The recent revelations of a potential winding up order being served on Rangers Newco certainly does have a sense of “deja vu all over again” for the average reader of this blog.
It reminds me of an episode of the excellent Western series Alias Smith & Jones. The episode was called The Posse That Wouldn’t Quit. In the story, the eponymous anti-heroes were being tracked by a particularly dogged group of law-men whom they just couldn’t shake off – and they spent the entire episode trying to do just that. In a famous quote, Thaddeus Jones, worn out from running, says to Joshua Smith, “We’ve got to get out of this business!”
The SFM has been trying since its inception to widen the scope and remit of the discussion and debate on the blog. Unsuccessfully. Like the posse that wouldn’t quit, Rangers are refusing to go away as a story. With the latest revelations, I confided in my fellow mods that perhaps we too should get out of this business. I suspect that, even if we did, this story would doggedly trail our paths until it wears us all down.
The fact that the latest episode of the Rangers saga has sparked off debate on this blog may even confirm the notion subscribed to by Rangers fans that TSFM is obsessed with their club. However even they must agree that the situation with regard to Rangers would be of interest to anyone with a stake in Scottish Football; and that they themselves must be concerned by the pattern of events which started over a decade ago and saw the old club fall into decline on a trajectory which ended in liquidation.
But let me enter into a wee discussion which doesn’t merely trot out the notion of damage done to others or sins against the greater good, but which enters the realm of the damage done to one of the great institutions of world sport, Rangers themselves.
David Murray was regarded by Rangers fans as a hero. His bluster, hubris and (as some see it) arrogant contempt for his competitors afforded him a status as a champion of the cause as long as it was underpinned by on-field success.
The huge pot of goodwill he possessed was filled and topped-up by a dripping tap of GIRUY-ness for many years beyond the loss of total ascendency that his spending (in pursuit of European success) had achieved, and only began to bottom out around the time the club was sold to Craig Whyte. In retrospect, it can be seen that the damage that was done to the club’s reputation by the Murray ethos (not so much a Rangers ethos as a Thatcherite one) and reckless financial practice is now well known.
Notwithstanding the massive blemish on its character due to its employment policies, the (pre-Murray) Rangers ethos portrayed a particularly Scottish, perhaps even Presbyterian stoicism. It was that of a conservative, establishment orientated, God-fearing and law-abiding institution that played by the rules. It was of a club that would pay its dues, applied thrift and honesty in its business dealings, and was first to congratulate rivals on successes (witness the quiet dignity of John Lawrence at the foot of the aircraft steps with an outstretched hand to Bob Kelly when Celtic returned from Lisbon).
If Murray had dug a hole for that Rangers, Craig Whyte set himself up to fill it in. No neo-bourgeois shirking of responsibilities and duty to the public for him; his signature was more pre-war ghetto, hiding behind the couch until the rent man moved along to the next door. Whyte just didn’t pay any bills and with-held money that was due to be passed along to the treasury to fund the ever more diminished public purse. Where Murray’s Rangers had been regarded by the establishment and others as merely distasteful, Whyte’s was now regarded as a circus act, and almost every day of his tenure brought more bizarre and ridiculous news which had Rangers fans cringing, the rest laughing up their sleeve, and Bill Struth birling in his grave.
The pattern was now developing in plain sight. Murray promised Rangers fans he would only sell to someone who could take the club on, but he sold it – for a pound – to a guy whose reputation did not survive the most cursory of inspection. Whyte protested that season tickets had not been sold in advance, that he used his own money to buy the club. Both complete fabrications. Yet until the very end of Whyte’s time with the club, he, like Murray still, was regarded as hero by a fan-base which badly wanted to believe that the approaching car-crash could be avoided.
Enter Charles Green. Having been bitten twice already, the fans’ first instincts were to be suspicious of his motives. Yet in one of history’s greatest ironic turnarounds, he saw off the challenge of real Rangers-minded folk (like John Brown and Paul Murray) and their warnings, and by appealing to what many regard as the baser instincts of the fan-base became the third hero to emerge in the boardroom in as many years. The irony of course is that Green himself shouldn’t really pass any kind of Rangers sniff-test; personal, sporting, business or cultural; and yet there he is the spokesman for 140 years of the aspirations of a quarter of the country’s fans.
To be fair though, what else could Rangers fans do? Green had managed (and shame on the administration process and football authorities for this) to pick up the assets of the club for less (nett) than Craig Whyte and still maintained a presence in the major leagues.
If they hadn’t backed him only the certainty of doom lay before them. It was Green’s way or the highway in other words – and speaking of words, his sounded mighty fine. But do the real Rangers minded people really buy into it all?
First consider McCoist. I do not challenge his credentials as a Rangers minded man, and his compelling need to be an effective if often ineloquent spokesman for the fans. However, according to James Traynor (who was then acting as an unofficial PR advisor to the Rangers manager), McCoist was ready to walk in July (no pun intended) because he did not trust Green. The story was deliberately leaked, to undermine Green, by both Traynor and McCoist. McCoist also refused for a long period of time to endorse the uptake of season books by Rangers fans, even went as far as to say he couldn’t recommend it.
So what changed? Was it a Damascene conversion to the ways of Green, or was it the 250,000 shares in the new venture that he acquired. Nothing improper or unethical – but is it idealism? Is it fighting for the cause?
Now think Traynor. I realise that can be unpleasant, but bear with me.
Firstly, when he wrote that story on McCoist’s resignation, (and later backed it up on radio claiming he had spoken to Ally before printing the story), he was helping McCoist to twist Green’s arm a little. Now, and I’m guessing that Charles didn’t take this view when he saw the story in question, Green thinks that Traynor is a “media visionary”?
Traynor also very publicly, in a Daily Record leader, took the “New Club line” and was simultaneously contemptuous of Green.
What happened to change both their minds about each other? Could it have been (for Green) the PR success of having JT on board and close enough to control, and (for Traynor) an escape route for a man who had lost the battle with own internal social media demons?
Or, given both McCoist’s and Traynor’s past allegiance to David Murray, is it something else altogether?
Whatever it is, both Traynor and McCoist have started to sing from a totally different hymn sheet to Charles Green since the winding up order story became public. McCoist’s expert étude in equivocation at last Friday’s press conference would have had the Porter in Macbeth slamming down the portcullis (now there’s an irony). He carefully distanced himself from his chairman and ensured that his hands are clean. Traynor has been telling one story, “we have an agreement on the bill”, and Green another, “we are not paying it”.
And what of Walter Smith? At first, very anti-Charles Green, he even talked about Green’s “new club”. Then a period of silence followed by his being co-opted to the board and a “same club” statement. Now in the face of the damaging WUP story, more silence. Hardly a stamp of approval on Green’s credentials is it?
