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.
Serious question. Was Sandy Bryson a witness for the SPL or RFC? Surely he would have been one the first people that Harper Macleod would have spoken to with the simple question “were these players correctly registered?”
smugas @ 09:51
It will be a league of one.
Barcabhoy
You are not comparing apples with apples here ,how big is the barrel,we need to know.
fandanio on Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 09:08
0 0 Rate This
shield2012 says:
Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 20:17
—————–
I personally think you would have needed to gain an advantage for it to be classed as cheating. Breaking the rules deserves punishment but being classed as cheats when you didn’t gain an advantage is taking it too far.
Genuine question because I can’t remember – do we know that RFC, beyond all doubt, deliberately concealed the payments? If so, how do we know this?
————————————————————————————————————————-
Deliberate non disclosure of payments was what the old club was found guilty of so yes beyond all doubt. Like anybody needed an independent commission to know that anyway.
The very definition of cheating is deliberately breaking rules in any game or sport.
This has been proven despite the ridiculous punishment which flies in the face of all other “administrative errors” in the past (Spartans, Dunfermline etc)
Admin errors except LNS said it was DELIBERATE.
————-
Thanks fandango for answering without referring to me being a troll! (Cheers smug as!)
I’m just trying to establish whether RFC concealed ALL payments from the SPL I.e did the SPL know anything about EBT’s.
Also, I’m still not clear on the motives of RFC to conceal payments from the SPL. The HMRC is a different story but why from SPL? If they thought they were legit all along, why hide it?
Sorry if i’m going over old and obvious ground here.
alanramsay2013 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 09:09
aye Allan great site…the dark ones have been keeping me grinning for a good while now …I,m a Forfar loon whose coloured green!
Shield,
I said no offence, I just found your previous question re concealment following several previous ‘lines of enquiry’ with apparently well informed responses surprising.
To answer your latest query I don’t quite follow your logic. For the first part, no, I understand Rangers deliberately concealed only that element of the RFC player’s payment being paid into a trust (which the player subsequently received a loan against and, central to the “competitive advantage” arguement, Rangers received a tax saving against).
On the second part, I wholeheartedly agree – Why would they? As Barca and several others have said PLEASE someone give us an alternative believeable reason, else we are led repeatedly to a very clear conclusion of wrongdoing and resultant competitive advantage, hence the ill feeling towards the panel results and the authorities (as opposed to RFC per se).
Shields
It’s simple .
1 HMRC can demand that the SFA and SPL provide the contracts if they suspect a tax evasion has taken place.
2 Rangers knew that. They didn’t want those letters ever seeing the light of day.
3 That’s why for 5 years they denied to HMRC they even existed .
4 Until the City of London Police raided Ibrox and got their own proof Rangers told HMRC that they had provided all information
That covers the tax position.
The Football position is even clearer
1 Rangers knew that there was no motivation whatsoever from an SPL run by Lex Gold (Rangers supporter) an SFA run by George Peat (Rangers supporter ) Campbell Ogilvie (Rangers supporter) and Gordon Smith (Rangers supporter) to even ask a question about side letters
In a tale of lies and unbelievable claims, the most unbelievable of all is that in an industry as mouthy as football the SFA never knew about Rangers use of side letters.
Players bragging about their packages, how tax efficient it was. Smith was an agent !!! He dealt with other agents, he dealt with players who played for Rangers . Ogilvie was on the board of both Rangers and the SFA.
Are we really to believe that while over 80 players had EBT payments and most of them had side letters, that the SFA never knew about this.
They knew and they did nothing. What they have done now is move from ignoring the rule breaking and cheating, to rewrite the interpretation of their own rules to provide a get of jail free card for a club who polluted the competitive landscape for well over a decade
SFA…….Shameless Football Association
smugas says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 09:51
2 0 Rate This
D Provan.
Enjoy your league of two. I won’t be there to see it, fund it or provide token opposition to ensure a CL place is ‘justified.’
———————————————–
I’m hoping the TD’s to my post were disagreeing with Provans comments!
