Everything Has Changed

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.

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.
Tom Byrne

About Trisidium

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.

4,442 thoughts on “Everything Has Changed


  1. shield2012 says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:42
    0 0 Rate This
    Lord Wobbly says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:21
    shield2012 says:
    Yes, they paid players through an EBT to save money and buy
    players. Firstly, you don’t know they would have went elsewhere
    and you don’t know if RFC could have otherwise afforded the
    players. Therefore, if you mean they were seeking an advantage
    by spending more money to attract players then isn’t that what
    football transfers is all about?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    You’re really not helping yourself. If Rangers hadn’t offered what
    they did, of course players would have gone elsewhere. They
    couldn’t afford to by recognised means. Rangers could only offer
    what they did by deception. They sought to gain an advantage. If
    you genuinely believe otherwise (and not for a moment do I
    believe that you do) then you’re an imbecile. And if you’re a
    regular reader over the last couple of years, you will know that I
    don’t throw insults about lightly.
    ——————–
    OK so lets say, for argument sake, they would have gone
    elsewhere. You still don’t know if RFC could have otherwise
    afforded to pay them. Not sure exactly what ‘recognised means’
    are in football. You can’t possibly consider, in the current climate,
    getting into debt as unrecognisable means of buying players.
    Therefore, how did they gain an advantage that any other club
    couldn’t?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Oh please…

    You are deliberately being obtuse.


  2. I’m pleased with the CFC statement issued today regarding the LNS decision, as well as Neil Lennon’s disciplined handling of it when harangued by the media.

    Because Celtic’s credibility throughout the football world is so much greater that TRFC, I think the responses brilliantly and implicitly explains the whole saga to a hitherto confused wider footballing fraternity, who may just have thought that RFC were innocent.

    In addition to the UTT appeal by HMRC, I think this issue has a ways to run yet, and that Celtic will have much more to say in due course.


  3. shield2012 says:

    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:42

    Shield mate, we do value your contribution to these pages, but I think you need to give up on this as you’re beginning to make a fool of yourself. The reason we know RFC couldn’t afford to pay for them is self evident – even despite the EBT’s, Rangers still went under. Imagine how much worse it would have been if they had to pay the full whack….


  4. Imagine how much worse it would have been if they had to pay the full whack….

    Imagine how much worse it would have been if (SDM had to take more from the bank that we, the taxpayers, all subsequently had to bail out ) to pay the full whack….

    wait a minute, he did us a favour !! he only stiffed us for 50M.


  5. Murray told the FTTT that the EBT scheme allowed Rangers to sign players they otherwise couldn’t have afforded, I think that kills the “how do we know they wouldn’t have signed anyway” argument

    Meanwhile, very good statement by Celtic today.


  6. shield2012 says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:52
    0 1 Rate This
    Lord Wobbly says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:29
    10 0 Rate This
    shield2012 says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:19
    0 0 Rate This
    Lord Wobbly says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 19:58
    I appreciate that many on TSFM are not Celtic supporters but,
    having just watched Neil Lennon on Sky Sports News, I am hugely impressed by his dignified stance. Many others, most particularly those at Rangers both old and new, could learn much.
    —————-
    Now we’ve to take dignity lessons from Lennon? things really
    have gone pear-shaped!
    ~~~~~~~~~~~
    And that attitude is one of the reasons that your club was
    liquidated. The saddest aspect of this sorry saga is that you, and many like you, have learned nothing.
    ———
    A minor attempt at humour but admittedly my timing probably wasn’t good. A tedious attempt at linking it to liquidation mind
    you LW.
    ~~~~~~~~~~
    Extremely minor. Your probably correct about the link between blinkered Rangers fans and their club’s liquidation * being tedious. Alas it’s all too accurate *.

    * Yup! I did it again. 😀


  7. areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:54
    0 0 Rate This
    shield2012 says:

    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:42

    Shield mate, we do value your contribution to these pages, but I think you need to give up on this as you’re beginning to make a fool of yourself. The reason we know RFC couldn’t afford to pay for them is self evident – even despite the EBT’s, Rangers still went under. Imagine how much worse it would have been if they had to pay the full whack….
    ————-
    I completely agree. I’m just trying to show that it is difficult to prove conclusively that RFC couldn’t have otherwise afforded it and therefore it makes it difficult to prove beyond doubt that they gained an advantage.

    I’m splitting hairs here I know. I’ll leave it.


  8. Horse wins race but fails dope test. Jockey club decides horse would have won the race without the help of drugs.

    AYE RIGHT.


  9. joeraith says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:39

    Raith Rovers sign Messi,Ronaldo and Van Persie on £500 per week,but they give them EBT’s for an undisclosed sum. Raith go on to win the league by 40 points

    Hey steady on there – no need for that kind of horror story. 🙂


  10. shield2012 says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 21:03
    0 1 Rate This
    areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:54
    0 0 Rate This
    shield2012 says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:42
    Shield mate, we do value your contribution to these pages, but I think you need to give up on this as you’re beginning to make a fool of yourself. The reason we know RFC couldn’t afford to pay for them is self evident – even despite the EBT’s, Rangers still went under. Imagine how much worse it would have been if they had to pay the full whack….
    ————-
    I completely agree. I’m just trying to show that it is difficult to
    prove conclusively that RFC couldn’t have otherwise afforded it
    and therefore it makes it difficult to prove beyond doubt that they gained an advantage.
    I’m splitting hairs here I know. I’ll leave it.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    It really isn’t that difficult. The very fact that they embarked on that strategy is highly instructive.

    But I think we’ve established why Rangers did what they did. I too will leave it there.


  11. I think I must be drunk or something, because I’ve just read a paragraph by Charles Green that I agree with:

    “This issue could have and should have been dealt with by the board of the SPL rather than embarking on an unnecessarily grand and expensive process. At the end of the day I am left with the impression that this has been much ado about very little and a great waste of energy, time and money. ”

    He’s completely right – if the SPL board had dealt with Rangers (as they were meant to, instead of ignoring the directives and passing it onto the clubs), and implemented the rules as written, then this investigation into wrongly registered players would have been a footnote in the obituary of Rangers.


  12. Another potentially gamechanging point doing the rounds of various fans’ sites:

    Didn’t LNS emphasise repeatedly that his commission’s role was not to punish RFC but simply to offer ‘recommendations’?

    So isn’t the key now for sites like this and SPL Fans United etc to put pressure on the SPL board to ignore these recommendations when it meets to ‘consider’ them, as they’ve promised to?

    ‘Thanks for your time and for your recommendations, your Lordship. As virtually every official and fan of SPL clubs regards them as cuckoo at best and utterly corrupt at worst, however, there isn’t a hope in hell of us acting upon them. Nice try, though. Cheerio.’


  13. Tonight I showed my boys highlights of the game they were unable to attend last week.

    At the end, my 4 year old said, “Daddy, why do Partick Thistle win every week?”.

