.. and they wonder why nobody buys papers

Avatar 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

Avatar

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

Avatar

Jingso.JimsiePosted on3:46 pm - Jun 21, 2016


Donald Rumsfeld:

“As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

Slavoj Žižek:

“Beyond these three categories there is a fourth, the unknown known, that which we intentionally refuse to acknowledge that we know.

Well done, Slavoj, that completely nails the stance of the SFA/SMSM…

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on4:22 pm - Jun 21, 2016


A further update from CQN today:
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/the-res-12-news/

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on5:24 pm - Jun 21, 2016


A further article / quote from King, in the Evening Shark-Jump, [(c) The Clumpany, 2015];
[My bold highlighting.]
==========================
“…
It has also been publicised that the Club has recently taken legal action against Mike Ashley, Charles Green, Imran Ahmad and Brian Stockbridge for their joint participation in a scheme to alienate assets of the Club for personal gain. I don’t want to comment on this matter in detail as it is sub judice.
There will clearly be legal costs to fund this application but I anticipate that it will lead to the double benefit of the Club being compensated for any wrongdoing and also gaining the satisfaction of holding people to account.
“In the bigger picture none of this litigation is a major economic factor nor a major distraction to the management team in driving our football fortunes forward.”
==========================
Hmmm…

For this sort of expensive legal action, I presume that King wouldn’t be able to obtain a “No Win / No Fee” type of deal ?

Therefore, in the expectation/hope of winning compensation – plus legal costs being reimbursed – RIFC/TRFC will have to fund this action up front – and with the additional risk of appeals / delays etc. 

i.e. It’s not exactly going to help the Ibrox cashflow, and funding the legal fees could actually have a potentially, disproportionate, negative economic impact on the club/company – win or lose – IMO.

View Comment

shug

shugPosted on7:44 pm - Jun 21, 2016


Latest from philmac http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/changing-the-menu-and-being-consumed-with-envy/

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on9:35 pm - Jun 21, 2016


ReiverJune 20, 2016 at 16:58

“It is easy to say that a judicial review is what is needed but what would be the objective points to be reviewed. ”
————————————–
I think the most obvious target for any potential privately funded judicial review would be the Lord Nimmo Smith Inquiry decisions. This commission was convened on a quasi-judicial model to fill a gap in the (then) SPL rule book eventuated by the unprecedented nature of the circumstances under consideration (multiple player mis-registrations).

Points for consideration would be:

1. How was it possible to arrive at a ‘no sporting advantage’ finding in respect of a rule breach. Surely this is a contradiction in terms. Why would a sports governing body be applying rules that did not appertain to maintaining the integrity of its competitions in the first place?
Ancillary to this query would be the invocation of the then current status of the big tax case findings in support of this ‘no sporting advantage’ finding. How could it have been viable to use a current version of a court decision to establish mitigation of guilt if there were yet further iterations of that version still to be gone through (UTT and supreme court).

2. Why were the terms of reference of the LNS commision altered to exclude evidence (DOS (wee tax case)) that would have had a material effect on the decisions arrived at. The ‘no sporting advantage’ mitigation was based upon the tax scheme in operation being available to any other club that had cared to explore the possibilities. As has been apparently firmly established, DOS would have exploded this conclusion.

When LNS was commissioned its intent was to provide unequivocal judgement on a contentious and major issue. If the commission failed in its attempt to do this then it rightly will have opened itself up to further scrutiny.

Exercises such as judicial review will likely involve much highly remunerated legal opinion and would not be undertaken lightly I suspect. A starting point might be to gain some legal opinion on the viability of such an approach.

The standards of proof required would be determined by natural justice, sporting precedent and the LNS decisions itself. At the very least LNS needed to be consistent within itself. If ‘no sporting advantage’ was arrived at on the basis that the big tax case was lost by HMRC then an ultimate victory by HMRC at the supreme court would logically overturn this finding. It appears an act of supreme expediency to base the LNS findings on a court decision that had not yet gone through all the possible stages of appeal. From a technical perspective the judgement is flawed in that alone. However I suspect that legal opinion might alight upon more substantive flaws.

The Resolution 12 exercise I think illustrates that such challenges need to be marshalled within a tight knit and motivated community. Simply crowd funding the potential costs would be no guarantee of success. Like any audacious sporting escapade it would require organisation, tactics, perseverance and vision.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on10:06 pm - Jun 21, 2016


CoT 

Unfortunately I don’t think a JR of LNS is possible at the moment as I’m pretty sure it would be time-barred. 

However, if circumstances change and an interested party formally requests the SPFL or SFA to review the original decision and is refused or the original decision is upheld after said review, a JR can be sought within a very limited time frame – 3 months from the latest decision. 

I may be wrong – but I’d think that the courts are unlikely to see Individual club shareholders as interested parties, and such an application would likely have to come from a club that could show that the decision disadvantaged them in some meaningful way. 

Who would launch an application for judicial review? 

View Comment

paddy malarkey

paddy malarkeyPosted on10:15 pm - Jun 21, 2016


Was talking to my mate who frequents Auchenhowie and he reckons that the Warbmeister is not too happy with Frank McParland’s recruits as they don’t fit the profile that he was spouting last season – ie young ,fit and hungry with a sell on potential .
I also saw a French journalist on a Euro round-up show , who reckons that there are basically two UEFA’s until the end of the tournament – Platini’s mob and the mob who will replace them . Would this have any bearing on Res 12  ? 

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on10:29 pm - Jun 21, 2016


Hoopy 7June 21, 2016 at 12:32

“This is enshrined in their rules, they have a legal and moral duty to do what is right NOW, because if it all goes belly up again they have nobody to blame but themselves.”
——————————
I think you are being far too generous.

The necessity for a club to illustrate its capacity to complete its league fixture programme is indeed enshrined in the rules as you point out.

This does not preclude a football club suffering financial difficulties intra-season. Stuff happens. However if such an occurrence should materialise when its potential had been flagged up in advance, then it might be expected that this could only be in spite of additional scrutiny. In such circumstances said financial difficulties could not have snuck up unawares or fallen unexpectedly from the skies.

If such a thing were to happen then you’d reasonably anticipate the governing bodies rolling out a plethora of precautionary action they had undertaken to prevent such a disappointing outcome. They would not be so much blaming themselves as condemning themselves. To lose one football club might be seen as unfortunate bit to lose two…

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on10:54 pm - Jun 21, 2016


HirsutePursuitJune 21, 2016 at 22:06

“Unfortunately I don’t think a JR of LNS is possible at the moment as I’m pretty sure it would be time-barred. ”
————————————
Shoot me down, why don’t you.

I manage to cobble together a few sentences that might just be intelligible and I end up having to eat them.

I’m off to see if there’s any more Thomas Paine I can quote.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on11:12 pm - Jun 21, 2016


“It appears in general observation, that revolutions create genius and talents; but those events do no more than bring them forward. There is existing in man, a mass of sense lying in a dormant state, and which, unless something excites it to action, will descend with him, in that condition, to the grave. As it is to the advantage of society that the whole of its faculties should be employed, the construction of government ought to be such as to bring forward, by a quiet and regular operation, all that extent of capacity which never fails to appear in revolutions.