Rangers fans would be right to be suspicious of any non-Rangers people extrapolating from this story to their own version of Armageddon, but shouldn’t they also reserve some of that scepticism for Green and Traynor (neither are Rangers men, and both with only a financial interest in the club) when they say “all is well” whilst the real Rangers man (McCoist) is only willing to say “as far as I have been told everything is well”
As a Celtic fan, it may be a fair charge to say that I don’t have Rangers best interests at heart, but I do not wish for their extinction, nor do I believe that one should ignore a quarter of the potential audience for our national game. Never thought I’d hear myself say this, but apart from one (admittedly mightily significant) character defect, I can look at the Rangers of Struth and Simon, Gillick and Morton, Henderson and Baxter, and Waddell and Lawrence (and God help me even Jock Wallace) with fondness and a degree of nostalgia.
I suspect most Rangers fans are deeply unhappy about how profoundly their club has changed. To be fair, my own club no longer enchants me in the manner of old. As sport has undergone globalisation, everything has changed. Our relationship to our clubs has altered, the business models have shifted, and the aspirations of clubs is different from that of a generation ago. It has turned most football clubs into different propositions from the institutions people of my generation grew up supporting, but Rangers are virtually unrecognisable.
The challenge right now for Rangers fans is this. How much more damage will be done to the club’s legacy before this saga comes to an end?
And by then will it be too late to do anything about it?
Most people on this blog know my views about the name of Green’s club. I really don’t give a damn because for me it is not important. I do know, like Craig Whyte said, that in the fullness of time there will be a team called Rangers, playing football in a blue strip at Ibrox, and in the top division in the country.
I understand that this may be controversial to many of our contributors, but I hope that this incarnation of Rangers is closer to that of Lawrence and Simon than to Murray and Souness.
Auldheid (@Auldheid) says: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 12:50
Good idea! I think it’s both sensible and fair in the sense of establishing a collective responsibility to look after the league. I’m not so sure that Scotland’s top club(s) would share the same altruism though.
And this is how they plan to speed Sevco up the table after reorganisation – inviting them to the extra play off place
An extra play-off place for promotion from the Second Division will be added this season if league reconstruction plans are approved.
Proposals to reshape Scottish league football into a 12-12-18 format are gathering pace and Kilmarnock have released a document providing further details on the plans.
The document confirms that if the new structure is put in place for next season, there would be an additional Second Division team entering the play-off to join the second tier.
Under the current league set-up, the bottom team in the First Division is automatically relegated, with the team in ninth going into a four-team play-off with the sides finishing second, third and fourth in the Second Division.
If the SPL and SFL vote to approve new plans for the 2013-14 season, there will be no automatic relegation from the First Division this term and no relegation play-off involving the side that finishes ninth.
That, in turn, would require an extra team to be entered into the play-off for the second promotion spot from the Second Division.
As the league currently stands, Queen of the South are 18 points clear in first place and look likely to gain automatic promotion to the First Division.
Alloa Athletic, Brechin City and Arbroath occupy the second, third and fourth positions but if the new plans gain approval, fifth place Forfar Athletic would be in the fourth play-off place.
Should league positions remain the same until the end of the season, they would enter the knock-out games for promotion.
The creation of an 18-team third tier would mean no relegation from the Second Division and no promotion from the Third as a new division is formed.
smugas says: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:09
Can I ask though, am I right in thinking the first 900k goes to the bottom 8 of the SPL 1/2. The next 200k goes to the bottom 18, next 900k goes to the top 8 of the SPL1/2 with the following monies being distributed ‘down the line’. What’s the thinking behind missing out the middle 8?
——————————–
That’s not my understanding. The first £900K goes to the 12 Championship sides i.e. the 2nd league of 12.
The proposed distribution seems to be based on a straight 12:12:18 and appears to ignore the 8:8:8:18 final league positions.
In the case of league titles it is a pretty simple matter to adjust all other teams placings based on a 3-0 result (in the case of unregistered players). It therefore follows that it would be simple to work out where teams would eventually have finished over the course of a season. In the case of cup competitions however it is not so clear cut. At what round would you adjust the result and if you were to do this at the earliest point of entry into the competition who can say how future results would have panned out.
Speaking as a Celtic fan I would have no wish to see vacated titles awarded to my club. Better to win them on the field of play as the sevconians are happy to say. The whole issue of prize monies and UEFA monies will keep the lawyers in work for years to come.
NTHM,
I don’t follow. Are you saying you would expect the winner of the 3rd div to join 2nd. 3rd and 4th of the 2nd div in a playoff? Why would 5-10th vote for that?
Ref the boardroom “split”.
There’s a recent Daily Mail piece by chief football writer Stephen McGowan doing the rounds on Rangers messageboards that has Dave King still very much in the picture, with wee Craigie trying to flog him the ‘Gers in one of James Mortimer’s ‘nite spots’. Co-incidently, Mortimer owns the large serviced light industrial block – Junction 24 – adjacent to Ibrox.
One to watch?
easyJambo says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:09
Auldheid (@Auldheid) says: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 12:50
Good idea! I think it’s both sensible and fair in the sense of establishing a collective responsibility to look after the league. I’m not so sure that Scotland’s top club(s) would share the same altruism though.
—————————-
Not so sure. They are all in the same holed boat baking out and if one stops baling out and falls out the boat sinks.
Its not altruism that is needed its common sense. Even the footballer whose wage packet funds it eventually by being a few £k less needs someone to play against to earn what he does.
smugas says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:19
0 0 Rate This
NTHM,
I don’t follow. Are you saying you would expect the winner of the 3rd div to join 2nd. 3rd and 4th of the 2nd div in a playoff? Why would 5-10th vote for that?
———————————–
that’s where this is heading……lets just wait and see what the MSM start to print with regards to this.
Tommy says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:01
Agreed there needs to be more meat on the bones on this one. It can’t be because Charles has cut back on the choccy biscuits in the boardroom to save a bit of cash!
Given that all eyes are on the club, right down to insignificant unpaid invoices, it is hard to see what benefit there is from publicizing a spat between Chairman and CEO.
The only benefits I can see is that there may be a move by ‘Rangers Men’ to try and take over the running of the club now the IPO has gone through and they have a better idea of exaclty where they stand financially (albeit they should not be surprised if some stuff is hidden away).
OR
Charles and his pals are worried about not getting away with it ‘because of those pesky kids’ and are trying to do away with the Cassandras while looking for an exit strategy.
The problem for Mr Traynor, if he is indeed involved in such a scenario, is which camp does he side with?
The answer is of course whichever suits JT the best 🙂
All journos with exclusive juicy titbits like to put out a wee bit of tease first before getting to the main point.
Maybe Keith Jackson will tell us some more tomorrow.
NTHM
Cant see it saying anything about them being allowed into playoffs.