    Oh, how times have changed.


  14. As Big Pink said today, I said yesterday and many others have said before (and was the main thrust of auldhied’s post) The Clubs are the SFA/SPL/SFL – ultimately our clubs have the power to do anything with respect to these organisations. I think Auldhied’s initiative fell flat maybe because it was too lofty, maybe we should start small – let’s pressure our club reps to do one simple thing : propose and support a vote of no-confidence in the executive teams of governing bodies (SFA, SPL, SFL respectively.)


  15. bayviewgold says:

    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 21:34

    I would say a more pressing matter would be no propose a vote to basically ignore the LNS ‘recommendations’.

    I’m still undecided whether to go back to Broadwood next season on the back of, I’m still thinking ‘What’s the point?’ when there’s such an obvious stitch up in favour of one team, but I suspect that as soon as I’m back at for my next game, and I’ve got the cosy familiarity of the crowd screaming abuse at Jim Duffy, then I’ll probably sign up.

    I suppose I’m lucky enough to have that option, because Clyde aren’t an SPL team, and in reality it’s now only SPL teams that can actually bring the correct conclusion to this utter farce.


  16. ‘no propose’?!? ‘TO propose’ – Christ, the typos are flying about tonight!


  17. pau1mart1n says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 20:36

    are we just forgetting the losses year on year with the scam in place??
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    and how those losses (increased by EBT deductions) were used to cover MIHL group profits in those years. The taxpayer got ripped twice. And lets not forget bank debt financed it all and there was even tax relief on the interest payable on it. FFS!


  18. In addition to the UTT appeal by HMRC, I think this issue has a ways to run yet, and that Celtic will have much more to say in due course.
    ______________________________

    Celtic better have much more to say on this matter. They are wakening up to the fact that this shambles has the potential to destroy football, Celtic included. Celtic and other SPL teams reluctance to step up to the plate and speak out clearly on this scandal was interpreted as weakness by the football administration and it appears they were correct in this interpretation. My sense is that many many fans are about to walk away. The football clubs of Scotland better get a move on and show a bit of backbone before the drift becomes a deluge. I personally feel it is too late now to make a stand. The football administrators read the tea-leaves well and have won the argument hands down and with not a little ease.

    Will the bloggers (a dozen or more) who are responding to shield cop themselves on. He is a troll, albeit a exceptionally good one. He is absorbing a lot of energy from some of our best bloggers.

    One last thing, I find it hard to credit that LNS et, al. would allow their names to be be appended to this report. It is one of the poorest interpretations of a rule-book I have ever witnessed.
    Their reputations are surely besmirched by this incredible report. They knew when they signed off on this report that they had been party a cover up – what price reputation?


  19. I said I would’nt be back on here, I have chilled a wee bit, I also said CFC needed our backing more than ever, words repeated by the club today. The saddest thing to come from this, is the feeling that genuine fans of the game feel the need to punish their club in response to RFC being let off for cheating, as if it is their fault.

    I also feel the need to display some sort of objection.

    Lets be different from them, no bhoycotts. Instead why don’t we take a different approach.

    Pick a team, RRFC say, TH should have got a medal, lets give him a full house, maybe even a full town. Just turn up in numbers with or without colours, apologise for any congestion if need be and behave oursleves. It might even make the telly, then we can get to hear the big chap give his verdict on recent goings on.

    Or you can sit on here being all diplomatic to trolls, and preaching to the converted about how this is all wrong.


  20. Senior says:

    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 22:01

    I think you’re being a little unfair to shield. I’ll continue to engage with him. I respect that he’s defending his team as best he can, and sometimes he gets carried away and tries to defend the indefensible, but that’s the nature of being fan. GreenockJack, on the other hand…..


  21. Galling fiver says:

    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 22:03

    But IT IS THEIR FAULT! The SPL is a body made up of member clubs – they have the power to influence whether this comes to pass or not. So I would suggest that instead of giving Raith Rovers a nice pay day (much as they deserve it for employing someone as upstanding as TH), you lobby your club to do the right thing.


  22. areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 22:10
    ==================================================================

    Correct.

    This point cannot be made often enough. As fan groups and individual fans we need to be telling our chosen teams this corruption of our game is not acceptable and cannot go on or we walk. Where will there much loved money god be then?


  23. There is no point in studying LNS verdict to attempt to see reason in it .
    The whole process was a farce from start to finish ,there is no rational explanation to it all except it involved a certain club ,as soon as you put a certain club into the mix it all makes perfect sense .
    The game here IMO is now well beyond saving even though the peepil involved may have believed rules had to be ignored to keep scottish football on the map .
    IMO our game was already judged as second rate for the quality of fare on offer ,now that the peepil in charge have shown it to be a complete joke ,who knows where it will end up .
    The SPL/SFA have more or less announced that every Scottish football fan outwith ragers 1872 is a mug punter only there to provide sevco 2012 with some opposition .
    THE CHOICE IS NOW OURS are we going to say ,OK that ‘s no problem ,I will hand over my hard earned cash for football’s equivalent of WWF .
    As for my own clubs statement about this affair ,I know they could only say so much but IMO it was crap .
    We see the verdict as strange but we are in a good place ,give me a break .
    Try ,we accept the decision but we now feel we need to actively pursue ways of finding a way of moving on from Scottish football .
    I hope they are being diplomatic in there response but if they are just going to accept what has went on this week and past then I would have to assume they also see me as a mug punter as the SFA do


  24. Sorry, see my comment about preaching to the converted. You are anonymous, yet you urge others to act on your behalf.


  25. As for sevco fans out demanding apologies .
    They should just sit back and light up their cigars and keep quiet .
    Accept what they got and be thankful that they really are THE PEEPIL .


  26. bayviewgold says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 21:34
    5 0 Rate This

    … let’s pressure our club reps to do one simple thing : propose and support a vote of no-confidence in the executive teams of governing bodies (SFA, SPL, SFL respectively.)

    ————————————————————————————————–

    After the SFL clubs vetoed the governing body’s proposal to parachute Newco into SFL1, on July 13 last year, there were many people calling for a vote of no confidence on RTC.

    After the demise of RTC shortly after (perfect timing, by the way), TSFM rose from the ashes.

    And here we are, 7 months and 34,000 comments later, proposing the same action. What has TSFM achieved?, and where is it going?

    Many months ago I was sure that the people ‘running’ the game in Scotland and the (so called) journalists from the MSM were keeping a nervous eye on TSFM. Now, I am fairly certain that they, long ago, let out a relieved sigh. I am convinced that they now feel that they can dismiss TSFM as an anti-Rangers site.

    The ‘keyboard warriors’ of last summer are fighting with plastic swords.