He really doesn’t get it does he and its all very sad
schottie59
great to see tsfm is read worldwide. i.m a blue nose, but a dark blue one from dundee.i wish all the dees worlwide all the best for the cup game today. we have made huge mistakes over the last years and we can never forget this or try to play it down. we were punished, for some not enough and i can accept that. we as a club should never forget the wrong doings that were done on ordinary people, let alone the tax man. still, on my small lowersaxony opinion it is not time to move on with the whole rangers “lie”. the investigations especially from this site must be continued until this club whatever it is or was called is properly punished. carry on the great work and many thaks for some great stories that many a time brought a tear in the eye of a dark blue nose wally in germany. this site also takes away the occasinal homesickness. i hear some of you chuckling back home, oh yeah, homesick about dundee, that,s a good one!!
barcabhoy says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 10:19
0 0 Rate This
Thanks barcabhoy, that makes perfect sense now. This is what I’ve been trying to establish recently.
I knew RFC must have had an important motive for concealing the payments from the SPL/SFA so that clears that up.
I also couldn’t understand why, with so many players being paid through EBT’s, the SPL/SFA couldn’t have know anything. Especially when RFC have openly said they did indeed know something if not everything.
bill1903 says:
You hurting Billy
Shield,
In the interest of balance and with the greatest respect to Barca I will temper his comments slightly.
On his tax position, that is the commonly held belief (well barca and me for starters) but again, please provide an alternative viewpoint. I would add the FTTT finding that the files impounded by Met police held side letters, the ones eventually provided by Rangers, laid out in exactly the same format, didn’t.
On his football viewpoint I will actually differ slightly. Did the SPL know? In a perfect world, far removed from Barca’s where Smith was both an agent and a board member, where Ogilvie was both a board member and SFA president, where footballers are private individuals and not “mouthy” openly discussing their packagaes, the SPL did not know, because they weren’t told. They relied on the common sense view that having laid out their rules re declaration that all clubs would follow it or face what you would have thought were obvious consequences. 41 clubs got that. One didn’t. One didn’t even seek a ruling for what, as it turns out subject to appeal, and RFC apprently maintained all along, were legitImate tax vehicles any way. So why not declare?
Forgive me my balancing interpretation Barca – to be clear I’m still a lot closer to your interpretation than, for instance, Richard Wilson’s today in the herald.
From Ally McCoist re LNS.
“And I would rather take his decision as opposed to anyone else’s. We’re delighted with it.”
2 Questions.
1. Would Mr McCoist have been so happy to accept the result of LNS enquiry had it led to the stripping of titles or worse? Did’nt he run to CAS the last time a decision went against his Club/Company?
2. Does Mr McCoist simply not understand that there was a giulty verdict returned and his Old Club/Company have been branded as Cheats forever even if the punishment suited his New Club/Company down to the ground?
Strong possibility of the SPL Chairpersons falling out over the direction to take at the TBA SPL meeting – stormy days ahead?.
Sorry bill1903missed the top of your post but the sentiment applies to Davie.
Shield,
I see your subsequent response so please accept above in similar heart and vein.
I am intrigued by your comments about did the SPL know? From a clubs point of view does that really matter looked at from the sporting integrity angle? From the murky inner world of Hampden where apparently deals are done and titles offered to be stripped in return for registration (on who’s authority exactly?) its important yes, but its a slightly different arguement to those clubs struggling to avoid relegation and seeing 47m quids worth lined up against them.
smugas says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 10:11
3 0 Rate This
Apologies, I’m getting a bit too sensitive to the troll remarks!
alanramsay2013 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 10:23
70 shillings Mclays….in the pub across from Mcgills….1/4 gills braw…as a Forfar loon the city was always a mystery..hahaha..great people though…and your right about nobody giving ground to the darkside….there hanging from a cliff and its slowly slowly crumbling….there will be a wee whimper fae them and then banished …their name always to be associated with stupidity and greed…
shield2012 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 09:56
1
5
Rate This
fandanio on Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 09:08
0 0 Rate This
shield2012 says:
Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 20:17
—————–
I personally think you would have needed to gain an advantage for it to be classed as cheating. Breaking the rules deserves punishment but being classed as cheats when you didn’t gain an advantage is taking it too far.
Genuine question because I can’t remember – do we know that RFC, beyond all doubt, deliberately concealed the payments? If so, how do we know this?
————————————————————————————————————————-
Deliberate non disclosure of payments was what the old club was found guilty of so yes beyond all doubt. Like anybody needed an independent commission to know that anyway.
The very definition of cheating is deliberately breaking rules in any game or sport.