Alloa Athletic, Brechin City and Arbroath occupy the second, third and fourth positions but if the new plans gain approval, fifth place Forfar Athletic would be in the fourth play-off place.
??????????????
Green and Murray fall out.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I understand what you are saying but why would Green put Murray in place initially?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Can only guess
Normally
Spivs only involve decent people in their scams when it is essential to do so
So the rationale for appointing a Gentleman is most likely to get businessmen to deal with them
Since all the investors are Spivs ( excluding the Gullible)
They may be trying to impress respectable Bears who may give TRFC money or credit terms
Alternatively
Murray was appointed as the price of the Cardigan signing up
If Murray is forced out the Cardigan may also walk away
We will soon find out
This leak to the gutter press looks deliberate
hangerhead says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 12:38
I can’t agree with not giving the stripped titles (if that is what is done) to the 2nd place team. Celtic are entitled to them, simple.
There have been instances of titles being stripped and not being re-assigned in football and other sports, though there is always a good reason for this. Juventus were stripped of two titles for cheating. One was not re-assigned, but that was because the team who finished 2nd had also cheated. It was decided giving the title to the 3rd place team was a bridge too far.
The Lance Armstrong titles will never be re-assigned because the authorities cannot be sure who else was cheating at the time and do not want to risk having to award the titles to someone else, again. It is important to remember that Lance Armstrong never failed a doping test and there is no physical evidence against him. The authorities don’t know the extent to which other cyclists were involved. They have effectively closed that chapter of cycling history.
The league titles must go to Celtic, the Cups to whoever lost in the Final. Any other result is unacceptable.
The Uk Government has announced today that it shall name and shame individuals who use aggressive tax avoidance schemes. Well we could supply them with a list of names on here and as we know a certain indivual with a Knighthood no less, encouraged his employees to use such schemes. He should be exposed and stripped of his knighthood.
RE redistribution of titles if proven, the ramifications for football could be chaotic.
Redidtribution of titles?
Prize money for every team in the SPL over a 10 year period?
European prize money?(10’s of millions)
European co-efficents redrawn all over the place?
National team? (just as well they mostly lose 3-0 anyway)
The content of this can of worms may reduce Scottish football to utter farce, a farce that could reverberate round Europe for years…..(if we are not already there). Best go with what happened…..RFC tainted a decade of Scottish football, and the crime cannot be undone, by any of the actions above, indeed only more damage and upheaval. The consequence is stripping of titles, the punishment should be severe ……..if of course we can prove that RFC and tRFC are the same club…..who would testify to this effect?
Re the boardroom spat
I notice that everyone on the board gets a mention in the DR story apart from Financial Director Brian Stockbridge.
So we have the main protagonists Murray v Green while the three non-execs present were ‘shocked’ and Sir Cardigan (not present) is reported to ahve urged Green to reconsider.
What a tangled web they weave.
Auldheid for SFA Pres.
He just keeps making sense.
Why would Green put Murray in place initially?
———————————————————-
I think it is simply that Murray appears to have a first-rate reputation in The City and would have been intrumental in attracting Institutional investment. Although Green is known for his ability to raise cash on the market through flotations perhaps some might have thought that Murray would make an ideal counterbalance.
But perhaps Murray has outlived his usefulness as the IIs have parted with their cash and are locked-in for 6 months.
Murray was appointed a considerable time before Walter Smith so I doubt if there is any quid pro quo connection there. But Murray will be well aware of his legal obligations as a Plc NED and he does have a reputation to protect and I believe quite capable not only of asking difficult questions but demanding anwers and that these be minuted.
Ok, my final word on this.
So what your are saying is that the club that mucked up Scottish football for ten years, and thus prevented any other club from winning a title will give a jot if a score/mark is engraved on the League trophy.!!!
It’s not about a particular club being rewarded it’s about letting the club that cheated know that their infamous plan to hoodwink the rest of Scottish football has failed.
Re. the prize money – If you have not got first place,second etc. how can you distribute the prize money. You really would give the law classes at Uni a big boost with that vista – I’d nearly enrol myself, but the salary here on TSFM is too good for me to contemplate going back to college.
Regarding the titles going to any other club including Aberdeen I have absolutely no problem with this. My only gripe is that the cheaters do not gain any satisfaction or reward for almost single-handedly bringing down the game in Scotland.
Interesting chatter on twitter re relationships between HBOS and (S)DM?
FERGUS McCANN – TIG@tommyinglasgow
Any1 ever heard of a Mr Gavin Masterton,good banker friend of SDM,he also crashed his Stadia company 2 the tune of £25million after bank job
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 10:45
Dropping £315k for Premiership first is fair enough for what it first looks like.
But consider that Celtic (the likeliest winner for the upcoming seasons… ) have previously had a roughly 50/50 chance of winning, but finished second where they didn’t win – whereas they now have a ‘clear run’.
This means that first place might pay less, but Celtic have a better chance of achieving that more often.
Well negotiated, Mr Lawell.
Auldheid (@Auldheid) on Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 12:50
12 3 Rate This
easyJambo says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 11:42
If the top SPL club qualifies for the CL stages I suggest not paying out anything to them but put it in a solidarity fund to help distressed SPL clubs adjust their wage bills to sustainable levels using an agreed wage to normal turnover ratio..
………………………………………………………………..
Due to Celtics qualification to the group stages of the CL this season the SPL received a payment of 1.5 million from UEFA to be divided between its member clubs. If Celtic had failed to make the group stages the kitty would have been 400k.
I would hazard a guess that the whole of the SPL would like to keep the status quo on that one.
Consider also, the prize money for winning the SPL. This could make buying the player that helps you qualify for the CL group stages possible. Think of the fee Celtic paid for Fraser Forster and it is around the same as the money they would have been short of with your idea.
Another consideration is the timing between league success and CL qualification. Do you want to hold back a tournament winners pay cheque until you see how they fair in another tournament?
I’m sorry to disagree with you on this one but for me this is just a liberal step too far.
Keith Jackson – As our game slides down the pan isn’t it time for a new radical idea
In a bid to preserve what good bits are left of Scottish football, Sir Alex Ferguson’s knowledge and expertise could be the saviour of our national sport.
.
THERE’S still plenty to play for … right?
Two cup finals, 11 points separating 10 teams from second place in the SPL all the way down to 11th. European places to be won and lost. And a titanic two-way battle for the First Division title.
So how come it felt as if the season ended last Tuesday night when Efe Ambrose turned out against Juventus even though his head was somewhere in the clouds above the Indian Ocean?
Is it just me? Or is anyone else out there wondering if there’s any real point in carrying on?
It’s probably only a temporary state of mind but, even so, a sense of deep depression set in the moment it became clear there would be no way back for Scotland’s champions in Turin.
And it hasn’t lifted yet.