  27. areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 22:06
    1 0 Rate This
    Senior says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 22:01
    I think you’re being a little unfair to shield. I’ll continue to engage with him. I respect that he’s defending his team as best he can, and sometimes he gets carried away and tries to defend the indefensible, but that’s the nature of being fan. GreenockJack, on the other hand…..
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Whilst Shield and Greenockjack are both trying to deflect and defend the indefensible, they do at least do it in a reasonable manner. I have absolutely no problem conversing with either of them. I only wish they would be honest about their motives. I really would respect them more if they simply thumbed their noses because their club got away with it.


  28. I fully admit it. If I urge my team to approach the SPL, the SPL will turn around and say a) Sorry, who are you? Clyde? Didn’t you used to be famous, like about 60 years ago or something? b) You’re not in the SPL, so what’s it got to do with you?

    If I write as an individual to the SPL, it’s not going to make any difference. What can I say? Do as I ask or I’ll continue not to put my money in your coffers?

    The only interest that Clyde realistically have in all this is that we got two fairly lucrative visits from the 17th century this season – I’ve said this all along that it makes me slightly hypocritical. The reason it affects me is the same reason that it should affect all of Scotland’s teams, and that is that it’s now evident that Scottish football is run for the beneft of one team and one team only, and that makes me question why I turn up at all.

    Having justified myself (sort of!), I’m merely pointing out that being a fan who puts money into the coffers on an SPL club, you have influence, and yet you will seemingly choose not to use it.


  29. The focus should now switch to pressurising SPL clubs to reject the findings of LNS.

    Fan action ended the gerrymandering of T’Gers into SPL.

    Its time for the same fans to force the SPL board to do the right thing.

    Again.


  30. For the sake of forming a balanced opinion i’ve been trying to see this decision from the perspective that it’s all above board and totally honest – that no sporting advantage was seeked or gained therefore no sporting penalty should be imposed. Not being even a novice legal mind i don’t know how legit the decision is, but for the life of me I can’t think how it CAN’T be viewed as a sporting advantage as it relates to payments to PLAYERS! Maybe one day someone will explain that to me in a way a dimwit can understand.

    The other thing that’s been bothering me all day in work is this Campbell Ogilvie business. Is there any precedent where someone as conflicted as him remains in post during an investigation anywhere or at any time in this country? And for the conflicted individual and a colleague to actually have the balls to come out with statements like ‘he told us he had nothing to do with it so we all must believe him’ and ‘I take nothing to do with this investigation (even though my office is next door)’?

    Again for the life of me I just don’t get how these things can just happen right in front of everyone and yet nothing is/can be done about it! Why is this not on every news channel in the developed world?

    And you know what, my paranoia/imagination i’ll admit has went into overdrive tonight. My wee brain has been churning out images of the SPL being created FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of protecting RFC from the EBT scheme maybe one day backfiring. So that if one day someone looks into the whole thing and sees tax evasion and registration rules being broken it can only be traced back to when the SPL was formed and any wrongdoing BEFORE the SPL was formed will be left out of focus. And even then the rules are written to protect this club from being punished in any meaningful way.

    Yeah, that’s where i’m at. Football really is not worth the states I get myself into sometimes. There are more important things my energy should be getting used for so as much as i’ll always love my club I can no longer spend my time trying to get to the bottom of this. It really is not worth the heartache.


  31. gallingfiver
    And in there lies the problem ,the tribute act that was set up to fill the void when 1872 had ditched all their debts are in div 3 struggling along and this decision has more chance of boosting their gates when it will probably result in a reduction across the board of a lot of other clubs .
    Every time the powers that be kick new club /old club when their down everyone esle in the game feels the pain except them .
    Sums it all up really


  32. Martin Hutchison (@Squire_67) says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 22:54
    0 0 Rate This
    For the sake of forming a balanced opinion i’ve been trying to see this decision from the perspective that it’s all above board and totally honest – that no sporting advantage was seeked or gained therefore no sporting penalty should be imposed. Not being even a novice legal mind i don’t know how legit the decision is, but for the life of me I can’t think how it CAN’T be viewed as a sporting advantage as it relates to payments to PLAYERS! Maybe one day someone will explain that to me in a way a dimwit can understand.

    The other thing that’s been bothering me all day in work is this Campbell Ogilvie business. Is there any precedent where someone as conflicted as him remains in post during an investigation anywhere or at any time in this country? And for the conflicted individual and a colleague to actually have the balls to come out with statements like ‘he told us he had nothing to do with it so we all must believe him’ and ‘I take nothing to do with this investigation (even though my office is next door)’?

    ————————————————————————

    Well put, Martin. It is an astonishing outcome.


  33. Galling fiver says:

    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 22:52

    Tell me, was TV and sponsorship about 100 years ago? If, and I give this purely as an example and not as a recommendation, Celtic were to suddenly announce that they were resigning from the SPL with 2 years notice, citing the LNS ruling as evidence that they will put to UEFA as to why they can’t continue in Scotland, the SFA and SPL would fill their pants to the brim. All commercial deals would be up the spout, TV deals would be dead. That’s the power that Celtic have. Rangers pretend they are a global brand, Celtic actually are.


  34. And I bet you shouted for them to leave when they “hitched their skirt to the EPL” ok, I’m out. Sometimes I wonder if it is better to jump into bed with the devil, at least you know what he is all about.


  35. Really difficult situation now for the fans.

    Big Pink is correct, that the SFA is the clubs. The problem previously, the aspect which kept some sweet, was the smaller clubs hankered for a draw in one of the cups against a well supported side, including oldRangers. Now some of these smaller clubs have had a bit extra via The Rangers being in the lowest league. They’ll like the cash that has brought them.

    I can’t see them (the smaller clubs) bringing any pressure to bear at Hampden, why would they rock the boat? And do the supporters of these clubs have any great concerns for what oldRangers have done, and got away with? I’m unsure.

    So, again, it may be down to supporters of the top league sides. Yet what we have left attending spl games are the real ‘die hards’, everyone else driven away by high entry costs, uncomfortable all seater grounds, erratic fixture scheduling, poor standards (refereeing, playing ability, catering even), and, of course, oldRangers shenanigans. Once more, I’m unsure whether the fans who are attending this season will have the appetite to make a stand.

    The fans have possibly had enough: it may be that crowds will dwindle as The Rangers progress up the leagues (if they survive further financial crises), and later this decade attendances of 1-2000 will be the norm for many games at out top league level.

    I feel quite pessimistic for the future of Scottish football.


  36. fan power -> financial -> clubs -> SFA/SPL/SFL

    that is the problem in a nutshell, that is how we got change last year, that is the only way we will get any change from here on. I do tend to agree with the “plastic swords” comment a few posts back – so are we up to it? or do we just go back to whining/laughing at the CG roadshow?


  37. ‘Let the Peepil Sing’

    Let them enjoy inglorious ‘victory’.

    Let them wallow in unrighteous wrath.