This has been proven despite the ridiculous punishment which flies in the face of all other “administrative errors” in the past (Spartans, Dunfermline etc)
Admin errors except LNS said it was DELIBERATE.
————-
Thanks fandango for answering without referring to me being a troll! (Cheers smug as!)
I’m just trying to establish whether RFC concealed ALL payments from the SPL I.e did the SPL know anything about EBT’s.
Also, I’m still not clear on the motives of RFC to conceal payments from the SPL. The HMRC is a different story but why from SPL? If they thought they were legit all along, why hide it?
Sorry if i’m going over old and obvious ground here.
————————————————————————————————————————-
Cmon Shield you know the motivation for not telling the SPL
Martin Bains shredding machine will tell you
One thing LNS cleared up. They are now officially cheats – and by all accounts they are happy with this – what a club!
smugas says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 10:45
0 0 Rate This
Shield,
I see your subsequent response so please accept above in similar heart and vein.
I am intrigued by your comments about did the SPL know? From a clubs point of view does that really matter looked at from the sporting integrity angle? From the murky inner world of Hampden where apparently deals are done and titles offered to be stripped in return for registration (on who’s authority exactly?) its important yes, but its a slightly different arguement to those clubs struggling to avoid relegation and seeing 47m quids worth lined up against them
———————-
I guess whether the SPL knew or not doesn’t matter from a sporting integrity point of view. I was trying to understand the attitude within the SPL and whether something could have been dne sooner. If the SPL knew, it also shows that RFC were more open about the EBT’s and possibly didn’t have anything to hide.
According to what Barca says, they had motive to hide them from everyone’s eyes. This contradicts what RFC say.
Interesting.
barcabhoy says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 10:19
0 0 Rate This
Thanks barcabhoy, that makes perfect sense now. This is what I’ve been trying to establish recently.
I knew RFC must have had an important motive for concealing the payments from the SPL/SFA so that clears that up.
I also couldn’t understand why, with so many players being paid through EBT’s, the SPL/SFA couldn’t have know anything. Especially when RFC have openly said they did indeed know something if not everything.
————————————————————————————————————————
Hence why Ogilivie must go
The worlds greatest administrator who just signed whatever SDM put in front of him and who then moved onto the SFA
Obvious corruption
shield, gonnae just say “but they were in the accounts” and save us all a lot of time.
I see Davie Provan one of many footballers who have made a good commercial living out if the game wants to boot sporting integrity into touch.
Not sure I would want to listen to a commentator who thinks its not a sport he is commentating on.
Perhaps Sky Sport should move him to WW Wrestling as more appropriate of his belief system.
Just because (ex) footballers think cheating is part of the game does not mean fans have to accept it.
I’d drop my Sky Sports sub but I already have.
Davie Provan, seriously? That’s what you yearn for, McCoist and Lennon in each others faces in front of a baying mob. Someone take this cretin to an emergency room the next time the teams face each other. What a profoundly sad statement.
broadswordcallingdannybhoy says:
Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 20:52
33 0 Rate This
texaspedro says:
You fail or are unable to say why challenging the decision is pointless?
For me it’s not so much the decision but the punishment which should be challenged.
They died, they ceased to be, not as a punishment, as a consequence of their business practices stretching back possibly decades. We may even see people prosecuted as a result.
Excellent all season? Do you want the YouTube links to the sectarian and offensive filth sung by those excellent fans all season?
Perhaps like you they have no issue with increasing sectarian tensions in our country because it’s for the good of the club, I hope I’m inferring your meaning incorrectly.
I’m hoping for a cheap laugh by saying that Rangers are a no star team, in a state, and run by cowboys.
Hopefully you can respond with some similar witty banter and we can keep the discussion civil.
——————-
I think its time to move on as time would be better served in investing in Scottish Football and restructuring the game for the better of all involved. Continuing to pursue a matter that will continue to take money out of the game and continue to take effort away from restructuring the game is, in my mind pointless – particularly as I cannot see the decision being overturned or appealed. I have friends of Dunfermline and Hearts persuasion, and whilst I am sure many Rangers fans would dance on these clubs graves, I certainly hope they get the help required to survive from other clubs, as opposed to wasting time on Rangers.