Without the Champions League to intoxicate our senses, the view from here until May is a bleak and desolate landscape. In fact, it’s quite sobering to ponder on the state of our game. And, worse still, where it goes from here.
What about next season, for example? What if Celtic can’t repeat their heroics in Europe?
What if there is no Champions League at all? What if this barren, futile domestic run-in is actually as good as it gets?
Neil Lennon nodded towards that very scenario the other day, when he confessed the pressure of playing Helsingborgs and HJK Helsinki in the qualifiers far outweighed the stress levels involved with taking on the champions of Italy in the last 16.
Lennon found the thought of crashing out of the competition at that stage utterly terrifying and we should all share his fear.
Because the painful truth is that without the excitement of watching one of our own mixing it in the big league Scottish football would just be one big, long headache.
And anyone who claims otherwise is missing the point. Probably quite deliberately.
For example, I heard a St Johnstone fan the other day desperately trying to talk up the SPL and getting all dewy eyed about watching his team being eliminated from Europe by a bunch of third-rate Turks.
With a bit of luck the Perth club can qualify for Europe again this season, as could a whole host of others whose mediocrity clogs up the vital organs of the SPL like a giant black-pudding supper.
Yes, they will go at each other like tramps eating chips from now until May in a bid to get over the line first so that they too can offer their fans the chance to travel to some far-flung outpost in July.
And so, for the time being, this will create a modicum of interest with two Europa League places still up for grabs in the league and another for whoever wins the Scottish Cup. Or loses it to Celtic.
But then, almost certainly, they’ll take it in turns to come back with their tails between their legs, eliminated from Europe before the rest of the continent has dragged itself off the beaches.
No, these annual one-stop tartan tours are nothing to go weak at the knees about. In fact, they are toe curling and causing further disrepair to the reputation of the Scottish game never mind its coefficient.
Our clubs, with the obvious exception of Celtic, have become continental cannon fodder. And you’re telling me this is something to celebrate or savour?
Well, leave me out. We are now the horse burgers of the European game.
Fast food without quality control which goes in one end and splatters out the other, leaving you without time to decide which of the two was marginally less pleasurable.
Our game is disappearing down the pan. The question is, what is to be done as things have got so bad that even the hoary old debate over comparing one man’s 12-12-18 to another’s 12-12-10-10 seems hardly worth the effort.
In other words, same s***, different toilet. Instead, what is required here if our game is to be spared from a slow, lingering death is something far more radical and fundamental.
We must do to Scottish football what Barry Hearn has done to darts and snooker.
We need to rip it up and start again if we are to preserve what good bits are left and build on them. The SFA, for example, are pressing ahead with fine work under the far-seeing eye of performance director Mark Wotte.
In time, the Dutchman’s plans may bear fruit and a better breed of Scottish footballer will emerge.
But what kind of landscape will be left for them to emerge into?
Because Scottish football is already a world strewn with winding up orders, empty seats, toxic debt and liquidation.
As a business, our game is already broken. Like our shipyards and our coalmines.
And yet the people in charge somehow fail to see it.
No, it’s not the SFA we need to lead us out of this crisis.
But here’s an idea. How about SAF? Or Sir Alex of Furious to the likes of you and I.
The great man may still be going strong at Man United but his managerial career must surely soon wind down and when it does we ought to beg him to ride to our rescue. I can think of no other whose clout and credibility comes remotely close to that of Ferguson.
I cannot think of a safer pair of hands nor a sharper footballing mind. His knowledge and expertise are unsurpassed.
We are fortunate his two great passions remain football and being Scottish. We must do all we can to exploit that by tempting him into a position at the top of our national sport. Well that’s what the Dutch would do, isn’t it?
He should be trusted implicitly and given carte blanche to impose whatever changes he sees fit. If Ferguson says jump then Stewart Regan, Neil Doncaster and the rest should only ask how high.
It would be up to them to administrate and facilitate. The visionary work could be left to someone who knows what this game is about and how best to change it.
It would be criminal for us not to tap into the mind of this living legend and if Ferguson can fix us then it will be his finest triumph and provide a lasting legacy befitting of the man.
If Ferguson can’t fix us then the chances are no one can.
And all we’ve got to look forward to is the continuation of a gradual decline which really ought to be breaking the hearts of all of us.
But hey, there’s still plenty to play for … right?
scapaflow14 says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 12:45
log on to the blog, and un check the Noify box below the contibute to discussion box
__________________________________________________
Cheers..tried this but still gettng the damn emails…..
goosygoosy says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:41
“This leak to the gutter press looks deliberate”
From JT upwards?
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:29
3 1 i
Rate This
smugas says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:19
0 0 Rate This
NTHM,
I don’t follow. Are you saying you would expect the winner of the 3rd div to join 2nd. 3rd and 4th of the 2nd div in a playoff? Why would 5-10th vote for that?
———————————–
that’s where this is heading……lets just wait and see what the MSM start to print with regards to this.
____________________
Absolutely, it’s as plain as the ever lengthening nose on CG’s face.
Who are 5-10th going to be? We don’t actually know at this stage and the prevailing SFL/SPL opinion is that a TRFC are needed for the well-being of the game, and of course there is all sorts of bribery and cajoling that can take place behind the scenes.
A report here on STV website about the possibility of 4 teams being promoted to the new Championship. One team feature very prominently in the associated graphic although they ostensibly aren’t actually relevant to the story. Just a coincidence though….nothing subliminal intended
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/airdrie-united/214594-four-teams-could-be-promoted-to-scotlands-second-tier-under-play-off-plans/
Regards the “Stripping of Titles” argument. I think this has been deliberately highlighted as the worse punishment in the media to distract from other possible penalties.
There are a wide range of penalties if a team is proven to play improperly registered players. The most oft used being a 3-0 score line recorded. This is the precedent for minor mishaps and/or oversight. The points would then be re-allocated and positions adjusted as required. This is actually the minimum that should be done if proven guilty.
Given that a guilty verdict would mean a catalogue of cheating and collusion all involved should expect sporting penalties up to and including lifetime bans from football.
Financial restitution may well be on the table if the infamous and secretive 5 way agreement does indeed include acceptance of penalty as a cost of allowing 2012 the licence of 1872 and entry to the league. This would probably result in the collapse of the new entity.
The Cups are more difficult given the knock on effect but IMO should be awarded to the runners up given that they defeated all honest competition the faced.
Finally the argument that not awarding the titles and cups would stand as reminder of the actions of the corrupt club for posterity. Poppycock! We know, they know and everyone else will know. The fact that one club cheats does not taint the competition it condemns the corrupt club. That is what allocating titles does.
Regarding Eco’s post earlier today, is there any real possibility the “spat” between Green and Murray is a charade?