    Let them demand undue apology.

    Let them shout and let them laugh.

    Take comfort in your blameless action.

    Take solace in a conscience clear.

    Sleep well and take some satisfaction.

    Knowing that your club’s still here.

    Let them sing their songs of conquest.

    Let them pretend they keep their pride.

    Twixt right and wrong there is no contest.

    And in the light, no place to hide.

    Let them keep their grand delusion.

    Of lifeless corpses vivified.

    In their hearts there’s no confusion.

    About who still lives and who has died.

    So let them retain their bogus baubles.

    Let them believe that they have won.

    For they have paid for all their troubles.

    Their club is dead, those dreams are gone.

    http://theinternetbampot.wordpress.com/2013/03/01/let-the-peepil-sing/


  38. Galling fiver says:

    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:12

    Funnily enough, no I wasn’t. I would say that the SPL would have become an absolute backwater on a par with the league of Ireland or the Welsh league without both Rangers and Celtic – I mean a slightly more competitive backwater than it was previously, but still a backwater. The idea that the SPL wouldn’t suffer if, say, an Aberdeen match was scheduled against Celtic v Man Utd was laughable.

    I really don’t see what your problem is. I’m saying you’ve got influence if you choose to use it, and yet you’re are desperately insisting that you don’t, and in fact, seem to takeit as some sort of insult that I would even suggest it.


  39. I would also like to say to Messrs Glen,Shield, Greenockjack and any other posters of a blue team that the view that we need a change and clear out of the governing bodies is something that I hope you and even the most fervent green team supporter could agree on. Even the blue tinged Mr Green has no confidence in the way they are mismanaging the game.


  40. areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:24

    Not the old league of Ireland/Wales claptrap that gets spouted by muppets on SSB.

    The Scottish first division gets bigger crowds than both of those leagues.


  41. Sugar Daddy says:

    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 22:46

    The focus should now switch to pressurising SPL clubs to reject the findings of LNS.

    Fan action ended the gerrymandering of T’Gers into SPL.

    Its time for the same fans to force the SPL board to do the right thing.

    Again.
    —————————-
    Celtic have said all that they can in public, that does not mean they have accepted this bizarre ruling.

    However the decision is to go before the SPL Board but no date given

    http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=12131&back=home

    “SPL Statement – Independent Commission

    The SPL Board appointed the Independent Commission to consider all aspects of the above matter and at no point provided any direction to the Commission on any aspect of the case.

    The SPL Board notes that the Commission has upheld a number of complaints against Rangers OldCo and that Rangers OldCo has been found to have breached SPL and Scottish FA Rules over an 11-year period in relation to the non-disclosure of financial arrangements involving many of its Players.

    The SPL Board are assured by the integrity of the process followed and thank The Rt Hon Lord Nimmo Smith and his colleagues, Nicholas Stewart QC and Charles Flint QC, for their time and effort.

    The Board wishes to GIVE THE DETAIL OF THE DECISION FURTHER CONSIDERATION at its next meeting.”

    Celtic are but one voice there and need other clubs to have their say. the SPL Board consists of Ralph Topping (SPL Chairman), Neil Doncaster (SPL Chief Executive), Eric Riley (Celtic FC), Stephen Thompson (Dundee United FC), Duncan Fraser (Aberdeen FC) and Michael Johnston (Kilmarnock FC).

    It is unclear if only they will consider whether to accept LNS or not but supporters of Celtic, Hibs,Dundee Utd, Aberdeen and Kilmarnock at least but preferably all SPL club supporters should contact their club and say that this bizarre judgement flies in the face of what fans demand of football’s governing bodies and they will expect the SPL Board to seek clarification of a judgement that on the face of it flies in the face of the sporting integrity the registration process was desiged to protect. The damage to Scottish Football as a result of not clarifying where the SPL stand on this key issue of sporting integrity will be incalculable.


  42. I have not chilled a we bit, no offence meant. This should have been fought by all except CFC to muddy the water. Of course they have the commercial clout, but can they be seen to use it? Or allowed. As someone joked yesterday about NL getting a ban from the LNS report, they will end up the villian if they wave this wand of power they have been keeping in reserve.


  43. borussiabeefburg says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:16
    0 0 Rate This
    Really difficult situation now for the fans.

    Big Pink is correct, that the SFA is the clubs. The problem previously, the aspect which kept some sweet, was the smaller clubs hankered for a draw in one of the cups against a well supported side, including oldRangers. Now some of these smaller clubs have had a bit extra via The Rangers being in the lowest league. They’ll like the cash that has brought them.

    I can’t see them (the smaller clubs) bringing any pressure to bear at Hampden, why would they rock the boat? And do the supporters of these clubs have any great concerns for what oldRangers have done, and got away with? I’m unsure.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    I have already, this evening, referred to the SFL clubs veto of the SFL proposal to put Newco into SFL1.

    i was outside Hampden that day because I believed it to be an historic day. The mood amongst the the Chairmen of what you, dismissively, refer to as the smaller clubs was one of anger. Anger that the ‘Rangers problem’ had been dumped in their laps. The ‘smaller clubs’ overwhelmingly rejected the proposal and immediately called for a vote of no confidence in the SFL board. They were told that it would not be permitted at the meeting.

    Many small clubs operate on a shoestring. Poorly paid, if at all. They exist because they believe in the beautiful game, played at any level. They believe in the highest ideal of sporting integrity. They are immense every time they manage to get a game on on a snowy January Saturday afternoon and they were immense on that July afternoon at Hampden. They rocked the boat that day.


  44. Judging by Celtic’s statement today and Lenny’s press conference i’m in no doubt that they know fine well they need to pursue this in order to keep the clubs fans onside. Lenny was bombarded on Twitter yesterday about it, then comes out tonight and says what he says, and the club release the staement that they did. I trust my club 100% to do the right thing here, no two ways about it.

    Whether or not it makes any difference, well, that’s another matter entirely.


  45. newshedenvy says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:43

    borussiabeefburg says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:16

    Really difficult situation now for the fans.

    Big Pink is correct, that the SFA is the clubs. The problem previously, the aspect which kept some sweet, was the smaller clubs hankered for a draw in one of the cups against a well supported side, including oldRangers. Now some of these smaller clubs have had a bit extra via The Rangers being in the lowest league. They’ll like the cash that has brought them.

    I can’t see them (the smaller clubs) bringing any pressure to bear at Hampden, why would they rock the boat? And do the supporters of these clubs have any great concerns for what oldRangers have done, and got away with? I’m unsure.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    I have already, this evening, referred to the SFL clubs veto of the SFL proposal to put Newco into SFL1.

    i was outside Hampden that day because I believed it to be an historic day. The mood amongst the the Chairmen of what you, dismissively, refer to as the smaller clubs was one of anger. Anger that the ‘Rangers problem’ had been dumped in their laps. The ‘smaller clubs’ overwhelmingly rejected the proposal and immediately called for a vote of no confidence in the SFL board. They were told that it would not be permitted at the meeting.