You say cheating, I say admin error – we are unlikely to agree or change each others views. I just go back to the independent ruling I quoted above that clearly states that no competitive advantage was gained. To me thats key – you don’t. Fair enough.
I also mentioned above that I do not know of these other offences so cannot comment – but again, if its about players not being registered it is a different thing entirely as the decision makes clear the Rangers players were registered. But again, happy to hear these other cases to see the similarities/differences.
Rangers were put into liquidation with a mythical tax debt of 50-100 million. I would say being liquidated and being refused a CVA was a pretty big punishment – but then again, as you refuse to accept the neutral FTT decision, you will of course see it differently.
I note your continual want to discuss the sectarian singing. I have no doubt that there has been singing at away games, although I don’t trawl through You Tube to find them… It is disappointing – these fans have no idea of the damage they do the club or choose to not care. Hopefully things will approve – education of kids is the best way to stop the sectarianism in Scotland as well as better self policing by supporters.
As for this “Perhaps like you they have no issue with increasing sectarian tensions in our country because it’s for the good of the club” – pathetic statement since you don’t even know me and the fact I have mentioned nothing sectarian in any of my posts. I have not noticed an increase in tension in normal life – however, maybe it is who I decide to spend time with and where I spend my time. All I have noticed is getting a lot of stick for Rangers being guff and playing in Div 3 whilst my mates swan off to Barca and Turin. Then again, they couldn’t care less about stripping of titles and tax now that both decisions have been made, they just want to support there team.
On forums and phone ins – yeah, there is probably an edge at the moment. I was hoping drawing a line under everything and moving on would aid this process but I can see this won’t happen with certain people.
I am certainly not arrogant, I just like to look at the bigger picture. I know none of what I say will change peoples views – how many dislikes can one post get – but I think it is important to air different opinions.
And no cheap laugh from your post – you need to be funny first. But I will certainly be civil – I have no interest in getting personal.
For those of you stating Celtic should appeal. I see the other clubs in Scotland as clubs without a backbone. They are like children in the school playground pushing the big boy to take on the bully but ready to run away or change sides at a moments notice. The other clubs are a disgrace in all of this.
As for Scottish football needing rangers. Rangers are no more, we have a new shiny rangers fast tracked into division three but they are really a paper tiger.
shield2012 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 10:54
I guess whether the SPL knew or not doesn’t matter from a sporting integrity point of view. I was trying to understand the attitude within the SPL and whether something could have been dne sooner. If the SPL knew, it also shows that RFC were more open about the EBT’s and possibly didn’t have anything to hide.
According to what Barca says, they had motive to hide them from everyone’s eyes. This contradicts what RFC say.
Interesting.
——————–
The contradictory viewpoint I would add is also a viewpoint consistently not seen in the media, one of the core themes of RTC all along.
I believe the euro licence arguement (whilst no expert) puts to bed that the SFA/SPL had a willingness to see and hear only certain parts of the debate (at least prior to, and I believe basically why RTC came on the go). (I’m not accepting incidentally that the SPL knew the ins and outs of what was going on as you seem very keen to highlight) Commercial reality dictates why that might have been the case. I am old enough to understand that. I understand it right up to the point where they, RFC in whatever guise, and the colluding authorities were caught at it. Then my simplistic, logical and common sensical view on life simply cannot comprehend, and hence accept what subsequently followed.
a lasting legacy for this charade would be a boycott weekend, once a year all fans boycott a specific weekend, maybe the weekend proceeding St Andrews day. Call it sporting integrity weekend. Eventually the sporting authorities would leave that weekend free of sports, but the legacy of the cheating and failure to govern would always be remembered.
Palacio67 says:
Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 21:19
37 0 Rate This
texaspedro says:
Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 19:15
0 18 Rate This
Palacio67 says:
Saturday, March 2, 2013 at 17:1
————————————–
Good post, your best yet, I did’nt even give you the thumbs down
Concerned, Yes really concerned about the state of our game and the new addition at the bottom of the ladder who have had a large silver spoon thrust in its mouth .
——–
Cheers, I thought it was a good post too.
I am concerned with the state of our game too – the terrible reconstruction ideas, the teams in financial strife, attendances down, revenue down, quality down.
Well done on supporting your team – if only more people in Scotland did the same it would be a better state.
barcabhoy says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 10:19
Good points, well presented.