In that one of them walks or gets sacked- and can then cash in on their shares, which have become unlocked?
fara1968 says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 14:34
Fair enough but the distribution of UEFA CL money has done as much to kill the competitiveness in our game and I think it is an issue that needs to be seriously looked at by UEFA.
Either rob the other clubs share (preferrably the EPL ones as I blame them for the greed is good culture that spoils the game and Adrian Durham irritates me no end) to compensate us or redistribute the Scottish share.
Lets assume Celtic on their current business model that sees them almost debt free with a load of valuable assets win the title and gain CL entry to latter stages for next three seasons bringing in £45 to £60m?
Are they going to miss the £7M used to shore up the very league who gives them access to that kind of reward? With that kind of reward we could afford FF type purchases anyway.
Keeping the SPL alive is very much in Celtic’s interests until UEFA accept that the rules on borders and how distribution follows them are killing smaller clubs.
As to payment I said put it in a solidarity fund not pay it out as prize money. Its extra so clubs will not be missing anything, but will know that some money is being squirreled away to help clubs trying to run sustainably to do so. It could for instance allow a club with a player on too high a wage to pay him off and cut costs thereafter.
We need to think differently, more broadly and less selfishly for as Rangers have shown, not doing that ruins the game for everybody not just themselves.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21502659
Should have posted this link
Senior says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 12:15
………………………………………………..
Whilst I understand the thrust of your point…there are elements within the game that go beyond a simple application of awarding a 3-0 defeat and 3 points or 2 points or no points to their opponents and then tally it up…
It does not account for players who may have been sent off therefore causing your club to be understrength in the next game….players who became injured…or games where the players in question didn’t play…all of which would have had a bearing on results in other games not involving the club that cheated…
I just would not be comfortable being handed a trophy that had been won by another club even though they have been found guilty of cheating.
It may seem like natural justice for every club that season in question to move up a place…I believe it is not that straight forward.
bartinmain says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 15:23
Regarding Eco’s post earlier today, is there any real possibility the “spat” between Green and Murray is a charade?
———————————————————————————————————-
Malcolm Murray only has approx 270,000 shares as opposed to Green’s 5+ million and I don’t really see someone as low-key as Murray getting involved voluntarily in a tabloid headline for a relatively small amount of dosh for him.
The possible damage to the company share price through this media exposure could be serious which makes me think that whatever is going on isn’t just a personal tiff but something fundamental.
Timing is interesting as well coinciding with the – I believe – first Board Meeting after flotation although the meeting with Cenkos could have been a couple of week earlier. Was there something on the agenda that created a problem? The papers for the meeting presumably would have been distributed before the meeting so was there something in them that caused a problem?
Auldheid: why not just take the money that accrues to the whole league, (excluding the particpant in the CL) and use that as a solidarity payment (isn’t that what it is actually called?). It would seem bizarre to punish the team winning the SPL for actually qualifying for the CL.
If Celtic needs to be handicapped financially because they are the strongest, why not just give a proportion of all Celtic season tickets and merchandise to a solidarity fund for the benefit of every team other than Celtic?
Idiot-proof disclaimer: that was a joke
Fact is, if titles were re-allocated it would be a re-writing of history too far. CFC (for the sake of argument 🙂 ) would be able to claim they were Champions or Scottish Cup winners in such and such a season, when they simply weren’t.
Better to have either the name “Rangers” deleted entirely from trophies, or to have it scored through. I prefer the score-through, as it gives a permanent reminder that the trophy was awarded to a Club/Company – then taken back for heinous swickery.
I just can’t see the trophies being taken in and re-inscribed with a different Club’s name. There would be social unrest.
Also the redistribution of titles – the money for all those league positions is gone. The SPL clubs would be just adding to the amount OldGers were liquidated by. It does no-one any good to try and manipulate the reality of what happpened.
One team scr3wed over up an entire country’s national sport for the best part of a decade. And even then didn’t sweep everything and eventually went bust in possibly the most spectacular self-immolation in world sports.
Titles should be taken away from those found to have systematically cheated the other league participants but no titles should be given retrospectively. IMO.
jockybhoy says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 16:06
Also the redistribution of titles – the money for all those league positions is gone. The SPL clubs would be just adding to the amount OldGers were liquidated by. It does no-one any good to try and manipulate the reality of what happpened.
==========================================================================
I’m not convinced the money has gone. The five way agreement may say that Newco Rangers will stand in the shoes of Oldco when it comes to financial penalties which makes sense since they are obviously the same club because they had the existing Oldco SFA licence transferred to them. That is certainly the reasoning of LNS.
jockybhoy says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 16:06
3 1 Rate This
Also the redistribution of titles – the money for all those league positions is gone. The SPL clubs would be just adding to the amount OldGers were liquidated by. It does no-one any good to try and manipulate the reality of what happpened.
===========================
Sevco have agreed to pick up any football debts and are subject to outcome of LNS inquiry…if they ARE the same club, they’ll be the ones paying back the prize money.
Also, would be good to put a figure on just how much their cheating cost other clubs
Agreed
An asterisk with Rangets scored through would do me
*title not awarded due to cheating
Auldheid (@Auldheid) on Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 15:32
4 0 Rate This
fara1968 says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 14:34
Fair enough but the distribution of UEFA CL money has done as much to kill the competitiveness in our game and I think it is an issue that needs to be seriously looked at by UEFA.
Either rob the other clubs share (preferrably the EPL ones as I blame …………
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
With regards to a fairer distribution of wealth I totally agree. For the current model of wealth distribution killing competitive football I also agree. However I believe that if Scotland took a unilateral decision and pioneered a move to change the way football wealth is shared it would have no impact on changing things in a European scale and I believe it would harm Scottish football in the long run. We are a small and poor nation in football terms.
It should be the richer leagues who are initiating these ideas not us and if they don’t pressure should be put on them to force change. You are amongst many forward thinking people in our little country. Better we used our energy to change things at the top and over time see it filter through to our little backwater. Only my humble opinion. 🙂
Long Time Lurker says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 14:30
———————————————————————————————————————–
That re-surfaced on KdS recently. A search of their archives pops up a few interesting details.
However most of that info is based on the work of Ian Fraser.
http://www.ianfraser.org/
Dominick Keane is worth a Google as well.
Assuming that Thornhill will again represent Rangers at the UTT (there’s only one boy that knows more about the implementation of theses schemes than him, and that’ the Pipe-smoking Porn King himself) what silk would Brenda be considering to proxy for her?
Interesting tweet from FF if true
Follow Follow @Follow_Follow_
Stephen Thompson resigns from SPL board citing “professional differences” DEC – reappointed FEB? http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/5986/splx.png …
It looks like TRFC could still be facing a winding-up order:
Andy @AndyD564
@Pmacgiollabhain Do you know if the WUO story fizzled out, or is it simply on hiatus? It was reported to head around about now was it not?