    Many small clubs operate on a shoestring. Poorly paid, if at all. They exist because they believe in the beautiful game, played at any level. They believe in the highest ideal of sporting integrity. They are immense every time they manage to get a game on on a snowy January Saturday afternoon and they were immense on that July afternoon at Hampden. They rocked the boat that day.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    TU to you, but you misunderstand my position. I’m not dismissing the smaller clubs in any way, as I financially support both a Div2 side and a junior club.

    What the lower league teams (is that better?) did was laudable, but some may say they supported The Rangers entrance into the lowest level so most could gain a financial benefit from that scenario. Stranraer excepted, of course.

    However, I do recall the rejection of the attempt at a vote of no confidence, which sort of flies in the face of the argument that the clubs are the SFA/spl/SFL. And that reinforces my pessimistic view this night.


  46. borussiabeefburg says:
    Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 00:02
    0 0 Rate This
    newshedenvy says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:43

    borussiabeefburg says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:16

    Really difficult situation now for the fans.

    Big Pink is correct, that the SFA is the clubs. The problem previously, the aspect which kept some sweet, was the smaller clubs hankered for a draw in one of the cups against a well supported side, including oldRangers. Now some of these smaller clubs have had a bit extra via The Rangers being in the lowest league. They’ll like the cash that has brought them.

    I can’t see them (the smaller clubs) bringing any pressure to bear at Hampden, why would they rock the boat? And do the supporters of these clubs have any great concerns for what oldRangers have done, and got away with? I’m unsure.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    I have already, this evening, referred to the SFL clubs veto of the SFL proposal to put Newco into SFL1.

    i was outside Hampden that day because I believed it to be an historic day. The mood amongst the the Chairmen of what you, dismissively, refer to as the smaller clubs was one of anger. Anger that the ‘Rangers problem’ had been dumped in their laps. The ‘smaller clubs’ overwhelmingly rejected the proposal and immediately called for a vote of no confidence in the SFL board. They were told that it would not be permitted at the meeting.

    Many small clubs operate on a shoestring. Poorly paid, if at all. They exist because they believe in the beautiful game, played at any level. They believe in the highest ideal of sporting integrity. They are immense every time they manage to get a game on on a snowy January Saturday afternoon and they were immense on that July afternoon at Hampden. They rocked the boat that day.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    TU to you, but you misunderstand my position. I’m not dismissing the smaller clubs in any way, as I financially support both a Div2 side and a junior club.

    What the lower league teams (is that better?) did was laudable, but some may say they supported The Rangers entrance into the lowest level so most could gain a financial benefit from that scenario. Stranraer excepted, of course.

    However, I do recall the rejection of the attempt at a vote of no confidence, which sort of flies in the face of the argument that the clubs are the SFA/spl/SFL. And that reinforces my pessimistic view this night.

    ——————————————————————

    It would be wrong to suggest that the lower league teams supported The Rangers entry to the lowest league.

    The proposal put to them that day was that Newco should be parachuted into SFL1. If, as it was, the proposal was rejected, then Newco would be parachuted into SFL3 automatically by the SFL board.

    That day was extraordinary precisely because the clubs weren’t voting on Newco inclusion in the SFL but on where within the structure they would start. Which is why I am amazed that the board have survived to this day.

    It’s like having a General Election where the choice is the Tories this year or in two years time.

    ← Older Comments


  47. Auldheid (@Auldheid)
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:35
    I agree entirely, Auldheid. I get a sair heid everytime I try to make sense of the LNS findings. To me the fundamental question was and is: Did RFC break registration rules? If they did, fairness requires that they be punished in the same way as other clubs have been treated over similar rule breaches – no more and no less. As far as I can see, LNS did not address this, though I might well have missed it. The SPL Board have to be made to recognise it is their responsibility to ensure consistency and failure to do so is likely to push the SPL into a downward spiral from which it cannot recover.


  48. Celtic can’t go much further in public. They need to test the feeling amongst the other SPL clubs for a continuation of the disciplinary hearing against Rangers.

    I suspect that there will be sympathy for the view that LNS was provided with a Hobson’s choice because of Bryson’s evidence . I doubt there is an appetite for further action , because there is no money in it. If there was the opportunity for financial recompense because of the 11 years of deliberately breaking SPL rules then no doubt that would be different.

    I’m afraid that’s the reality and without SPL support Celtic can do little on their own

    There may be the option of shareholder action through the European Courts, but that’s easier and cheaper said than done. Unless something changes then the best we , as supporters, can do is treat Rangers as the pariah club they have become

    Talk of putting it behind us , which is coming from the “reasonable” Rangers support and some in the media is nonsense. All clubs in Scotland and further afield have been cheated , have had the game reduced to a farce by the Toxicity of David Murray.

    There has been virtually no punishment for his actions, either personally or on the club. Consequences of his actions have resulted in SFL 3 , administration and liquidation. Green may appeal to the mob, but he wasn’t appealing very well until McCoist endorsed the season book sales campaign.

    Right there , at that moment an opportunity was lost. Green should have been recognized as a liability by the shareholders, and a reasonable individual put in his place. Instead we have to listen to Greens constant boasts of wealth and no debt, his incessant demands for apology from victims , and his outlandish claims of future value and Walter Mitty like associations with organizations far beyond his grasp as commercial partners.

    To the “reasonable ” Rangers supporters.

    You want us to forget about the damage you have wrought on our national game…….no chance.

    You want to start to lay the path for a return to competitive dislike as opposed to disgust……then muzzle Green and McCoist, start demanding life bans for Murray, Ogilvie, and others at your club who destroyed you as well as were complicit in years of deliberate deception and rule breaking .

    These guys cheated you as much as they cheated us. £Millions of shareholder value destroyed, and don’t fall for the MSM claptrap about Whyte destroying it. Murray got £1 for 86% of the equity. That was the day the worthlessness was confirmed, not Valentines Day 2012.

    Ask yourself this

    What would have happened if Murray didn’t sell. Would income have grown so dramatically that administration would have been avoided………of course not

    Murray had nothing to invest, Lloyd’s had long since stopped giving him their , and our, cash . His company has lost well over £200 million in the last 3 years and is balance sheet insolvent. Massively so.

    So if Murray didn’t sell administration would have happened anyway, probably quicker, given Lloyd’s wouldn’t have allowed Rangers to stiff HMRC for PAYE and NIC.

    Did Ogilvie help Rangers? Only if you redefine help in the forms of ignorance or cowardice. He either knew rules were being broken and said nothing (cowardice) or failed in his duty to know (ignorance)

    There are guilty individuals who should be the target of everyone’s ire, regardless of what club we support . No matter which club you support , we should all have a vested interest in ensuring those who caused this debacle are named, shamed and banned


  49. Let’s get this straight…..

    No one forced Murray to pay £12m for a dud

    No one forced Murray to go down the EBT route.