This cannot take place in the insipid state of hereditary government, not only because it prevents, but because it operates to benumb. When the mind of a nation is bowed down by any political superstition in its government, such as hereditary succession is, it loses a considerable portion of its powers on all other subjects and objects. Hereditary succession requires the same obedience to ignorance, as to wisdom; and when once the mind can bring itself to pay this indiscriminate reverence, it descends below the stature of mental manhood. It is fit to be great only in little things. It acts a treachery upon itself, and suffocates the sensations that urge detection”

– The Rights of Man

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on11:46 pm - Jun 21, 2016


HirsutePursuitJune 21, 2016 at 22:06

“Unfortunately I don’t think a JR of LNS is possible at the moment as I’m pretty sure it would be time-barred. ”
———————————–
Mr. Paine admits of no prevarication.

Whilst such matters are not entirely within my comfort zone my curiosity urges me forward. The following article relates to a time bar on judicial review but at the time of its composition (July 2013) indicates that no such strictures are in force in Scotland. Even if a time bar on judicial review has been imposed since this article was published, the circumstances of any application for judicial review would surely have to be reviewed before it automatically fell victim to any time bar.

A motley collection of internet correspondents might not be expected to act with the same expediency as a corporate body and therefore might gain some leeway in any potential application.

If, as you imply, any appellant would need to be able to illustrate an interest in the matters to be reviewed then that is another situation requiring ingenious remedy. Football supporters (as opposed to fans) may not be a body corporate but they surely have an interest in such matters. As Zam 1 intimated in the opening shots of this discussion, there are multiple points of co-incidence between football supporters interests and the nature of the governance of the sports they fund. Any one of these might alight upon a legal precedence that illuminates a path to a justifiable end.

Whilst not in my comfort zone I think there might at least be ground for seeking formal legal opinion.

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2013/07/30/aileen-mcharg-access-to-judicial-review-in-scotland/

View Comment

Avatar

Winning CaptainsPosted on11:47 pm - Jun 21, 2016


Everything implied in the CQN article today is in the letter from UEFA which was received two weeks ago. 
It is much more detailed than the PR exercise with STV.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on1:53 am - Jun 22, 2016


CoT 

Sorry,  should have said… 

The rules were changed in 2015

http://www.brodies.com/blog/public-law/judicial-review/new-judicial-review-rules-in-force-from-today/

View Comment

Gabby

GabbyPosted on3:39 am - Jun 22, 2016


HP, CoT et al.

It is important to remember that LNS was not an official judicial process.  It was a private, internal investigation procured and paid for by the governing body of Scottish Football.
The only purpose of hiring Lord Nimmo Smith was to give the internal investigation credibility.  But given the very narrow terms of reference and type of evidence that was supplied, they ensured they got the result they paid for.
There is nothing actually wrong with this, it is their investigation so they can structure it however they like.   
A JR would be pointless because it would only be able to judge the conclusions of LNS based on the terms of reference and the evidence supplied.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on6:58 am - Jun 22, 2016


WINNING CAPTAINSJUNE 21, 2016 at 23:47
Everything implied in the CQN article today is in the letter from UEFA which was received two weeks ago. It is much more detailed than the PR exercise with STV.
=============================

It must be incredibly frustrating for you, if not surprising, that the mainstream media are running away from this. As someone said earlier, even half of what is in the CQN article is absolute dynamite and should be getting wide exposure. Yet here we are in a situation where they would rather protect the wrongdoers than expose the wrongdoing. Of course, the wrongdoers actions had an actual and potential benefit for the old Rangers therefore it can’t be discussed, as it would then leave so much else open to question.

What a pity the BBC couldn’t show the same vigour they did when they rushed to report the state aid nonsense a couple of years back, which has been confirmed to have no basis at all, and most certainly had no basis at the time they rushed to report it. Going back to Res 12, STV, the Herald/Evening Times and the Daily Record have all now run with the same warped narrative.

They are worried all right.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on8:04 am - Jun 22, 2016


I reported on here about a month ago that I had sent Private Eye the link to the tax report.  I have just found out that have run with the story today.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on8:46 am - Jun 22, 2016


I dare say I was not alone in contacting them and they might well have picked up on the story anyway, but I was just making sure they knew about it.

Hope loads of people go out and buy a copy (£1.80) give their sales a boost here in Scotland.

View Comment

Reiver

ReiverPosted on9:34 am - Jun 22, 2016


Broken record time again.

While there is still some life in Res12 and hopefully we can look forward to the guys getting some success I find my initial judgement, that it will be down to the fans themselves, strengthening in my mind. No matter where we turn to for assistance, the clubs, UEFA and the media, we never get the support we feel we deserve.
Let me put this scenario to you. A call is made to the fans, when they all know the issues regarding the doubts over the SFA, to firstly turn their backs on the field of play for one minute at a set time during play. If that is not successful in gaining attention then at a later match all fans turn up 15 minutes into the game. Still no response then a call to fans to boycott a series of games on a rolling basis. Should the message not have got home then, as these actions would take time and the season would be nearing an end, a call to hold back on purchasing season tickets for 2017/18 until change occurs.

I suggest that these actions would GUARANTEE an outcome. They would be painless and free but the problem faced is informing ALL fans that we do have issues and where information on the issues and the actions required can be found. That would be essential as we know the media will not be the “go to” place for that info.

The press would refuse any adverts we may try to purchase so we have the problem of spreading the word. Surely we have enough minds on here that we can come up with an idea to get the info out there. You all know my efforts are just a drop in the bucket and we need to find some way that is more effective. I investigated adverts on the outside of buses but that was outside of what I could afford so let’s hear some ideas guys. Try to make them “thought through” with some defined process to them.

If we had full awareness amongst all fans then taking the steps needed for success would be relatively simple. Not every fan would agree with us but we would have enough support to be effective. One idea that would spread the word is all we need.

View Comment

Avatar

hen1rikPosted on9:50 am - Jun 22, 2016


https://t.co/SyJYAi1yZG The Biggest scandal/cover up in the history of our game and the media are nowhere to be seen.
Can someone tell me who picks the awards for our award winning journalist at the daily record ?
The more he remains silent the more his credibility is questioned.

View Comment

Giovanni

GiovanniPosted on11:29 am - Jun 22, 2016


JIMBO
JUNE 22, 2016 at 08:04

Moi aussi. There are minor issues that we could correct in the article but at least it is there. Private Eye also has a larger circulation than the Daily Record. Often their articles are picked up by the English daily papers.