In other considerations, no matter how anyone wants to spin it Rangers have been found guilty by the footballing authorities and by the tax gathering authorities of lying, stealing and cheating.
Quite frankly I am glad to be rid of them.
It’s just a pity that this new incarnation seems to be, if anything, worse.
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:16
===============================
Thanks for replying – and apols if I misrepresented you.
(there’s a lot of residual anger at what’s happened recently, you caught some collateral damage)
I have a flight to catch but will be online later tonight.
I’ll reply to your post tonight from the hotel.
chipsandblog says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:24
3 0 Rate This
a lasting legacy for this charade would be a boycott weekend, once a year all fans boycott a specific weekend, maybe the weekend proceeding St Andrews day. Call it sporting integrity weekend. Eventually the sporting authorities would leave that weekend free of sports, but the legacy of the cheating and failure to govern would always be remembered.
—–
Isn’t this every Saturday in Scottish football? People need to go first before they can boycott.
Presumably Davie Provan will return all those medals and caps that he won due to his sporting integrity, as they may have been at the expense of commercial interests elsewhere, and that’s what is paramount, right?
A shame that a player who I used to idolise for his great skills, and subsequently for his sensible analysis, is now ruining his reputation by agreeing to have his name attached to such an article written in something that only qualifies for usefulness once the Andrex has run out.
T’Rangers, the club, the management and the fans.
A bunch, that if they had been charged with murder or manslaughter for killing someone while drunk behind the wheel of a car would be celebrating (most likely down the pub with yet another pint) that they got the charge reduced to dangerous driving and were given a few points on the license via a technical loophole. While shouting to the rooftops – Sod the victims and everyone else who dare challenge us.
They know no shame. Totally lacking in any sense of responsibility. Nae class.
Premanent embarrassment, occasional disgrace.
As they say on Dragon’s Den – I’m out.
It has been fun but lets face it Scottish Football is knackered and will be until the people running the game are untainted and brave enough to apply the rules without fear or favour.
broadswordcallingdannybhoy says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:40
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:16
===============================
Thanks for replying – and apols if I misrepresented you.
(there’s a lot of residual anger at what’s happened recently, you caught some collateral damage)
I have a flight to catch but will be online later tonight.
=========================================
Away to pick up Clint Eastwood ?
REGAN PLEA COMPROMISES NIMMO SMITH APPEAL
http://videocelts.com/2013/03/blogs/regan-plea-compromises-nimmo-smith-appeal
—————————————–
Tom English @TomEnglishSport
Rangers: My response to David Murray and his witch-hunt claim
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/sfl-division-three/tom-english-david-murray-wreaked-terrible-damage-1-2819017
Tic 6709 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 12:27
1 0 Rate This
broadswordcallingdannybhoy says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:40
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:16
===============================
Thanks for replying – and apols if I misrepresented you.
(there’s a lot of residual anger at what’s happened recently, you caught some collateral damage)
I have a flight to catch but will be online later tonight.
=========================================
Away to pick up Clint Eastwood ?
========================
Sorry to be pedantic but Richard Burton was Broadsword 😀
When faced with the same factual information why do we see such extremes of opinion?
Everyone has to filter and edir information received and studies show that anything positive is readily admitted. However, anything negative and unsettling to our “vital beliefs” is routinely ignored.
LNS the Establishment’s “logic chopper” is no doubt well aware of legal precedent and The 19th Cent. concept of “wilful blindness” described above; an opportunity for knowledge and a responsibility to be informed…. but it is shirked.
“The Ringers Football Club” and their media cheerleaders ably supported by “placemen” would and will never accept the word “cheating”.
The opposition’s view hoped that natural justice would prevail and any bias in governance and decision making would be exposed in regard to the treatment of one club in comparison with other clubs.
In summary it appears to be a draw…that both sides can claim they actually won.
Has our intrepid MSM requested that SDM pay up the £250K fine for the damage caused? Where are the SFA in their phoney battle to eek the £200K fine from MBB?
No one wants to a lay a finger on that absolute shower, the only option is that once that bunch of ribald doggerel singing so called supporters are back in the SPL is that no tickets are sold or taken for games involving that shower.
I can see Celtic not selling or accepting tickets if the hot ball cools down in the drum and throws up a cup-tie in the near future.
Still the game is doomed mis-managed by incompetents pandering to their favourite club , 20 years time , the std of Scottish football will be beyond dreadful …….