5 hrsPhil MacGiollaBhain@Pmacgiollabhain
@AndyD564 Patience
Cheers Ecobhoy, I agree, something has gone terribly wrong for Sevco. Perhaps Green will reveal all at the Louden Tavern this Friday and tell the bears the truth. Ahem.
goosygoosy says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:41
Rate This
Green and Murray fall out.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I understand what you are saying but why would Green put Murray in place initially?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Can only guess
Normally
Spivs only involve decent people in their scams when it is essential to do so
So the rationale for appointing a Gentleman is most likely to get businessmen to deal with them
Since all the investors are Spivs ( excluding the Gullible)
They may be trying to impress respectable Bears who may give TRFC money or credit terms
Alternatively
Murray was appointed as the price of the Cardigan signing up
If Murray is forced out the Cardigan may also walk away
We will soon find out
–
—————————————————————————————————————-
Goosy,
Chico did not appoint Murray. Murray was appointed by the nominated advisers of the PLC. Cenkos and to an extent Zeus will have made the decisions. Murray is a Rangers fan and is a pretty well respected and professional person by all accounts. He is also acutely aware of the role and responsibility of non executive directors. I will not bore you with the full Cadbury Report, suffice to say that Murray has a responsibility to act independently in the interests of the shareholders and ensure the company operates legally and within the rules of the stock exchange.
I think personally that Chico has been guilty of ramping his stock and promising all kinds of things to various fan groups and that Murray has attempted to put him in the “under control” box. Chico does not like this perfectly reasonable view and has reacted by leaking the story so that the fans……yet again…. get involved and pressurise Murray to go. Needless to say the institutional investors will not be happy and I am sure Murray has already spoken to them. If he has not he needs to now. These PLC issues are usually the domain of the institutional investors so Chico involving the fans is really unusual and extremely bad for the company. I would think most contributors to this blog might be surprised about the restraint shown by Murray in light of Chico’s behaviour. I posted last year that he might “go native” and it certainly appears to be the case. Forget corporate governance………Chico wants Louden governance…..till it suits him!
jockybhoy says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 15:55
I would not see it as a punishment but as a thank you award to the other clubs for providing the competition that enabled my club access to such riches. Without them where would we be?
As a matter of personal philosophy I find that when folk find themselves appreciated, life is so much more happy.
I’m a good tipper as well btw before you ask 🙂
ara1968 says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 16:50
Indeed but somebody somewhere has to take the Rosa Parks step ;).
I do not see it being a long term proposal necessarily, just one done for long enough to get our game out of the hole UEFA and the EPL have dug for us and we fell/jumped or were pushed into.
Poor old Chris Graham, I read his recent piece – funny how he ALWAYS uses the phrase ‘spew their bile’ – and wondered at the logic he’d used to simply dismiss the idea that Rangers are a new Club. Flawed doesn’t cover it, but it got me thinking.
Before 14 February 2012 there was only one Rangers, this covered; a) the Rangers brand, the badge, the shirt, Ibrox, the song book and so on, b) the Club that was a member of the SFA and SPL and c) the Company, a PLC, that has to exist in a corporate sense, for it to be a member of the the SFA etc, as well as the stock exchange, in which many folk (including Messrs Longmuir and Ogilvie) held shares.
Since administration, and as we know, the failed CVA and impending liquidation, ‘certain’ assets of the PLC were sold to Mr Green (who interestingly now says he was involved since Feb’ 12…, but that’s another point altogether). The Company that operated the Club went bust, this meant the Club could no longer continue to be a member of the SFA, as the Club and the Company were one in the same, along with the Brand, of course.
Thereafter a method was found to allow the new Company, Sevco, to operate a Club (eventually) in the SFL.This involved ‘transfering a membership’,a hitherto unknown practice, but which was in essence a technique that allowed the “brand” to be transfered, or transplanted, into a new corporate and legal entity, an entity that is required for SFA membership purposes.
This Company was not Rangers and this Club was not Rangers FC either. It couldn’t be, that Club had ended when its owner ended and its assets sold. But this this new Club, the one that became an ‘associate member’ simply assumed all the branding of the Rangers Football Club, which was previously part of the one entity, prior to administration. Not only did assume all of its branding but we are led to believe that it also assumed, all of its predecessors history too.
Now from an emotional perspective I completely understand that Rangers fans will see their Club continuing, as they support the Brand, the team, at Ibrox, in that shirt. I get that completely. They don’t support a PLC, or a body that is a member of an association. They support a football team, players on the park. I get that completely. In this sense a team will always live on as long as people want it to.
But to my mind here’s the important point – this was and is not the same Club that finished the 2011/12 season in 2nd place. If it were it would still be there. If it were the FIFA website would not have frozen at the St Johnstone result. No, a Club, is essentially the member of an association, and in Rangers FC’s case that membership of that association ended.
A new Club was formed by a new company, it assumed the old brand, and it was allowed to take on a membership that had ended. Third Lanark, Airdrie and Gretna suffered the same fate, they went bust, their membership ended,but, in the case of Rangers, “transfer of membership” was invented, to create the facade of continuity, despite two parts of the original triology having become defunct.
League reconstruction proposals.
Complex, detailed and open to several interpretations. In order to fully understand and respond to them there will have to be many exhaustive and expert analyses.
Except there shouldn’t be a gasp of breath or a single keystroke wasted on them. The issue is not reconstructioin but whether a single existing Scottish football body or their senior post holders is remotely fit for purpose.
Let’s have the proper debate first, how dare they entertain the possibility of being fit to run our game let alone reconstruct it.
thespecialswon says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 17:28
“but, in the case of Rangers, “transfer of membership” was invented, to create the facade of continuity”
=====
Sorry, but that is incorrect. Transfer of membership was provided for in the SFA rules well before RFC became insolvent. The same provision was used by Airdrie to acquire Clydebank’s SFA membership by transfer in 2002.
I have always been of the mind that ragers fc was dead in the water many moonbeams ago as the Knight had been trying to find a mug punter for at least 5yrs but to no avail .
I often wondered what those negotiations would be like and here is my thoughts on it
seller …..I am looking to sell ragers and move on ,are you interested .
potential buyer ….. of course but what about hector
seller …..don’t worry our advice is all is above board .
pot/buyer …..no thanks ……..repeat as many times as needed ….
Then IMO someone realised that something had to change to get the deal done .
In summary IMO there were peepil interested in buying ragers but only if certain things were sorted out .
I have always said that when the peepil who were originally aproached have taken their seat at the table then we will have completed the circle .IMO CG is not one of them .
Only my thoughts though but time will tell ……..IMO of course
That reminds me Iv’e a washing to do ……laters peeps
the transfer of SFA membership is irrelevant. It was transfered from one club to another. The club RFC in division 3 is a different club to the club RFC that played in the SPL last season.