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on12:16 pm - Jun 22, 2016


@STVGrant……….Just a wee reminder for you fella. And it would be invaluable for the rest of your colleagues to pay heed too.         You said, “Res 12 is dead in the water!”…..A bold, but perhaps premature statement.  
   When the Res 12-ers blow this thing wide open. when there is simply no lie big enough to cover what is exposed. No spin that can be spun. A world where fans realise  they have been “Duped” of their hard-earned emotional and real cash, and had their loyalties abused, not only by those in fitba’ but by the off the radar reporting in this country, where do you go from there?…. Are you good at lifting heavy things?
     Every other day I see SMSM agendas and lies exposed and archived on-line. but this is generally done by reasonably moderate, temperate folks.   What happens when those whose idea of “restraint”, is to engage in pitched battles on a park in their attempts to right perceived wrongs, stop believing?.
     Of course not all are so ready with their fists, and there are those who would rather just send a damaging and forceful “letter of complaint”  
      I was going to ask that when that day arrives, from what angle will you be reporting on your own mis-reporting,? But I think a more pertinent question would be, “Where you gonna hide fella?” 
   Maybe it’s time to say, “Fair enough ! We’ve had our wee laugh. Time to get back to work and get some real reporting done”
   If I was a reporter, I would be thinking, there is no “scoop” in the Res 12-ers issue so no point trying to gazump them. They have the direct line. But I would be of a mind that they would keep me informed when they had anything to report. Hopefully they will tell me first….Maybe throw me a few leads? 
   While I am waiting, I think I would have a wee dig about, into what the “The Offshore Game” report claims. It would be a great story to run in parallel with. Do we really need a fully independent inquiry, when calls for transparency are met with “No comment” on every issue raised?……I think that answers itself. ! 
    I would be quite good at that reporting lark, (maybe even win an award)  but I am also good at lifting heavy things, so a P45 wouldn’t trouble me too much….What about you Grant…….Is this your one job?

View Comment

CrownStBhoy

CrownStBhoyPosted on2:12 pm - Jun 22, 2016


CORRUPT OFFICIALJUNE 22, 2016 at 12:16
That is excellent CO, and thanks for it.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on4:12 pm - Jun 22, 2016


While I appreciate the cynicism I have to say that I am a bit disappointed in some of the, well lets call then ‘attacks’ on Grant Russell.

We have very few people in the media even going near the Res12 and Russell has been about the only one covering the story and one of the few taking time to attend court on other matters.

As opposed to having a go at the guy why not encourage/challenge him to look deeper, develop an nurture a relationship.

If he is a Level 5 stooge (I don’t think he is) he will be found out soon enough. Howewer a load of abuse is just going to help him make up his mind to close the door, pick up his wages and move along to pure on the pitch matters  once the season starts.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on4:56 pm - Jun 22, 2016


WRT the SMSM seemingly having learned nothing – ‘absolutely’ – over the last 4+ years in terms of reporting the truth, asking questions, looking the other way, copy/pasting as instructed, etc…

I am still a bit mystified why not even one print publication, [I am just dismissing the BBC !], has attempted to report accurately on the RFC/TRFC saga.  19

In the run up to the Scottish Referendum all the SMSM – including the ‘impartial’ BBC – were vehemently opposed to Independence and happily copied/pasted assorted nonsense, scaremongering stories to ensure a ‘NO’ vote result.

However, one publication – The Sunday Herald – went against the grain and declared that it was in favour of Independence.
IIRC, their initial ‘declaration’ edition was cleared off the shelves by the paying public in double quick time.
And again, IIRC, The Sunday Herald circulation numbers went against the industry trend – and it actually increased its sales.
[Don’t know if that increase was sustained post-Referendum.]

So, if only in the interests of self-preservation in a dying industry: why hasn’t an opportunistic, Scottish rag not decided to break ranks and go with the truth, and ask the questions the SFA / SPFL / the senior clubs don’t want to be asked ?

Just don’t get it…  20

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on5:11 pm - Jun 22, 2016


wottpi  June 22, 2016 at 16:12
——————————-
You are correct in your observations and I agree that Grant Russell should not be a target for criticism re the Res12 issue.  By all means question him on what he has said, but here are many others in the SMSM whose ramblings deserve to be scrutinised to a far greater degree than Grant.

Through the various court cases, both John Clark and I have managed to develop a good relationship with Grant (and a couple of other journalists) where we are able to talk to them during recesses about what has been raised in court and other footballing matters.  Grant and the others have also shared information on some topics that we wouldn’t otherwise have known about.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on5:16 pm - Jun 22, 2016


EASYJAMBO
JUNE 22, 2016 at 17:11

It must be the Hearts / Budge way?

Build bridges – not walls!! (apart from with those cup winning Hobos, of course 03 )

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on6:03 pm - Jun 22, 2016


WOTTPIJUNE 22, 2016 at 16:12  While I appreciate the cynicism I have to say that I am a bit disappointed in some of the, well lets call then ‘attacks’ on Grant Russell. 
   —————————————————————————————————————————–
      Why?…Res 12 has nothing to do with whether Ranger (I.L.) should be investigated, and he was wrong to correlate the two.
   To be fair, and if it was my post you were referring to, I think he is one of the better reporters, but I think my advice is valid. 
   The Res 12-ers will be the first to know of any development, and the TOG is just sitting there waiting for someone to run with it. There is no need to limit himself to speaking to “Those concerned” Not in the secret world of our fitba hierarchy anyway. 
   An independent investigation was called for by The Tax Justice Network. He should be up at Hollyrood asking if our MPs have spoken with them. Will an investigation be opened. If not, why not? Have they investigated themselves? If not why not? If yes, who did they speak to? were they conflicted. or could be perceived to be?
   Fitba is a multi-million pound industry in Scotland, generating revenue, large employment of staff contributing to local economies, and in receipt of government funds.  
   There are many ways to crack a nut, and only approaching via the “No comment” fitba world is a limitation of the resources available to him. He is on the telly, and that opens doors closed to others.  
   Go on Grant. Get up there and ask them WTF they have to say, and WTF they are doing, about a respected network of tax investigators calling out Scottish fitba bosses.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on7:56 pm - Jun 22, 2016


HirsutePursuitJune 22, 2016 at 01:53

“The rules were changed in 2015”
————————————
I rather suspected you were talking from a point of knowledge.

I did take some solace from the article I posted where it said:

(b) such longer period as the Court considers equitable having regard to all the circumstances (section 27A).

I’m not sure if this provision found its way into the amended legislation but it did suggest to me that some leeway might be available. Whether any such leeway would stretch from 3 months to over 3 years has got to be seriously in doubt, however I’d imagine there would need to be some scope for natural justice to be enacted. Estrangement from a legal remedy should not be based on the asymmetry between the parties involved; that would simply be despotism.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on8:09 pm - Jun 22, 2016


GabbyJune 22, 2016 at 03:39

“It is important to remember that LNS was not an official judicial process. ”
————————————
I appreciate this. A greater problem appears to be that the SPL are not a public body, as you point out.

It would appear, using my very inexpert eye that a judicial review of LNS is unlikely to get off the ground.

It would likely need to be a private legal challenge by an affected club for LNS to be revisited. Unless (no laughing at the back) the SFA were to come over all repentant and ask for a review themselves.

If the SFA did wish to restore their credibility in the light of the criticism they had received over the last few years then this avenue may be open to them. Like the rest of the world however, I won’t be holding my breath.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on8:31 pm - Jun 22, 2016


ReiverJune 22, 2016 at 09:34

“…I find my initial judgement, that it will be down to the fans themselves, strengthening in my mind.”
——————————–
Your endeavours are admirable and may yet bear fruit. Your obvious frustration opens up another, highly speculative, vista to my mind.

Football supporters and fans are essential for the health of the game, both ethically and financially.

Supporters provide essential gate receipts to clubs and fans buy merchandise and assist in club marketing and off-field commercial activities. Yet both supporters and fans are dis-enfranchised from the decision making process.

