me. 
_________________________

If it was just the SFA/football governors involved in the apparent cover up I’d maybe be inclined to agree in a ‘just incompetency’ approach, but I cannot imagine ‘incompetents’ having the power and influence to prevent the media from making more of an effort to uncover what must be a great story. It’s a great story whether anything untoward took place or not!

If it was just the Resolution 12 story that was being subverted, then maybe there might be a fault in the advert, or in the approach by the Resolution 12 guys themselves. But this is just one example of around five years of killer stories that have been ignored or only partially reported on! I can’t imagine incompetent people – incompetent in the job they are trained and paid handsomely to do – being this competent when it comes to silencing the media!

View Comment

BallyargusPosted on5:33 pm - Jun 9, 2016


To move away from Res 12, important though it is, I wonder why TRFC have not been brought to task over the flares and inappropriate singing.
The compliance officer didn’t was time calling on Celtic re a flare.
The remit of the committee being set up to investigate happenings at the Cup Final is confined to events after the game ended so has nothing to do with flares.

View Comment

bad capt madmanPosted on6:02 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Ballyargus – you see, with flares you light the blue touch paper and walk away. With any paper on the Blues you do light touch and walk away. 
Thought it was obvious by now.
Anyhoo, feeble jokes aside, well done to the Res 12 guys and the recent two blog authors. Excellent stuff, hoping for some progress. I too had some lingering hope for the Guardian, alas no more.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on6:07 pm - Jun 9, 2016


I received the same reply as others to my email to ‘The Guardian’ earlier today.
Here is the text of my reply to that reply:
” Dear H..H..,
Thank you for your reply.
I’m not entirely sure that I agree that refusing to accept an advertisement because ‘its tone and content’ are not in line with advertising terms and conditions does not in any way reflect ‘editorial position!’
But to prescind from arguing that point, what if I pitch it to you that the content of the rejected advertisement clearly indicates that there is a story to be investigated by any newspaper which is interested in the possibility of corruption at the highest administrative level of Scottish Football?
Mind you, it would require a very skilful and brave journalist to take it on.Is there any such on ‘the Guardian’ these days/
Yours sincerely
…..

View Comment

ReiverPosted on7:09 pm - Jun 9, 2016


The press’s treatment of the SFA issues should not suprise anyone. We have seen the lies they present during indyref, we have seen the avoidance of proper coverage about TPP and we have seen years of untruths about Hillsborough. The one thing in common with these is the involvement of the establishent/government/big business in controlling what we read.
For those who haven’t involved themselves in anything other than res 12 can I suggest a visit to the petition/action site sumofus. There is a lot going on around the world where the big corporations are driving the agendas even to such extent where small governments and local government are being dragged through the courts. How this has come about is agreements like TPP where negotiations are undertaken in secrecy and the citizens who will be affected are barred from knowing the details whilst it is the large corporations that decide the rules. We are facing a world where, if TPP is allowed to be passed,  a large corporation can sue a country for not allowing it to do as it wishes. The court that will decide the outcome of such lawsuits will have representatives of the corporations as the judge and jury. This is all happening right now so who is it that stops the media from telling us the exact details? The same as who is stopping the res12 story getting out. The government. The government whose politicians invariably get directorships on the boards of the large corporation and banks when they leave politics. Some even take these positions while still supposedly representing us.
Give sumofus a visit and see what they are fighting. They are to the wider world what SFM is to Scottish football but with a more hands on approach.
What we here are all fighting is important but is only a part of much bigger problems for us ordinary guys. Make yourselves aware of these wider problems and you will have a clearer idea of what is going on with regards to our own fight.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on8:12 pm - Jun 9, 2016


ReiverJune 9, 2016 at 19:09
____________________________________________________________
Reiver, I support your suggestion that folk should investigate TTIP. It is very, very scary stuff. I have found that when I raise the issue with others I get puzzled looks05
I do, however, think that the erudite people on TSFM, who are campaigning by nature, will be aware of it.