Someone trying to unite the fans:
SPL FANS UTD @splfansunited
When the site open tomorrow there will be a forum for all SPL fans to exchange opinions. #SPLFansUnited
Retweeted by Phil MacGiollaBhain
Expand
1 hr Jas Cameron Jas Cameron @CelticNetwork11
REGAN is totally out of touch and must go. So should Campbell Ogilvie and the rest of the SFA incompetents. We agree with @splfansunited
Expand
1 hr SPL FANS UTD SPL FANS UTD @splfansunited
@OntHeron1 @CelticNetwork11 Hopefully when the site opens we can have a good debate on that. All SPL fans must have an input. Thanks
nixonwhytewashing says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 12:51
Eh, no.
They were found guilty. They deliberately broke the rules of the association they were a member of.
From the Tom English Article
“Murray is attempting to change the narrative of what Nimmo Smith has actually concluded, pushing a shameless line about a witch hunt while singularly failing to address the many criticisms – not to mention the £250,000 fine – of the way Rangers did business when Murray owned the club. The breaches of the SPL rulebook on disclosure of payments were done on his watch and done deliberately according to Nimmo Smith, pictured. For that, the board of the Oldco have been panned, or, to quote from the verdict, the former directors of Rangers “bear a heavy responsibility”. Murray is talking like a man who has been deemed innocent when, in fact, Nimmo Smith says the “seriousness of the contraventions… require a substantial penalty to be imposed”.
Witch hunt? It’s more smoke and mirrors from Murray.”
The only real debating point is whether the punishment was overly lenient.
Some more:
SPL FANS UTD @splfansunited
Scottish football and the SPL can not ‘move on’ until there is a change in environment. #SPLFansUnited
Retweeted by Phil MacGiollaBhain
Expand
27 mins SPL FANS UTD SPL FANS UTD @splfansunited
There will also be a board on the forum for SFL club supporters to air their opinions. The future well being of the SPL will impact on all.
On Barcabhoy’s theme of who knew.
How and why did it go unoticed for so long when the SFA had an ex Rangers employee Campbell Ogilvie with vast football administration experience and ebt experience working with the SFA from 2002 pt, FT from 2005 and now President.
Anyone who looks at what makes a trust work, that its very guiding principle is trust, then they would know, if they worked in football as CO did, that the trust concept was incompatible with a highly contractural business culture.
Campbell Ogilvie as a recipient of a real trust SHOULD have known they were incompatible with football and asked questions how Rangers were operating them. He knew they were being used, he had one himself that depended on trust and they were reported in the accounts as Rangers suporters are quick to point out.
Other Rangers men help positions in the SFA, they too would have known. Why did they not blow the whistle to safeguard our game, why were ebts not questionned as soon as they appeared in Rangers accounts?
The idea that Campbell Ogilvie was unaware of what was taking place pushes credibility past breaking point.
Regan’s call to move on will remain unanswered until the questions now raised have been answered.
Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 13:05
Let’s be honest.
He knew they had the payments into trusts, he must have known they had side letters, and he had it open to him to find out if those were declared.
Corruption, pure and simple.
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:31
Well done on supporting your team – if only more people in Scotland did the same it would be a better state
======================================================
It really depends on the motives for supporting their team pedro.
If the main driving forces are hatred, intolerance, denial, getting in for just a few bob, getting it up
the rest of fitba fans, (“Kicked us when we were doon!”), or any number of other negative reasons that might be listed, then I’m afraid the answer is, no, it wouldn’t be in a better state.
Oh, how’s the sectarian issues coming along? I suppose Sevco players are openly blessing themselves these days without fear, yes? No?
tomtomaswell says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 12:38
Tic 6709 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 12:27
1 0 Rate This
broadswordcallingdannybhoy says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:40
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:16
===============================
Thanks for replying – and apols if I misrepresented you.
(there’s a lot of residual anger at what’s happened recently, you caught some collateral damage)
I have a flight to catch but will be online later tonight.
=========================================
Away to pick up Clint Eastwood ?
========================
Sorry to be pedantic but Richard Burton was Broadsword
=======================
He’s dead.
Remember a little thing called the under 16 World cup in Scotland in 1989….