If this were a food retailer, they would feel no particular obligation to pander to their customers other than to maintain their own commercial viability. Football is a bit different however. The whole edifice has been built on supporter and fan involvement from the very inception of the game. At the earliest stages of the sport many clubs were amateur and the involvement of supporters and fans was crucial in facilitating the commercial success currently enjoyed by the game.

From a moral standpoint, supporters and fans cannot be viewed as simply customers. To do this is an error.

The insight provided by the Rangers case study tells us that the commercial colonisation of football fails to understand the underlying ethos. This cultural dislocation has led to the anomalies we have witnessed. These errors have had a significant, though arguable, commercial affect on the game. Supporters and fans as the true custodians of the game understand these shortcomings in a way that their commercial colonists fail to perceive. There is an expertise that is not being made use of.

In the longer term I speculate that there could and should be a role for supporter and even fan representation. It might take the following form.

The supporters clubs of each league team elect one representative to go forward to a football supporters convention (or forum). This convention then elects a single representative who takes a seat on the board of the SFA. By having supporter representation in the upper echelons of the game the errors that have lately been witnessed might be obviated. The supporters representative would be delegated by the convention to carry forward decisions of the whole convention. As a board member of a private organisation they would be limited in how much information they could transact. However there would be at least some opportunity for supporter expertise to influence governance decisions.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on8:38 pm - Jun 22, 2016


hen1rikJune 22, 2016 at 09:50

“Can someone tell me who picks the awards for our award winning journalist at the daily record ?”
———————————-
No awards for journalism are given. It is an award for maintaining the status quo (patronage). They are fit only to be great in little things.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on9:27 pm - Jun 22, 2016


CORRUPT OFFICIAL
JUNE 22, 2016 at 18:03
CO, it wasn’t just your post. However yours was just the latest but no means the worst of posts and tweets where IMHO a hectoring and, dare I say,  aggressive tone is being used towards Grant Russell.

Like everyone else I feel frustrated. I hope  the Res 12 guys do have the nuclear option and could press the button tomorrow. My biggest fear is that like so many other issues we end up with another false dawn.
 
I am just voicing my concern that some of the stuff I have seen recently wouldn’t go a miss if one were of a mind to complain about stadium announcers and programme editors speaking out of turn.

If Easy thinks he is a good guy from looking into the man’s eyes, then I think we should just be a bit more respectful as opposed to turning him into the enemy.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on10:13 pm - Jun 22, 2016


Fantastic that Ireland, N.I., Wales – and yes even Engerlund – have qualified for the next Euro’s round.

It keeps it very interesting for us Scots, but it’s also is a painful reminder that we are missing out – yet again.

Come on the Iceland !!!  22

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on11:29 pm - Jun 22, 2016


WOTTPIJUNE 22, 2016 at 21:27
 
CORRUPT OFFICIALJUNE 22, 2016 at 18:03CO, it wasn’t just your post. However yours was just the latest but no means the worst of posts and tweets where IMHO a hectoring and, dare I say,  aggressive tone is being used towards Grant Russell.
    —————————————————————————————————————————
  Aye your probably right and it was a frustration driven post. But I stand by it. If the scenario I was talking about comes to pass (i.e. Res 12 blows everything wide open) many “reporters” will find themselves in a bad place. They have zero deniability of knowledge, as they have been supplied with it, The hiding behind “legal difficulties” just doesn’t wash, as nobody has received a cease and desist. No appetite, or not newsworthy?…P-Lease ! …Blame Timmy, or the Dons, or anybody else? Nope!
   They have nowhere to go with it other than come clean about  why things have gone unreported, or worse, mis-reported.  If that is down to their editors, then so be it ! Let the editors answer.  I doubt that is a scenario they have envisaged, and they thought that if they sat on it long enough it would blow over. It’s a scenario they should now be actively considering, as it is way beyond blowing over. Most are beyond redemption, but for Grant there is still credibility on the horizon. In fitba, you’re only as good as your last game. 
     

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on12:36 am - Jun 23, 2016


Wottpi.
In his report STV Grant misreprented the aim of Res12.
It was always about SFA accountability and it happened to be RFC were the club where governance failed them and their support, as well as all other clubs, by failing to apply due rigour to player registrations and asking questions about ebts as soon as they first got a mention in RFC accounts. 
When you consider that Rangers employees like Martin Bain and Andrew Dickson both ebt recipients with certain knowledge of ebts and side letters, sat on SFA/SPL committees there can be no questioning  that the SFA were ignorant of the gross deception played on Scottish football.
Res12 had another unappreciated aim though. It asked the UEFA CFCB to investigate the licensing process in 2011 because the CFCB had the power to demand the HMRC letters and e mails and other correspondence from that summer that had already been published on social media by Charlotte Fake overs. This is the material that our smsm do not dare go near for fear of the story it tells. STV were keen to make this a Celtic v Rangers issue but are not so keen to write anything about the narrative that CF material writes. 
Res12 had it been passed in 2013 would have legitimised the material that suggested wrong doing as in false statements or delays to get past key dates, had occurred. 
The thing is no one knows if that material is complete. Just one e mail or letter not leaked might render the narrative the material writes as meaningless and disprove suspicions only made worse by 3 years of silence.
So why is no one prepared to check out that narrative? Why no comparison with it and what exists in the records held by RFC and SFA?
Further  did the SFA apply due rigour given what the full material might suggest? Did they use their powers under FFP to establish the true position with HMRC?
Regardless of any UEFA response, that material is still in the public domain and the story it tells once the CW court case is out of the way will show why it should not have been buried since 2013, unless of course a piece of the script is missing, but how will we ever know?
Another failing in what was reported is a vital difference between what UEFA volunteered to Res12 lawyers and what was reported by STV Grant.
That means either that the vital wording is not part of what UEFA said in response to Grant’s questions or he omitted to include them in the STV report.
Somebody has been economical with the truth.
Scottish football is living on borrowed time in respect of LNS and the UEFA licence regardless of UEFA’s  position. We know LNS was a sham,  there has been no denial/explanation by the SPFL  and both STV and DR  had the full narrative on the LNS deception and did not refute the story it told.
The question now is simple why is the story the CF material suggests not the subject of investigation even if only to fill in any blanks that may  change that narrative and clear both RFC and SFA?

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on1:41 am - Jun 23, 2016


Auldheid June 23, 2016 at 00:36
————————–
I think that Wottpi recognises that Grant Russell’s article missed the thrust of the RES12 argument, but he is virtually the only person in the SMSN who has even tried to get an answer from UEFA or Stewart Regan, however unpalatable the answers have been.

I will repeat the thrust of an earlier post of mine, that it is fair to find fault with what Grant has reported and his conclusions, but IMO the strongest criticisms should be for those who refuse to recognise, investigate and report on the issue at all, i.e. the Record, Herald, BBC et al. At least Grant has done something to try and get answers.  I would like him to continue to do so and not feel that flak received isn’t worth the effort.

I think that Paul Brennan also recognised some of that in his last piece on CQN.

View Comment

Johnbud78

Johnbud78Posted on4:05 am - Jun 23, 2016


Wottpi/EJ, 

Both of you are suggesting that because Grant has asked questions then he should be given less grief than DR,BBC etc? In my view he is worse than the others! At least they are upfront in their negligence, they won’t ask the questions and bury their heads. Grant ha stated RES12 is dead due to the statement from UEFA, it addresses zero of RES12, from my understanding of it, he has refused to give the questions asked to receive these answers and then said the letter the 12’ers have should be published? He is pro-actively trying to distort what has gone on and is using a national platform to do so.