    No one forced Murray or the directors of RFC to withhold side letters given to players.

    All these decision were taken by Murray and his board. Was anyone pointing a gun to their heads at the time of all these decisions? NO.

    This wouldn’t even be in the public domain if it wasn’t for the Met raiding Ibrox in 2007.

    Instead of living within their means, Murray and his lapdogs chose to face the Challenge of Martin O’Neill and the new resilient Celtic team by illegal means.

    I say illegal, as it will be decided that the EBT Loans to RFC players with side letters were contractual. Hence not loans and payments covered under the players contract. Once that evidence is seen by the UTT and taken away outwith Scotland and the alleged ruling class protecting the establishment club, it will be a big fat GUILTY.

    They’re cheats, they know it, McCoist knows it, every player or employee who ever received an EBT payment knows it, Green knows it, Ogilvie knows it, Bryson knows it, Murray knows it.

    We, the Scottish football fans, the lifeblood of the game in Scotland aren’t morons and every single one of us know they’re out and out CHEATS.

    We’re being told to move on now, nothing to see here.

    I have a message for Green, McCoist, Murray, Ogilvie and their lapdogs in the MSM. We won’t move on, we won’t be bullied, we won’t be lied to.

    The SPL, SFA, SFL and the boards of our clubs are sorely mistaken if we’re going to let this rest.

    There was a huge miscarriage of justice yesterday and we shall not be rest until justice has been done.


  50. Mr Ogilvie knew fine well that the EBT’s were a ‘payment/loan’ sham when he partook of their benefits via Rangers. In my view, he may have been guilty of cowardlice in dealing with David Murray’s regime and he was certainly complicit in covering these payments up during his time at Rangers and since joining the SFA, however, I don’t think you can define his actions (and inaction) as ignorance.


  51. First time poster. Long time lurker here and previously on RTC.

    I’m driven to post for the first time (and probably only) time by my incredulity at LNS’s interpretation of the rules on the eligibility of the players with undeclared side letters to play in official matches.

    Rule D1.13: A Club must, as a condition of Registration and for a Player to be eligible to Play in Official Matches, deliver the executed originals of all Contracts of Service and amendments and/or extensions to Contracts of Service and all other agreements providing for payment, other than for reimbursement of expenses actually incurred, between that Club and Player, to the Secretary, within fourteen days of such Contract of Service or other agreement being entered into, amended and/or, as the case may be, extended.

    In my opinion, and I drafted contracts for a living for many years, this rule means, in layman’s terms that “all other agreements providing for payment etc” must be delivered to the football authorities. If this is not done, the consequences are twofold: (1) a condition of the player registration requirements is broken; and (2) a player is not eligible to play in official matches.

    LNS concludes that the side letters were such “other agreements providing for payment”. He determines that the side letters had not been delivered. The two consequences of this failure to deliver the side letters, as provided in D1.13 and as Hirsute Pursuit and majorcoverup have already pointed out are clearly in my view (1) that the registrations were flawed AND (2) that the players were ineligible.

    On the registration point, LNS accepts seemingly without question the SFA’s Mr Bryson’s evidence that, as far as the SFA are concerned (1) a registration is valid until it shown not to be valid and even then, only becomes invalid from the point when the factor which invalidates it comes to light and is proved and (2) remains valid through any period during which it should not be valid but the invalidating factor is not yet known to the SFA. LNS quotes no precedents for this approach having been taken in the past and no SFA rule underpinning such an approach.

    LNS goes on to state that SPL rules in his view should be interpreted to agree with related SFA rules. Therefore, he interprets D1.13 to provide that while the non-disclosure of the side letters was a breach of the registration conditions, the fact the non-disclosure was not known to the SPL meant the registrations of the affected players remained valid and that, as they were validly registered, they were eligible to play. If the registrations were subsequently proven to be invalid, they would only became invalid from the point of time they were proven to be invalid (i.e. now) and cannot retrospectively be challenged or set aside.

    LNS then relies on rule D1. to determine that, following his conclusion above, no ineligible players were fielded by Rangers FC as a result of the non-disclosure of the side letters.

    Rule D1.1 states that: “Subject to these Rules, to be eligible to Play for a Club a Player must first be Registered…”

    Rule D.1 clearly, in my opinion, means that a player cannot be eligible to play if he is not registered.

    It cannot in my opinion, reasonably be taken to mean that if a player is registered, he is therefore eligible.

    Yet that is how LNS has interpreted it.

    A quick analogy. In order to be pregnant, one must be female. By the logic of LNS’s interpretation and application of D1.1, however, if one is female, it follows not only that one is pregnant, but also that one will be forever be deemed to have been pregnant during such period as passes from the point one became female until the point one proves that one is not pregnant.

    The most bizarre aspect of the LNS findings on eligibility of the affected players is that it goes to such lengths to determine that the players were validly registered when valid registration is just one of a number of requirements for eligibility and when, in terms of D1.13, another of the requirements for eligibility to play is clearly absent.

    As stated above, D1.13 provides that “for a Player to be eligible to Play in Official Matches…a club must…deliver all other agreements providing for payment”. This could not be clearer in my view. It matters not a jot whether the players were validly registered. In terms of D1.13, if the “other agreements for payment” were not delivered (which LNS confirms they were not), the players were not eligible to play, irrespective of the validity or otherwise of their registration.

    Yet LNS concludes that the side letters were “other agreements for payment”, concludes that they were not delivered, but concludes that the affected players WERE eligible to play.

    Try squaring that circle. I can’t.


  52. Martin Hutchison (@Squire_67) says:
    Friday, March 1, 2013 at 23:51

    Judging by Celtic’s statement today and Lenny’s press conference i’m in no doubt that they know fine well they need to pursue this in order to keep the clubs fans onside. Lenny was bombarded on Twitter yesterday about it, then comes out tonight and says what he says, and the club release the staement that they did. I trust my club 100% to do the right thing here, no two ways about it.