View Comment

Winning CaptainsPosted on8:42 pm - Jun 9, 2016


All that The Guardian have to do is produce a copy of the PDF of the ad copy we sent to them. In fact I called their senior manager today and he confirmed both ads sent to them were in English. He knew nothing about them saying it was supplied in French. 

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on9:31 pm - Jun 9, 2016


Anyone else think it a little strange that the ‘Vanguard Bears’ AND The Guardian Newspaper both wrongly spouting about the Res 12 advert being in French. Whoever is feeding 1 is feeding the other.
Who has most to lose in the Res 12 game? Teflon Dave Murray? The SFA? or Campbell Ogilvie who enjoys being whisked around Europe as a UEFA delegate and all the ‘little perks’ associated with such a position?  Or someone/thing/group far more sinister? It all stinks to high heaven. 

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on9:34 pm - Jun 9, 2016


I think we need to keep our collective cool. Just because you suffer a setback doesn’t mean you recoil back into your shell. That has never been the TSFM mode; it is to come out fighting.

This has never been just about Rangers. Rangers are merely a case study in how business, governance and the media can be distorted to suit subliminal agendas. We have been round this block often enough and generally end up back where we started.  This might reasonably be construed as going nowhere but lets consider the progress that has been made nevertheless.

A light has been shone into the dark corners of recesses that would rather remain anonymous. Such anonymity can no longer be guaranteed. We might not gain widespread publicity but we have certainly banished anonymity. Anyone who wishes to acquaint themselves with the detail and lessons of the Rangers case study have a plethora of information at their disposal.

Whilst this information may not be widely disseminated, where it resides is very telling. The people that contribute to blogs like TSFM are self selectingly ‘the informed’. They are the opinion makers. You might not read these opinions in the tabloids but they are out there and they are irreconcilable with the portrayal of events depicted elsewhere. I know that I personally will as a matter of course, in any conversation and in any circumstances, have no qualms or reservations about correcting those less well informed concerning events to which I have been privvy to a considerable weight of knowledge concerning.

The wider narrative that has been promulgated requires that all dissent is silenced and snuffed out. That just isn’t going to happen. Anyone peddling the media narrative will at some point find their views being challenged. It doesn’t need an army to perform such a function just a highly motivated cohort; and we have that already.

The refusal of the CQN advert by The Guardian is a testament to how effective this phenomena has been. It now appears that some level of censorship needs be employed to keep the lid on this farrago. It has gotten out of hand. All the efforts over all the years to put this to bed have been unsuccessful. It is alive and kicking and spitting and biting. It just won’t go away.

The last thing to betray in these circumstances is frustration. Frustration at what exactly? That a media that is highly suspect in its professionalism shows itself up as potentially highly unprofessional. From a different angle that could be made to look like a result.

In the mean time we’ve had the Tax Justice Network ‘Offshore Game’ report – Doing the SFA for fair play. At long last after many years, a seemingly respectable and independent organisation has looked apparently impartially at the information we have compiled and decided ‘that looks about right’. It is the justification that has been so long waited for and now that too is hanging around in the internet ether.

Forestall your frustration. This is just another false summit but the sunny uplands yet still lie within our grasp. It is other’s desperation we should be contemplating, not our own.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on9:36 pm - Jun 9, 2016


JEAN7BRODIE june 9 2016 at 20.12
REIVER  June 9 2016 at 19.09
________
TTIP ( transatlantic trade and investment partnership)— I am ashamed to say that I had to look up what it is!
And I was not terribly taken by the fact that negotiations began when Lord Livingston of Parkheid ( lord, how my old man’s generation in Cuthelton St and Glamis Road and environs would have told him where to stuff his peerage!) was the UK Minister for Trade, and an enthusiastic free marketeer.
Is he still a non-exec director at Celtic Park? If so, was he asked by the Directors for his ‘outside’ view on what the Board’s obligations to shareholders was, in the matter of Res 12? Non-execs are supposed to help the board stay on the straight and narrow in their dealings with shareholders. ( Voice from off: ah, JC, what do you think?)

View Comment

Comments are closed.