Just because he is asking questions does not exempt him from scrutiny, what are the questions? Who were they asked to? Are these things not important?

Auldheid, as always you hit the nail on the head! 

Wottpi/EJ, I am a very infrequent poster and both of you are guys I genuinely look forward to reading, so please do not take offence, but I just feel you are way off the mark in your defence of STVGrant here.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on7:21 am - Jun 23, 2016


Re Grant Russell. He has refused point blank to publish a list of questions STV asked UEFA, but has dismissed the CQN article as ‘speculation’ unless they publish the letter. Total hypocrisy IMO, whether he is a decent guy or not. 

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on8:01 am - Jun 23, 2016


JOHNBUD78 , CO and Auldheid, UTH

No one is saying that Grant Russell is perfect.

No one is saying his Uefa/RES 12 story isn’t flawed.

No one is saying that he shouldn’t  be challenged.

What I am saying is that the tone of some of the responses I have seen to his article have been wholly uncivil. Admittedly a good deal has been on twitter but, as discussed, the sense of frustration is creeping into this site as well.

I made the same point about trying to build bridges with  Roy Greenslade, as opposed to attacking him for the sake of it, the other week.

We have very few ‘friends’ in the media. These guys are the small handful of journos that may just keeping the story running. Shouting and swearing at them isn’t going to help our cause.

A person who is potentially an ally can easily turn around and walk away when they are given the wrong message.

“Having no intention of negatively affecting the potential outcome of the club’s future and after hearing the message from Rangers supporters and fans loud and clear (‘Yank go home!’), I notified the administrators today that I have withdrawn my bid for Rangers and will not be moving forward.”

I have no problem with folks challenging the likes of Russell and commenting on what they think. (I have more than a few questions myself).

However, all I am saying is that intelligent and well mannered argument is the way forward with these guys.

I know we can’t control folks who are on twitter but if we on TSFM continue the tradition started on RTC and being followed by the RES12 guys of keeping things civil then, hopefully, that will rub off on others. If not we end up being no more than a fan forum rabble who will merely be ignored. 

If people want to vent their frustration and dish out abuse there are plenty other easy targets working for the Red tops!!!

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on10:13 am - Jun 23, 2016


Just a quickie: I’m just in from Parliament House: the CW businesss, I discovered after an internal phone call by the desk, has been postponed till tomorrow.
See Scottish Courts administration? See efficiency? See service to the Public? 02

View Comment

Avatar

NTDEALPosted on11:35 am - Jun 23, 2016


WOTTPI@8.01
I’m not that sure where anyone on here has been anything but civil regards Mr Russell.
JOHNBUD78 and others have put forward their own views in a perfectly reasonable fashion.I agree with every word they say.
On the basis of what I have read and learned over the last 4-5 years on here and RTC previously,I am very surprised at your views here.
In my opinion,this was a clear attempt to discredit  res12 and use the UEFA statement to effectively say they(the requisitioners)are wasting their time.Russell needs to realise that we all see through this.
Agreed no one needs to shout,swear or be abusive,I’ve seen none of that here.
Can’t do anything about individuals on twitter 

View Comment

Avatar

DuplesisIIPosted on12:45 pm - Jun 23, 2016


Expenses awarded against Ashley and in favour of SFA and King in the “fit and proper” judicial review case :

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=a77617a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

View Comment

Avatar

shawfieldtoteboardPosted on1:00 pm - Jun 23, 2016


Clyde drawn at home to Partick Thistle U20’s in the IRNBRU cup. I will be giving this competition a wide bearth as including colt teams in senior competition leaves me cold. Here are some choice quotes from the Clyde board in response to a question regarding the new format:

The club was not involved in any consultation process regarding the format and the announcement of the format was shared with us one day prior to it being released to the public. The decision was made by the SPFL board.

The Challenge Cup has always been very marginal, and there is no prospect of the revised format being commercially viable for us if we play at home to small crowds.

The competition can be viable if we do not have home matches as the hosting club picks up all of the costs and related work and simply hands us 45% of the gate, which even on small attendances will always be positive.

What’s not to be excited about there? The only hope is that the format falls flat on its arse and is changed, in full consultation with all clubs. It means short term financial pain for clubs but needs must. My hope is that Barry ferguson plays the under-19’s for that game but no doubt if he did we would be hit with a fine for disrespecting the competition.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on1:17 pm - Jun 23, 2016


shawfieldtoteboardJune 23, 2016 at 13:00  

Clyde drawn at home to Partick Thistle U20’s in the IRNBRU cup. I will be giving this competition a wide bearth as including colt teams in senior competition leaves me cold.

Thanks for highlighting this, Shawfieldtoteboard.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/irn-bru-cup-how-much-8196025#xLzliV0IuEuYiE1B.97
Here’s a link, for those, like me, who were unaware of this.
I agree with you entirely, to include “under 20” teams from the higher leagues is just an insult to the teams in the lower leagues.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on1:51 pm - Jun 23, 2016


NTDEALJUNE 23, 2016 at 11:35

I can’t see why you are surprised at ‘my views’ as if what I have said is somehow supportive of what Grant Russell has reported.

I have made it clear that I think his recent report on Res12 is flawed and that he needs to be challenged.

My post was more about my concerns of not letting the abuse get in the way of the issues and actually trying to persuade and encourage Russell and others like Greenslade to take a different tact.

You appear to share my ‘views’ that abuse is not acceptable. I trust you will agree that it will most likely turn him and others off the subject altogether.

Similarly it also gives his STV employers an ‘out’ to move him off the story. 

I agree most of the comments on here have been civil. Whether that is down to the individual posters or the mods, I am not sure. However I do sense the frustration and am aware of where that can sometimes lead. I was just putting out a word of caution.

Personally I am not on twitter but some folk on here are. I would urge them to try and calm the waters when they see someone going ‘over the top’ and remind them to proceed with a bit of intelligence and dignity.

The SFA including CEO Regan, PR man Broadfoot  and even the Scotland manager have shown us plenty times they are quick to dismiss fans as being paranoid, obsessed, parochial etc etc.  Dishing out abuse to folks just gives them more ammo.

We all need to be a bit smarter than they think they are.

View Comment

CrownStBhoy

CrownStBhoyPosted on1:52 pm - Jun 23, 2016


@STVGrant seems to be topical so as a follow-up to my partially tongue-in-cheek previous comment I would like to make it clear that, as never having met the man, I have no particular opinion on Grant Russell.

I do, however, have an opinion on his ‘questions and answers’; it was not just indecent it was a deliberate attempt to at the very least deflect attention from the honest questions of Res12.

In short, it was corrupt!