    Whether or not it makes any difference, well, that’s another matter entirely.
    ===================================================
    Martin,
    You are correct in saying that CFCs intervention may not make a difference.However,the CFC fans would see that the club were fighting for what’s right,the “sporting integrity” subject.
    The SPL/SFA would then have to consider whether a fight with CFC was worth it,knowing that CFC hold the high ground or bury their heads in the sand.
    What I find disappointing in all of this is that everybody knows that RFC cheated.Their lawyer admitted they cheated!
    Still Lord Hodge,a fine upstanding guy,so we were told,deliberately held up proceedings that they’re still not resolved.
    Last week the DR ran a story about the sale of RFC to Whyte was against the law.There has been no follow up,not even by the DR.
    Strathclyde Police have not confirmed the above.Would anyone here bet that you won’t hear anything from them anytime soon.
    LNS,the man who sent an innocent man to jail for the Lockerbie bombing(not just my opinion but the opinion of the the victims committee chairman) was the perfect guy for this gig.
    He and his fellow tribunal members knew exactly what they were doing and also knew there would no challenge from the other members of the SPL/SFA.
    This to me is the biggest scandal in this whole process.We’re continually told,quite rightly,that the SPL/SFA are the clubs.If so,then ALL CLUBS are complicit in allowing this farce to continue.
    As a CFC fan,it doesn’t bother me a jot whether we win an arguement or not.What does bother me,however,is for my club to just accept illegal rulings for the sake of preserving n income stream.Things are either right or wrong.
    Today,we here Dunfermline have only paid their players 20% of their salary and can’t promise the rest will be paid.(Mr Masterton, owns the assets.We know about him).If the rules as we understood them had been followed,Dunfermline would still be in the SPL,TV cash,gate receipts etc would probably have seen them OK.
    TRFC survive,Dunfermline die.Seems to be acceptable every other club in Scottish Football.
    Add Dundee,Hearts,Dundee Utd into the mix,all suffering to ensure that one club prospers,


  53. barcabhoy says:
    Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 00:46
    ……………………………………

    I would suggest there is financial consequence if this is not persued by those at the SPL Barca….

    Those responsible for the shameless and overt way in which they have forced every decision one way…regardless of facts…regardless of the truth…regardless of the rules and regulations…regardless of the fans of all other Scottish clubs…regardless of Scottish football…know that in the years to come there is greater prize money both domestically and in Europe to be had at the expense of all others…

    And with their success in openly showing everyone who has eyes that they can be as dishonest corrupt and dismissive as they want….and there ain’t a damn thing you or I could do…then the world would be there oyster and they can run rough shod over anyone and everyone…..and you can bet your bottom dollar they will ensure further people placements to accomodate this…

    So future revenues will be jepordised if this is allowed to pass…


  54. barcabhoy says:
    Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 00:46
    ==================================================
    I think Celtic can go a lot further.
    Everyone knows there’s a stitch up here.Celtic fans will not accept the supposed acceptance by Celtic of being trod upon by TRFC and their lackeys in the SFA/SPL.
    I’ve backed CFCs stance and I think their statement tonight was well balanced and threw the problem back at the SPL.
    I think we’ve reached the stage now where the fans expect the club to back their words with action.Continued appeasement will not sit well.If the club don’t react then the fans,wih some justification,will decide that Celtic think money is more important than integrity,rules etc. and are complicit wrt the current shenanigans.
    Even if Celtic act alone in search of honesty,integrity etc,CFC fans will back them.I just think unfortunately,that we’ve reached a time where every club has to put up or shut up.
    Everyone,with the exception of TRFC fans knows yesterdays outcome was diabolical.
    We’ve 42 senior clubs and not one has voiced any dissent.
    TH at Raith came across as someone we hoped would stand up for fair play and that’s all we want but a promise of a wee bit more cash with reconstruction and he soon changed his tune.
    Celtic fans want to see the club stand for what’s right.We stand together.win or lose but the club must be seen to do the right thing..if that means they inform the SPL that they don’t accept the LNS whitewash and go to war with the SPL then fair enough.If the Celtic fans see the club fighting for what’s right,then they’ll change the game.


  55. My own small effort to reddress the injustice at the heart of the Scottish game. Emailed to SFA and copied to KFC and Neil Doncaster.

    —————————————————————————————————————–

    F.A.O. SFA Chief Executive

    Kilmarnock FC Season Ticket Book No : XXXX

    Well, have taken some time to consider the latest farcical judgement that allegedly is intended to underpin the integrity of Scottish football and have come to the considered conclusion that I have no interest or intention in continuing to financially support an apparently corrupt game which allows one particular club to act, effectively, with impunity whilst being tacitly supported by the governing body, all to the detriment of every other member club.

    Well done SFA!

    At least you have had the good grace to lift the shroud of pretence and the accusations of paranoia can now be laid to rest. Your colours have truly been nailed to the mast.

    I hope ‘The Rangers’ really are the bedrock of the Scottish game, because the Scottish game isn’t getting another penny from me.

    Yours with considerable disgust,

    XXXXX XXXXXXX

    P.S. Note to Heather Brown & Kirsten Callaghan of Kilmarnock F.C. – you should take this communication as a formal notice that I have no wish to renew a Kilmarnock F.C. season ticket for next season or beyond. Perhaps ‘The Rangers’ or their protectorate the SFA will ensure the necessary funds are re-distributed from their income for ‘the good of the Scottish game’.

    ———————————————————————————————————————-

    The only leverage we have is the withdrawal of financial support as was clearly evidenced last summer.

    If you continue to pay into the game as it currently stands, you continue to support TRFC, Campbell Ogilvie and their ilk.

    Your choice.


  56. So, after the initial shock of the LNS decision – when will the SFA / SPL launch their ‘charm offensive’? !

    A cynical attempt to persuade the paying customer that now is the time to move on, for the good of the game, to look forward to a brighter future, the usual bollox…

    If we had any doubts before – we all know for sure now: it’s about business first and foremost. Sporting values and fair play come a very distant second.

    From that perspective it is quite easy to appreciate the efforts deployed by the SFA in particular to preserve the Govan club – and to return it to the top division ASAP.

    Likewise, also from that perspective it is quite easy to appreciate that the ONLY action which will facilitate meaningful change in the football administrations is a real threat to overall revenue. The clubs would only take notice like last summer when fans threaten to walk away.

    But the difference now – when compared to last summer – is that the FTTT and LNS decisions have been delivered. The unquantifiable risk is how many fans will walk away in disgust – and these fans and their families will probably be lost to the game – possibly for good.

    Uncertain times ahead…and just when Scottish football seriously needs effective leadership and direction.


  57. My 9 in a row……….things that I have realised this week

    (1) That my years of paranoia was not without foundation
    (2) That my team is one of the so called diddy clubs – proud to be alongside them!
    (3) That there will be an attempt to move TRFC further up the pyramid at some stage
    (4) That heavily conflicted officials are placed there for a reason
    (5) That Scottish society is still in the dark ages – and that is reflected in its judicial and political processes being cooerced into sporting decisions
    (6) That the MSM work very well together hand in hand with their puppet masters
    (7) That no matter how much cheating went on, like a school ground bully, it won’t be admitted to nor apologised for
    (8) That rules only matter to most of the participants of SFA/SPL/SFL
    (9) That the club sitting atop SFL3 has no one else to blame for being there given the massive help it has been given and apparently continuing to be given from the authorities – both football and judicial..

    I know they cheated – they know they cheated – even Ally and Hately knows they cheated.