The club and company cannot be separated.
neepheid says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 17:40
5 0 Rate This
thespecialswon says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 17:28
“but, in the case of Rangers, “transfer of membership” was invented, to create the facade of continuity”
=====
Sorry, but that is incorrect. Transfer of membership was provided for in the SFA rules well before RFC became insolvent. The same provision was used by Airdrie to acquire Clydebank’s SFA membership by transfer in 2002.
==========
So why did Airdie have to transfer another club membership – why not just transfer their own to themselves as rangers appear to have done?
smugas says: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:09
Can I ask though, am I right in thinking the first 900k goes to the bottom 8 of the SPL 1/2. The next 200k goes to the bottom 18, next 900k goes to the top 8 of the SPL1/2 with the following monies being distributed ‘down the line’. What’s the thinking behind missing out the middle 8?
——————————–
easyJambo says: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 13:16
That’s not my understanding. The first £900K goes to the 12 Championship sides i.e. the 2nd league of 12.
The proposed distribution seems to be based on a straight 12:12:18 and appears to ignore the 8:8:8:18 final league positions.
===========================
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/celtic/214554-financial-distribution-model-for-scottish-league-reconstruction-revealed/
It seems that the STV story has been updated since originally published. It now appears that that the team that finishes top of the middle 8 will get the ninth place money. That leaves it open for a team that was 4th in the 2nd tier, at the split, to take 9th prize money (£988,000). Similarly 9th in the top tier at the split may only receive £258,000 if they finished bottom of the middle 8.
Teams at risk of being in the bottom 4 of the top tier at the split will need to careful with their budget planning with that level of risk (£730,000 difference). Currently there is only a difference of £240,000 for SPL teams in finishing ninth or twelfth.
Easyjambo @ 18:22
Re. Cash distribution
You highlight a possible area of economic concern for some of the teams presently in the SPL.
Given that 11 yes votes are needed, I´d think that it may yet struggle to pass muster.
bill1903 says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 16:37
18 1 Rate This
Agreed
An asterisk with Rangets scored through would do me
*title not awarded due to cheating
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In neon!
Mea culpa…. so ‘transfer of membership’ was allowed…
Lets look at what happened then; a Club, owned and operated by a Company that went bust, saw its membership of the SFA terminated, as a result.
Certain assets of the defunct company were bought by a new company. It applied for membership of the SFA. It was given the defunct membership.
You can’t have a Club without a Company to register the membership. End of story.
As for the Brand and the history, that’s the emotional side. And I get that. But and Speirs is right, ‘technically’ they’re a new Club… Transfering membership proves that… IMO
I note a recurring theme in the argument against awarding stripped titles to the runner-up is fear of the consequences.
It was fear of the consequences of standing up to wrongdoing that got Scottish football into this almighty mess in the first place.
There is no question in my mind that if Rangers are found to have been fielding ineligible players, the results of their matches should be corrected to read as 0-3 defeats, in accordance with the rules. Consequently the final league standings in each of the seasons to which this applies should also be corrected to reveal who the true champions were, according to the rules.
This could scarcely be simpler.
Once the appropriate corrections have been made, the separate matter of what punishment should be meted out to the offending parties can be addressed.
I argue that nothing short of expulsion is appropriate. We are dealing with unprecedented levels of rule-breaking, probably in collusion with administrators at Hampden Park, incalculable damage to the reputation and development of Scottish football and, even now, chaos and turmoil which is destabilising the entire structure of the game.
But fear of the consequences appears to have induced a paralysis which is preventing the correct response from even being recognised, never mind being enacted.
A club which has been found guilty of consistently fielding ineligible players on a massive scale and, furthermore, actively concealed the paperwork which would have exposed the ineligibility is simply not fit to be a member of any organised league. Not is it fit to have SFA membership. Thus the record should clearly show that its punishment is either complete expulsion or a sine die suspension which will not be lifted until satisfactory restitution has been made for the damage suffered by other footballing parties.
If a future club wishes to trade as Rangers FC and portray itself as the continuation of the expelled Rangers FC, it must fulfil certain conditions.
Firstly, it must unequivocally recognise and accept that it is inheriting the culpability of the original Rangers FC for breaking football rules over many successive years.
Secondly, it will never make any claim to titles which have been stripped from it in accordance with the game’s rules nor will it ever dispute or question the justice of awarding those titles to any other club which did compete within the rules.
Thirdly, in recognition of the financial damage which original Rangers caused to its peers in the Scottish game, the new club which elects to trade as Rangers FC will forfeit a percentage of its future earnings and prize money for a period of time and at a level which is acceptable to all the clubs which it is found to have disadvantaged. If they can’t compete at the top level with what’s left in the coffers, too bad. Those are the consequences of cheating your way to glory.
Finally, if – and only if – these conditions are satisfied, then everyone else in Scottish football can agree to recognise the new club as a continuation of the old Rangers, albeit with a break in its history from the time that the suspension is backdated to up until it resumes trading as a suitably penitent and chastised member club. It could then legitimately include its forty-odd titles in its honours roll while acknowledging a period of misconduct which is a stain on its history but which it also condemns, apologises for and undertakes never to repeat.
The consequences for Scottish football in this scenario would be that a line could finally be drawn under the entire episode Honour would be restored all around and a fresh start would finally be possible.
I’m not holding my breath.
On the transfer of titles… Sorry but it’s a nonsense.
You can’t prove a historical negative, so you can’t just assume Celtic would have won a League IF Rangers hadn’t signed this, that or the other player, because even if they hadn’t, they’d have had to sign another player, and it’s completely impossible to determine what might have happend if players A,B and C, were replaced by players X,Y and Z.
Furthermore, you need to apply this logic to ALL the games RFC1872 played. If you go for a nil-3 score then Rangers would have been relegated, potentially, and it becomes even more impossible to determine the impact that would have on the wee diddy teams that aren’t Celtc.
Let the record reflect they were removed and lie empty as a permanent reminder of what happened.
Henry Clarson,
In the hypothetical situation you put forwaard Rangers would have been relegated in the first season, the season that would follow would lack a (promoted) team in the place of Rangers.
A team that may or may not have won the SPL (unlikely, but lets go by the book as you seem to want). So in that case you have a flawed League Championship and to award the League to another team would not be right.
Perhaps Mr Green and Mr Murray have discussed how much money Rangers FC Ltd need to keep trading and they can’t see eye to eye on how much Rangers International PLC will charge them to lend that amount of money. Rangers FC Ltd would be kind of over a barrell if that was their only line of credit available.
Or perhaps Mr Murray, the professional has told Mr Green that acting like some sort of PT Barnum is not proper for a PLC CEO, and asked him to stop playing to the masses and making extravagant promises he can’t keep.
Or perhaps Mr Murray is realising that the way things are working out is not what he was promised for the club he has supported all his life. It is difficult to think that he doesn’t know where this is likely to be heading.