TD away all you like, I do not seek to be contentious or contemptuous but that is the truth of the matter.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on2:25 pm - Jun 23, 2016


CrownStBhoy  June 23, 2016 at 13:52 
@STVGrant seems to be topical so as a follow-up to my partially tongue-in-cheek previous comment I would like to make it clear that, as never having met the man, I have no particular opinion on Grant Russell.
I do, however, have an opinion on his ‘questions and answers’; it was not just indecent it was a deliberate attempt to at the very least deflect attention from the honest questions of Res12.
In short, it was corrupt!
TD away all you like, I do not seek to be contentious or contemptuous but that is the truth of the matter.
=============================
You have gone from holding an opinion making a statement which you claim to be true. That’s a big leap to make without evidence to back it up.

I don’t know the truth about Grant Russell’s motives. But at least he (the only one I know from the SMSM) has sought to get a response from UEFA. We don’t know what he asked to get the response he did.  Reading between the lines I would guess it would be along the lines of asking what UEFA was going to do in response to the requisitioners’ letter.

The fact that GR has reported it as a Rangers issue misses the point of the requisitioners’ case. However, it is not possible to come to to a conclusion about what happened in the 2011 licensing round without involving Rangers. Did they lie? Did the SFA know they lied? Did the SFA seek to cover up the trues status of Rangers affairs?  We can all make educated guesses about what happened, but unless and until all communication between the parties is published we are all making guesses.

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on2:47 pm - Jun 23, 2016


EASYJAMBOJUNE 23, 2016 at 14:25
     “We don’t know what he asked to get the response he did. Reading between the lines I would guess it would be along the lines of asking what UEFA was going to do in response to the requisitioners’ letter”
    —————————————————————————————————————————
   Surely, EJ, the obvious thing for him to do, and guard against anybody reading between the lines, is to publish his questions to UEFA. Something he appears reluctant to do. I can see no fair minded reason for such reluctance
    

View Comment

Avatar

NTDEALPosted on2:54 pm - Jun 23, 2016


Ok,WOTTPI,take your point

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on4:26 pm - Jun 23, 2016


Corrupt official June 23, 2016 at 14:47
Surely, EJ, the obvious thing for him to do, and guard against anybody reading between the lines, is to publish his questions to UEFA. Something he appears reluctant to do. I can see no fair minded reason for such reluctance.
=======================
I agree wholeheartedly, but we can’t force him to do so. He may be holding something back, but equally so he may not. If and when the requisitioners are in a position to publish their questions and answers, then Grant could well be made to look foolish, or equally so, to have reported honestly and fairly.  He could be waiting to see what the requisitioners have been told before revealing all as an STV exclusive. Who knows?

There aren’t many virtues going round as this saga slowly unfolds, but “patience” is one that we all need just now.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on4:38 pm - Jun 23, 2016


I note John James is tearing into T’Rangers new signing’s playing record over the last few seasons.

Hadn’t appreciated Kranjcar had only apparently signed a three month deal with Cosmos.

I also note that the SMSM didn’t appear to mention this from 27 May 2016

http://www.thisiscosmoscountry.com/opinion/how-will-the-cosmos-fare-tactically-without-niko-kranjcar/

Cosmos head coach Giovanni Saverese confirmed this morning that Croatian attacker Niko Kranjčar will be out 4-6 weeks with what he described as a “pulled quad”. Gio indicated that Niko’s situation was a “disappointing” one, and that the midfielder would be participating in therapy away from the team and with other doctors that both he and the club know and trust. Gio also indicated that the club is not actively looking to replace either Niko or Michael Lahoud at this time.

Maybe the lad can resurrect his career at Ibrox, and good luck to him,  but all the press reports from elsewhere point to an aging,  but talented player, who is injury prone, lazy and lacking in game time.

Other than the free agent tag it doesn’t seem to be the type of player Warburton  would go for if ’55’ is the supposed target,  but no doubt he will be portrayed as the best thing since sliced bread. 

Only time will tell.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on4:53 pm - Jun 23, 2016


SHAWFIELDTOTEBOARD
JUNE 23, 2016 at 13:00 8 0  Rate This 
Clyde drawn at home to Partick Thistle U20’s in the IRNBRU cup. I will be giving this competition a wide bearth as including colt teams in senior competition leaves me cold.

That’s a poor show. Despoiling a competition that was meant to give the lower leagues teams something for themselves. Kind of makes the whole thing pointless really. I would tell them to shove it

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on5:44 pm - Jun 23, 2016


If Britain votes to leave the EU today what will be the effect of the free movement of workers around Europe? including footballers?

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on7:14 pm - Jun 23, 2016


JIMBOJUNE 23, 2016 at 17:44  
If Britain votes to leave the EU today what will be the effect of the free movement of workers around Europe? including footballers?
=========
Well as it is quiet, [everyone out voting?], and not totally OT, re: players’ movement.

IMHO, regardless of the ‘Brexit’ result, the UK will not be leaving the EU.
If the vote result is Leave, then Cameron resigns – and Boris takes over as PM.
Job done, [from Boris’ perspective anyway].

Then he can drag his feet, use scaremongering / terrorism threats etc. to kick an EU exit deep into the long grass.

The powers that be made sure that Scotland didn’t leave: there’s arguably a lot more at stake this time – and the City just doesn’t like uncertainty…  20

View Comment

CrownStBhoy

CrownStBhoyPosted on7:52 pm - Jun 23, 2016


EASYJAMBOJUNE 23, 2016 at 14:25

I appreciate you have found Mr Russell very helpful and have no reason to contend that; I would accept that he is a very pleasurable fellow.
 
However, notwithstanding his lack of willingness to reveal the content of questions asked of UEFA, the very headline of his report alone exposed Mr Russell’s abjective intent towards the continued existence of Res12.
 
I see nothing untruthful in holding that opinion which is just that and not a statement of fact.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on8:59 pm - Jun 23, 2016


My duties today included taking some American guests to the airport through the hellish Royal Highland Show traffic on the Edinburgh City bypass at 10.30 this morning ( one and a half hours from the Straiton junction) and voting on the Referendum about half an hour ago ( nice stroll through leafy, sun-dappled streets to the Army Cadet Centre). Having, in the ambiguous words of a staff performance reporting officer ” completed all my duties entirely to my own satisfaction”, I now have to say a wee word in support of GR [ next time I see him I’ll ask him if he likes being in with the other initials used on SFM!].
I’m pretty sure eJ is as aware of the Stockholm syndrome as I, and as aware as Hamlet ‘that one may smile and smile and be a villain’. Neither of us would take his pleasant, friendly, unassuming readiness to chat  to us and occasionally cross-check what he thought had been said with what we thought it related to and vice versa as meaning that he was not a SMSM person working in an media climate which we believe has signally failed both in its duty, and in missing an absolutely absorbing story, particularly when set in the wider world football context of suspicion of large-scale corruption and money-laundering.
However,  I think ( as I would imagine does eJ) that GR has , whether of his own initiative or not, got STV to  move a little way in at least relating to the UEFA story. And we must remember that ‘headlines’ of any sort are seldom written by the person who wrote the copy, and that , even if one is Alex Thomson, one’s copy is apt to be reshaped to the point of complete disfigurement!
To satisfy myself, I shall try ask GR when I next see him whether a) he really understood what the Res 12 is about and b) whether his copy was seriously edited by his seniors and c) whether he was in any restricted in the questioning (if any) that he was allowed to pursue with the UEFA people, and d) whether he has clout enough to insist to his seniors that the factual truth of what he reports should be reproduced in its proper and full context.
I’ll have to say ‘hullo’ to him first ,of course- and not in a threatening, contemptuous manner. So no personal bad-mouthing from me until I’ve spoken to him on the issue.
ps The other two professional gentlemen that I have had conversation with are free-lancers, whose reports have actually been factually accurate , well-written ,and free from any heavy propaganda slant. One of these is , of course, James D. The other I won’t name because I’m not entirely sure of it.( I asked someone else, and he gave me a name , but I think he may have thought I meant somebody else!)

