Comment Moderation Thread


It seems I have just had a post juxtaposing “the …

Comment on Comment Moderation Thread by Tif Finn.

It seems I have just had a post juxtaposing “the minimum wage” and “a minimum wage” deleted.

Can I ask why that was. I don’t think it was offensive, either in general or to a specific person.

Moderation is fine, and indeed necessary, however there really has to be a reason for it. I would just like to know what the reason for deleting that post was .

Removed mainly because of you “request” that others should state their allegiance before making comments. If the only people who were qualified to talk about the behaviour of any club are their own fans, we wouldn’t have a great deal to talk about on here.

The Celtic AGM, whilst of general interest, is pretty much OT as far as TSFM is concerned.
Your post introduced the concept of juxtaposition of minimum and living wage semantics. No-one else had done so, so in effect you were attributing sentiments to others which had not been expressed. Igniting partisan argument in this way over an essentially OT matter is not something mods are comfortable with.

Tif Finn Also Commented

Comment Moderation Thread
Thanks for the reply.

In relation to the juxtaposition thing, as I recall someone specifically mentioned ” a living wage” which I believed misleading as that is not the same as “the living wage” which is a specific campaign. That is what the Celtic board was asked about

I take your point with regard asking others about whether the club they support have subscribed to “the living wage”. I just thought it would be a bit disingenuous for people to be decrying the Celtic board for taking a position if they did not decry their own club if they took exactly the same stance.

Anyway, thanks for explaining, I appreciate it.

Comment Moderation Thread

Recent Comments by Tif Finn

Podcast Episode 1
Regarding tv coverage.

As I understand it the tv companies had the contractual right to show a number of games from the different stadiums.

They were naturally going to use two of those from Celtic Park when Rangers visited and two at Ibrox when Celtic visited. The bottom line for the other grounds is that the biggest draws were when that teams on natural rivals were visiting (say Hearts at Hibs) or when either Celtic or Rangers were there.

The tv companies have to try to maximise viewing figures and that was simply the best way to do it.

Podcast Episode 1
A nice precedent for Craig Whyte if these recordings are admissible.

Particulalry Charles Green saying “You are Sevco” several times in the same meeting.

It’s small wonder he wouldn’t object to things like that being made available.

Podcast Episode 1
RIFC actually did take on some of the debts of their predecessor and paid them.

From the accounts

“There were also substantial payments of £2.4m made to clear football debts to other Clubs incurred
pre-administration which the management of the Club was committed to addressing”

As I recall the football authorities also withheld money owed to Rangers, which should have gone to the administrators and used it to pay football debts.

Between them Rangers and the Scottish Football Authorities they created an effective preference for one group of creditors.

Podcast Episode 1
It’s an entirely different World nowadays with regards the press and access to information and opinion.

The internet and in particular social media has totally changed the landscape.

Several decades ago people really only had newspapers, the radio and Saturday night highlights to go on. Sports reporters and broadcasters had an enormous influence on public opinion, whether it be positive or negative.

That has been totally overturned for a lot of people. Particularly with places like this, where what they say can be challenged and often be demonstrated to be little more than propaganda and press releases.

For example for years most people really believed that Sir David Murray had actually been putting his own money into Rangers and financing their success. This was put about and supported by the “succulent lamb” journalism of the time.

Things have changed for the better.

Podcast Episode 1
For McCoist to “value” the players registered to the team at that time as if they were employed by a vibrant healthy club is disingenuous anyway. That is not the reality of the situation. It was a club in administration from February and as such any transfer fees would have reflected that position.

I know they didn’t think the normal rules of administration applied to them, they even tried to bring a player in. However as clubs who have been through the process know players are sold at a fraction of their “normal” value simply to bring money in and get them off the wage bill.

About the author