Or perhaps Mr Green is contriving an exit strategy, irreconcilable differences with the Chairman and the board, got to leave, much as I hate to now that I love The Rangers and The Bears who support it.
It could of course be smoke and mirrors to distract, from who knows what.
Whatever, it doesn’t look good, and I have as yet to see some sort of denial from Rangers or either of the high profile individuals involved in the story. Maybe I missed it on the way home.
Henry Clarson says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 19:12
If a future club wishes to trade as Rangers FC and portray itself as the continuation of the expelled Rangers FC, it must fulfil certain conditions.
==================
The 5 way agreement for the transfer of the existing RFC membership to Sevco presented the SFA with the opportunity to impose exactly the sort of conditions which you set out. As I understand it, when Green played hardball, and refused to agree to accept any punishments or even consequences which might flow from the LNS verdict, the SFA simply backed off, on the basis that it was unthinkable that they should refuse Sevco the membership.
If the authorities backed off then, when they were holding all the aces, then the chances of them imposing any conditions, consequences, or, heaven forbid, punishments, in future, are close to zero. The personnel who “negotiated” the 5 way agreement are all still in place. They are fatally compromised in any dealings involving TRFC. Close to zero. That is my level of trust in the Scottish football authorities.
In other considerations.
Who appeared in “The Rising” Mr Green, Mr Murray, both or neither.
It would surely be telling if one appeared and the other didn’t.
greenockjack,
We have a flawed league championship whichever way we look at it and the flaws are only made worse by the fear of the consequences of coming to terms with that.
You are correct in stating that Rangers should have been relegated after the first season. The consequence of them staying in the SPL is that even more damage to the game.
In the same way, a pickpocket should be arrested, charged, convicted and sentenced. The fact that he evades justice at the point of his first offence enables him to carry on picking pockets. Should his fifth or eleventh or twenty-fourth victim have his or her stolen money returned if the culprit still has it in his possession when he is finally apprehended? Or should everyone except the first victim be told that they have no claim because the pickpocket should not have been free to rob them after committing the first offence?
I say the former.
neepheid http://scottishfootballmonitor.wordpress.com/2013/02/10/everything-has-changed/comment-page-21/#comment-36176
Agreed. That’s why I’m not holding my breath.
The opportunities for reforming Scottish football continue to be derailed by fear of the consequences.
Henry Clarson says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 19:12
The number of thumbs up that your posts deserves would require scientific notation to prevent us having to scroll across the page.
There’s no way on Charlie’s green earth that our world class footie administrators have the cojones to apply the appropriate punishment to the establishment’s tribute act club. Twas ever thus in the best little country in the world.
Henry
I said “would” not “should” and there is a flaw in your first post, that a verdict hasn´t hasn´t been delivered.
Obviously your mind is made up along with the majority on this board.
The issues that have been considered on here haven´t really included much of what might be regarded the case for the defence.
The shady deals that were offered by governing bodies.
The timing of the issue coming to the fore (Rangers in administration) & the circumstances (via media) that led to this.
The relevant details in accounts not being questioned in earlier years by the governing bodies.
etc.
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 20:05
Your list reads more like mitigation after a guilty plea/verdict. That and the the classic big boy did it and ran away defence.
Take a bow Henry Clarson, excellent post..
Fear and intimidation are the elephants in the room. Until this is faced down I see no hope of our beloved game moving forward. First of all we must get rid of the weaklings who are forensically destroying this great game.
“. First of all we must get rid of the weaklings who are forensically destroying this great game.” Que? Is that not the sort statement folk right condemn ra peepil for making?
Greenockjack.
There is enough evidence already to convict them of cheating – and it came from their own players and officials mouths!
Henry – I think you missed the bit about sackcloth and ashes.
As greenockjack says, a verdict hasn’t been delivered yet. It has been shown in the past that, however certain an outcome may seem, it might not go the way you’d like it to.
Hypothetical situations given a guilty verdict are fine if phrased as such. I don’t see many people discussing what the future holds if Rangers are exonerated. Will TSFM posters accept a not guilty verdict in the same spirit they would accept a guilty one?
I would hope so.
Which makes me think … can LNS return a verdict of “Not Proven”?
Senior – what’s all this “getting rid of weaklings” business? I feel a Godwin’s Law moment coming on …
🙂
It’s been a while….
Anyway, headline in today’s Daily Phone-hacker read – “Celtic cop’s pest control taunts”. My initial reaction to this was to assume the cop in question was in some way connected to the club or, indeed a supporter. As it happens, he is the subject of a complaint, by the club, for comments he has allegedly made online with respect to members of the Green Brigade he had been assigned to ‘observe’ during the games. Call me paranoid, but this is just another example of the propagandaesque journalism we continually refer to on the site…
Wee tax case and btc result have already confirmed players or taxes were paid and not all details were lodged with SFA – case closed, guilty. Go directly to jail, do not collect £200
in both cases the club/company/ethereal entity that is “ra peepil” put their red hands up and siad it’s a fair cop gov.
So, stop blaming other people for your predicament, you cheated, were caught…do the time
Regarding the re-allocation of titles debate, it seems to me that the argument is being reduced to simply a matter of whether CFC should be awarded what some Celtic fans perceive as rightfully theirs. The truth is the matter is a whole lot more complex as several posters have pointed out. I would urge all fans to accept that, in the event of a guilty verdict being returned by LNS to what amounts to a charge of systematic cheating, it was not just Celtic and a few other runner-up clubs that were cheated by the systematic fielding of intelligible players but every club in the SPL and SFL – regardless of whether they played against and were defeated by the fraudulent team.
If the debate were simply about the outcome of honours for a current season, then I guess reallocation would be a reasonable and practical outcome. But how can anyone believe that justice can be served by simply carrying out a fag packet calculation based on fraudulent results over a ten year period? Surely it is obvious that there are so many variables as to make a valid case for reallocation impossible without the risk of even more injustice being done to other clubs.
Face it, every club was cheated, the game was the loser. Don’t compound the injustice by diving in to plunder the pirate’s booty. Let the records show that a crime was committed against every other club and the titles were withdrawn from the named club for cheating. It will leave a scar in the records of Scottish football that should never be disguised by plastic surgery.
prohibby says:
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 at 20:34
Correct – its not just about who was 2nd. Without EBTs would RFC-1872 have been able to plunder players from other clubs and stuff them into the reserves – Hibs, Hearts, Dundee, Motherwell, Falkirik all had players taken from them and never made the light of day at Ibrokes – Paul Ritchie, Alan Gow, Adamczuk, Miller (first time) Ian Murray – all come to mind of RFC-1872 flexing their muscle due to the unfair advantage and taking good players and putting them in their reserves – thus weakening teams and having a good squad themselves.