View Comment

justshatered

justshateredPosted on9:11 pm - Jun 23, 2016


The good news just keeps flowing down Govan way.
Niko Kranjcar seems like a good signing on the face of things. Well he is a name at least.
A bit like Joey Barton who will shout from the roof tops and our excuse for a media will duly print it.
However at the end of the day both of these guys are the wrong side of 30 and will certainly be unused to the physicality of the Scottish game. I would be surprised if either of these guys last ninety minutes regularly. They will have touches of class from time to time however they will not have the time on the ball they are used to.
I think it is also now safe to say that whatever has been saved by players leaving has now been swallowed up, and then some, by the recent signings.
There is no sell on value on any of these players.
As I see it this is the last gamble by a desperate board!
If these players hit the ground running, and they can go top and stay there until Christmas, then the three bears will be forced to anti up yet again in an attempt to get them through the season and access European money.
If this gamble fails and the team struggles in the top league then I think it is game over. This house of cards will collapse quicker than the previous entity.
The clock is ticking towards season start but if there are a series of injuries to the squad, injuries they did not suffer last year, then that will also impact on performance.
Meanwhile there will be no replica strips for the faithful to buy due to the fall out between King and Rangers Retail. This will hit them hard financially with no income at all as opposed to the pittance they were getting before.
In fact this will actually cost them more as they will have to buy unsold items at shop floor price but still, due to the exclusivity clause, be unable to sell it themselves. So they will have to buy the unsold units but still be unable to sell them themselves.
Once again we are watching high stakes, well for Scottish football, gambling.
This is a club continually posting losses very much like its predecessor.
It isn’t a business but a charity!
Everyone connected with it, that has money, is supposed to just shovel it down the money pit with no thanks because “it’s the Rangers way you know”!!

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on9:29 pm - Jun 23, 2016


justshateredJune 23, 2016 at 21:11
‘…They will have touches of class from time to time however they will not have the time on the ball they are used to.’
________
I was able to see only the first half of the Italy v Rep of Ireland game last night. I personally cannot remember a game in which any team had as little time on the ball as that utterly bewildered Italy team! They looked to me as though they thought they had been caught up in an Aussie rules game by mistake, by the incredible (but mostly legal) rushing and hustling of the Irish. I think certainly every Italy defender was sweating gallons within the first ten minutes, composure shot to hell.
It was not exactly billiard-table smooth , poetic football, but it was certainly effective in putting the Italians off.

View Comment

Avatar

YellohoosePosted on9:33 pm - Jun 23, 2016


What’s this?  I see TSFM gets a mention in the comments too.  Good!   http://www.thenational.scot/sport/the-kicker-sfa-can-expect-taxing-questions-from-private-eye.19137?utm_medium=social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_term=Autofeed#link_time=1466674415

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on9:40 pm - Jun 23, 2016


John Clark June 23, 2016 at 20:59
The other I won’t name because I’m not entirely sure of it.( I asked someone else, and he gave me a name , but I think he may have thought I meant somebody else!)
========================
James Mulholland is the chap I think you are referring to.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on9:55 pm - Jun 23, 2016


YellohooseJune 23, 2016 at 21:33
‘….What’s this? I see TSFM gets a mention in the comments too. Good!  ‘
_______
Dammit, I meant to buy ‘Private Eye’ this morning on my way home from the Court of Session, but my bus came before I had time to dive into the newsagent  at the bus stop.
I would like to think that the Res 12 guys have tried to ensure that Private Eye gets all the facts and ‘witness’ statements about what the attitude of the SFA ( and those SPFL boards with whom the matter has been raised by their supporters)has been.
And I would further hope that , once gripped by the story, Private Eye will follow through on the complicity angle in the manufacture of the Big Lie fabricated by the 5Way agreement, and, in short, really rip the whole dirty mess apart.
They could make it really topical,by asking whether it is any wonder that a Football Association such as the SFA  cannot produce a national team capable of qualifying for the Euros when the world and his  wife can!

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on10:07 pm - Jun 23, 2016


easyJamboJune 23, 2016 at 21:40
‘..James Mulholland is the chap I think you are referring to..’
_________
That’s the name, certainly,that was given to me when I tried to describe the chap. Was it you that gave me it?04

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on10:44 pm - Jun 23, 2016


John Clark June 23, 2016 at 22:07 
easyJamboJune 23, 2016 at 21:40 ‘..
James Mulholland is the chap I think you are referring to..’
_________
That’s the name, certainly,that was given to me when I tried to describe the chap. Was it you that gave me it?
===============================
Probably, but it was Grant who told me who he was.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on12:29 am - Jun 24, 2016


Corrupt officialJune 22, 2016 at 23:29

“… and they thought that if they sat on it long enough it would blow over”
——————————
That’s sometimes what victory looks like. A stifling nil-nil draw may not have the regalia of triumphant victory but if that perseverance gets you were you want to be then you have achieved your end.

In the process of achieving this defeat the SMSM have shown themselves up to be creatures of the establishment and the establishment has shown itself up in turn to be inept.

Scottish football supporters in general may not have the full detail of the malfeasance that has taken place within their sport but they know it has happened. Likely just about everyone will know the guy in the vicinity that IS able to rhyme off chapter and verse were all the skeletons have been wardrobed. The truth is out there and the truth has set us free. Do not believe that no achievement has occurred, for that would be to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Even the most die hard Rangers supporters will be aware that stinky stuff has occurred. Every denial of fact has marked out the scene of the crime. They may turn away in horror but only because the sight is horrific. Indeed it is probably all the greater in their imagination where wilful ignorance is at its height.

The SMSM has expended all its efforts to no good effect.

Which brings to mind that salutory tale of Greek General Pyrrhus recounted on this blog many a time. To quote his own words;
“If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined”.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on12:45 am - Jun 24, 2016


Johnbud78June 23, 2016 at 04:05

“Just because he is asking questions does not exempt him from scrutiny, what are the questions? Who were they asked to? Are these things not important?”
————————————-
EJ is as we would all recognise and as you graciously acknowledge Johnbud78, a highly valued contributor to the blog. He has taken the trouble to be in the various courtrooms (along with John Clark) to look into Grant Russel’s eyes. Despite this legitimacy, like you, I feel obliged to question GR’s motives.

In a propaganda exercise of this sort it is necessary on occasions to throw scraps from the table to keep the dog from chewing your leg. Defusing viewpoints by seeming to give some ground fits well with the typical propaganda model. You can garner some credence which can then be used to deflate further attacks.