    They also know they can do whatever they like, whenver they like to whomever they like.

    I don’t see any coming together in the future…………


  58. And a final thought to ponder………..

    Last March the SFA/SPL first stated that it would investigate the claims of Hugh Adams that payments to players were not disclosed to players etc……….

    The evidence was shown in May in Mark Daly’s program of the side letters…….

    Instead of going ahead with the inquiry, it was delayed and delayed and delayed……

    A decision to fine RFC-1872 at that time would have meant a payment to SFA of 250,000 pounds as all footballing debts were agreed by CG to be met by new club…….

    All the delay has done has meant the money wil never be paid……….

    In the meantime, CG has been banging the big drum of never will I allow them to strip OUR titles……

    The Peepil rallied behind him big time……….

    So I have to wonder……………

    To whom has the delay been the most beneficial to?


  59. I congratulate Celtic FC on their statement concerning the LNS enquiry.

    http://www.celticfc.net/newsstory?item=3748

    I believe that is is essential that all supporters of all clubs NOW ask their chairmen to release a statement on each club’s views on the findings of the LNS enquiry. It is for each club to decide what to say, or if they so choose to remain silent.

    Mr Milne will shortly be sent a letter requesting that Aberdeen FC release a statement to their fans and the wider public on this matter.

    I have posted previously that my own view is that RFC were guilty of breaking the rules, however technicalities intervened.

    The publication of the LNS decision should not be the final word on this matter.

    If more clubs release statements similar to that of Celtic’s and then the SFA do not comment on the matter – perhaps the collective fan base then have a mandate to seek the assistance of UEFA.

    Mr Cosgrove, if you are looking in, good morning. Can I ask that on off the ball could you put the following question to the fans of Scottish football: why is Celtic the only club (at the moment) to have issued a public statement on the LNS decision in response to requests from their fans that the club’s position be stated?


  60. For what its worth – a copy of my letter to Mr S Milne, asking for Aberdeen FC to release a statement to their fans and the public on the SPL Independent Commission decision and what this now means for the game.

    Again, can I ask that all fans consider writing to their clubs seeking a public statement on this matter.

    Dear Sir,

    With reference to the Independent Commission appointed by the SPL to consider whether Rangers OldCo had breached any sporting rules surrounding player registrations. http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=12131&back=home

    I am writing to you as Chairman of the club that I have faithfully supported from the age of 5 today to respectfully ask that Aberdeen FC issue a public statement on their views surrounding the findings of the Independent Commission and where this leaves the game in Scotland.

    I see that Celtic FC has issued a statement to their fans and to the public. I would be grateful if Aberdeen FC could also make their position known.

    There is growing frustration from the fan base in Scottish football that sporting integrity remains under threat. I have read the decision of the Independent Commission and forensic analysis of that decision from a number of reputable sources – not least the Scottish Football Monitor. I, like many other fans am surprised that Rangers OldCo can be found guilty of contravention of SPL rules, that are designed to provide for a level playing field and sporting integrity – yet it is believed that no competitive advantage was gained.

    I hope that Aberdeen FC under your stewardship will consider the Club’s position and make that known to its fans and the wider public. I cannot talk for other Aberdeen FC fans, however, if the Club choose to stay silent on this matter I would be bitterly disappointed.

    Yours sincerely,


  61. Interesting tweet on @Barcabhoy1 timeline:

    Lord PJ ‏@PJBruce
    @BartinMain @Barcabhoy1 getting the feeling the Nuclear option is a BOS one involving Masterton telling SDM who is in troublr and when


  62. Bunion well done. A sad but necessary step I am afraid.

    You are absolutely correct.

    I gave up all of my pecuniary interests in the game last summer – when the notorious five way agreement ended any pretence that professional football in Scotland was even a sport. Everything that has happened since has convinced me of this. I have now very little passion or interest in the game – though a part of me does still instinctively follow Celtic – I can logically understand that football is an organic whole – and not a healthy one.

    I still have feelings and an attachment to Celtic which will take years – possibly decades to unwind. That emotional attachment cannot and should not allow any of us to support what we know to be corrupt and immoral against all of our better judgements. It is the tie that binds forged from early childhood which the corrupt and deceitful who run the game rely upon to feed their greed, dishonesty and corruption. Only by resisting that powerful allure and freeing ourselves of our loyalties can we regain our dignity and self respect.

    The game will not change – either you acquiesce and continue supporting your teams under duress and protest whilst this unfolds around you, or you simply recognise that it is not an essential component of your life and your identity and your own happiness – and you simply do something else with your time, your money and your emotional collateral.


  63. I think I’ve had my “Road to Damascus” moment in all of this carnage. While my heart has been supporting my club for 46 years, (at least some of) my money has been supporting Rangers and the Establishment put in place to sustain Rangers.

    The people who manage my club have been happy with this arrangement and may well be happy for the arrangement to continue, but I am not.

    So unless and until my club make it clear that the game in this country is going to change, not another penny piece shall slip from my pocket to my club.


  64. After the discovery of 47 million non-competitive advantages under a loaded fudge cake in the Kangaroo Court area of Glasgow this week, is there perhaps an outside chance of a certain club being offered an extraordinary promotion?


  65. Weather forecast:

    The storm that’s been with us for the past 36hrs will die down for a short spell but conditions will remain somewhat changeable.

    However, another storm is brewing as a number of fronts approach from the north and east.

    Should these fronts merge then the storm may well be severe causing major disruption.


  66. Ps. Amended to read:
    Should these fronts merge,
    then the storm may well be severe, causing major disruption . . . . in the west.


  67. I couldn’t help but notice that FIFA top man Sepp Blatter arrived in our bonny capital city yesterday. Also noticed the members of the SFA hierarchy there to press the flesh. I wonder what the dinnertime smalltalk consisted of.


  68. manandboy says:

    Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 08:43

    Weather forecast:

    The storm that’s been with us for the past 36hrs will die down for a short spell but conditions will remain somewhat changeable.

    However, another storm is brewing as a number of fronts approach from the north and east.

    Should these fronts merge then the storm may well be severe causing major disruption.
    ======================================
    At long last, a decent forecast.


  69. A hypothetical question:

    Assuming the FTT verdict is final, am I right that Rangers could have declared the loan payments to the footballing authorities, thereby properly registering the players AND ‘aggressively avoided’ the tax? Or would declaring the payments have changed the tax status of them?

    I fully understand that non-disclosure was motivated by uncertainty about the tax position and in the real rather than hypothetical world this uncertainty in itself would have prevented ‘Rangers’ signing players of the calibre they did.


  70. brycecurdy says:
    Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 09:02

    If the EBT payments had been declared to the SFA/SPL there would have been no uncertainty, the tax scheme was a bogey. The existence of the side letters had to be suppressed to protect the fiction that the EBTs were not part of the players contractual benefits.

Leave a Reply