A propaganda model with too sharp a silhouette will clearly be seen for what it is. By occupying grey areas GR perhaps achieves the purpose of muddying the waters.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on12:46 am - Jun 24, 2016


And here’s another thing!
The Rolls of court of Session are updated at about 4.00 pm each ( civil service) working day.
So, having been told this morning that what had been scheduled for 9.45 today had been postponed until tomorrow, I have a look to see whether the Rolls  were updated today at 4 o’clock, in order to find out in which court room and, perhaps, under which judge, and at what time the HMA petition re CW matter is to be heard.
There’s eff all.
Am I to get up earlier than I would perhaps otherwise wish,  to bloody well inconvenience myself by traveling in to Parliament House, only to find that there has been another change, another postponement?
And it’s not just a simple matter of phoning a publicly available ‘enquiry’ number to ask. I have been told by ‘someone who knows’ that only accredited journalists can do that and expect to get an answer.
And I know from my own personal experience, that only accredited journalists will be given  copies of the indictment against an accused. I asked for a copy of the indictment against ‘the conspiracy accused’,but was refused because I couldn’t show a press accreditation card.
I have difficulties with that. I sit in court. There a guys in the dock. And I can’t have a copy of the indictment prepared by the Prosecution? while two or three guys sitting beside me in the benches have the full script because they are ‘journalists’?
Am I , are you, expected simply to accept what ‘journalists’ report, as if they were fountains of truth and objectivity?
I can say further, that if it were not for  having sight( apparently unofficially) of the indictment against the alleged ‘conspirators’ in a particular case of some public interest, I would not have had any idea of what the court proceedings were all about.

View Comment

Avatar

DunderheidPosted on8:41 am - Jun 24, 2016


JC

I marvel at your tenacity with this … and see how idiocies such as those described above can only serve to discourage even the most stout-hearted of fellows.

But perhaps, in one of those idle moments you senior citizen types must have [smiley, winkey thing here], you could ‘have a go’ at the Court Service from here: https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/complaints/complaints-and-feedback/scs-complaints-procedure.

#justsayin

View Comment

Avatar

fan of footballPosted on8:46 am - Jun 24, 2016


Well I suspect that the Res 12 guys must have some bad news for the same club fantasists .
Anyone remember a certain poster on here not too long ago putting in a truly dedicated shift trying THEIR best to convince everyone that the earth actually is flat .

Well I see he has popped up today on a new club forum with a couple of links to a uefa website (stop laughing at the back) claiming it proves their the same club in Uefa’s eyes and telling everyone too pass on the message 

Oh dear ,looks like the Res 12 guys have touched a nerve 

PS check the date the info on the site was last updated (bottom right hand side of results info) how lucky must that guy be to look at that site ,at that time ,just as it had been updated .
wish I was that lucky .
Oh and by the way the site asks you to send in info to help THEM keep the site updated .
Who would have thunk it ,eh 

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on10:08 am - Jun 24, 2016


Without ever wishing to bring politics to the site I couldn’t help pick up this quote from Brian Simpson, political bod for the beeb (he of the colourful braces and well filled short collar).  Having spoken to voters on the street… 

(Talking of the staunchly ‘Remain’ Edinburgh electorate)….”what I picked up more than anything was not from the seemingly victorious (at that time) ‘Remain’ camp but from the very strong ‘Leave’ contingent – that they were there seeking a voice indeed they were lashing out against the Bankers, the politicians, the Establishment.  They were utterly sick of being taken for granted.  Enough was enough……”

Well at least we know our own John Clark made it to the polling station then!  02

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on10:54 am - Jun 24, 2016


Been out the loop for some days now.holiday season and a terrible wi-fi.
But from what i picked up and i may be wrong,always happy to be corrected.
So here goes…not in any correct order but The Res 12 guys contacted celtic.celtic contacted the SFA,The Res 12 guys contacted lawyers,lawyers contacted celtic.Celtic contacted RES 12 Guys.SFA contacted celtic.Celtic contacted UEFA.UEFA contacted SFA.
And around and around it went for 4 years.But you get my drift.
STV have a Bat phone direct link to UEFA so it would seem.
So my question is this. If STV have a bat phone direct link to UEFA to ask them questions.How come STV never got in contact with celtic,Res 12 guys.Lawyers and The SFA years ago and said to them.”Here listen you could spend years contacting each other and at some expense. We here at STV studios have a bat phone style direct link to UEFA and we can pick up the phone any time and ask them questions.
So give STV all your questions lads and we will phone direct ask all your questions and have the answers for you back before tea time.
Is this what STV want us to believe, that they can just pick up a phone and ask questions. anytime they want and they will get answers over the phone.The RES 12 GUYS have been trying to get answers for years.It has taken Lawyers and hard work to even get some kind of responce.
Or did i miss something with the terrible wi-fi and sun10

View Comment

Reiver

ReiverPosted on11:43 am - Jun 24, 2016


Cluster

I think you need to correct your order of events. It is my understanding that the stage “Celtic contacted UEFA” never actually happened. I get the impression that that Celtic didn’t waste any time of their own they wasted the time of the Res12 boys.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on1:05 pm - Jun 24, 2016


ReiverJune 24, 2016 at 11:43  
Cluster
I think you need to correct your order of events. It is my understanding that the stage “Celtic contacted UEFA” never actually happened. I get the impression that that Celtic didn’t waste any time of their own they wasted the time of the Res12 boys.
================================
Looking at it objectively, it would be tempting to conclude that the Res 12 guys (for whom I have enormous admiration) have been hung out to dry. Except that they themselves don’t seem to see it that way. They seem confident that all is going well, but in ways that can’t be fully revealed to us right now.
I’m an old cynic, but the Res12 people have done the heavy lifting on this, while I’ve just sat on the sidelines and done nothing.
Do you remember those windows they used to put in the hoardings around building sites so that old geezers could pass their time watching the fit and able getting on with doing something useful? Well I’m now one of those old geezers, and I try really hard not to criticise the work being done by those on site.
I have severe reservations about CFC’s handling of this, but I will await the outcome (hopefuly very soon now) before concluding either that Lawell has played a blinder, or that he has sold his own stakeholders (plus the rest of Scottish fitba’) down the river on this.
I’m a great admirer of your own efforts, Riever, by the way. But there may be more than one way to skin a cat. We’ll see.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on1:48 pm - Jun 24, 2016


DunderheidJune 24, 2016 at 08:41
‘…JC..I marvel at your tenacity with this..’
_________
I should say that the reason I was so very annoyed yesterday is that I knew that I would not be able to attend Court today!
I may very well pen a missive. 02

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on2:08 pm - Jun 24, 2016


REIVERJUNE 24, 2016 at 11:43
Thanks for correction.
Celtic didn’t waste any time of their own they wasted the time of the Res12 boys.
——————
And by the look of things, the STV guys let everyone waste time as they could have got the answers in before tea.If you believe STV.
Is more the point i was trying to get at

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on3:44 pm - Jun 24, 2016


Just realised that France v. Ireland will be the first competitive rematch since the shocking ‘Henry’ cheating incident in Paris, in the 2010 World Cup qualification play-offs.

========================
“…
The French sport paper L’Equipe reacted to the prospect of facing Ireland in the Round of 16 with a picture of Henry handling the ball in the Stade de France, next to the headline Un vieux compte a regler – An old score to settle….”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/06/23/republic-of-ireland-prepare-for-chance-of-perfect-revenge-over-f/
========================

It would be Karma indeed if Ireland kicked France out of their own tournament !  14

View Comment

Comments are closed.