______________________________________________________________
Ernie Walker was adamant that Saudi Arabia had played over age players in the final, which Scotland lost on penalties. He was wanting it investigated and the result over-turned.
I wonder what would the outcome would have been if a commission led by LNS had investigated that and found out SA had withheld relevant documentation regarding their players age.
Would Bryson have given evidence saying that they were eligible to play as under SFA regulations they couldn’t revoke their registration as they didn’t know they were ineligible at the time of playing.
Also our MSM would have been in an uproar, petitioning the government, UEFA, FIFA, Greenpeace, The United Nations, Pele, The Queen, The Pope, Nelson Mandela, Rod Hull & Emu…. Demanding that the result be over-turned.
Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 13:05
On Barcabhoy’s theme of who knew.
How and why did it go unoticed for so long when the SFA had an ex Rangers employee Campbell Ogilvie with vast football administration experience and ebt experience working with the SFA from 2002 pt, FT from 2005 and now President.
Anyone who looks at what makes a trust work, that its very guiding principle is trust, then they would know, if they worked in football as CO did, that the trust concept was incompatible with a highly contractural business culture.
Campbell Ogilvie as a recipient of a real trust SHOULD have known they were incompatible with football and asked questions how Rangers were operating them. He knew they were being used, he had one himself that depended on trust and they were reported in the accounts as Rangers suporters are quick to point out.
Other Rangers men help positions in the SFA, they too would have known. Why did they not blow the whistle to safeguard our game, why were ebts not questionned as soon as they appeared in Rangers accounts?
The idea that Campbell Ogilvie was unaware of what was taking place pushes credibility past breaking point.
Regan’s call to move on will remain unanswered until the questions now raised have been answered.
=======================================================================
they must have known, and they must have realised it was a “train crash” waiting to happen
that’s what HUGH ADAM siad, was it not.
– – – – – – –
on the LNS analogy.
if a person was driving a car, without a licence
that person could not done for not having a licence by the police
why
because the individual DID NOT INFORM the DVLA that he was driving a vehicle!?
what is happening with the appeal on the LNS decision?
Brenda have you still got that clock, could we use it to see how long before Vincent Lunny launches his investigation into the sectarian singing at Berwick. Shirley he must have noticed the headlines in the press if only because it was actually reported for once.
spaldingbhoy says: how long before Vincent Lunny launches his investigation into the sectarian singing at Berwick.
probably not before he’s completed the killie at ibrox post admin one that the spl announced ??
Regan should surely not be mouthing off about moving on (us, not him) prior to the SPL ratifying LNS’s verdict. I thought he said the SFA has no influence in these matters. Why voice an a opinion before it’s concluded, then? Very defensive about Ogilvie, too. Nice of CO to get involved at this stage. If only he’d volunteered to discuss all this years ago. RFC may even have survived.
As to the SFA members who had and have knowledge of RFC’s EBTs, they cannot have been acting in the best interests of the game by doing nothing about the known lack of disclosure. The guilty verdict suggests they didn’t help RFC or, at least RFC’s reputation (though the medal haul seems to have improved unhindered). Were they not be in breach of their SFA contract/responsibilities or did they have a side letter telling them it was OK?
At last! good news! It has come to light that the Fat Lady’s real name is Ms. UTTT.
Asked, at a press conference today if she was any relation to Mr. LNS Inquiry esq. She, angrily, rejected such mischievous talk adding that “she most definitely was her own woman”
Just another thought on the LNS
Was it delayed because if it had been held whilst RFC players who had been registered and had side letters – for example Stephen Davies the captain now at Southampton who according to the BBC Hall of Shame had a side letter – would our good friend Mr Bryson be able to deliver his – we did not know he was not valid so there is nothing we can do etc….
If Stephen Davies was still playing, he would have been forced to make him ineligible based on his evidence/train of thought.
That would have meant a 0-3 for each game Stephen Davies played in
But since the inquiry was held long after they had all gone, it was a case of dash, if only we had known then…………..
The delay was also part of the cover up…………….
On the question of the SPL appealing LNS decision. As the Appellate Body would the SFA simply look at it in-house, concur with the view already expressed by Bryson and throw out the appeal? Or would they appoint another Law-Lord to hear the appeal?
I hear “The Killie Boys” being sung in the background. Can’t make out words past the first line but has this anything to do with sevco-kilmarnock fans who normally only watch footie on the telly turning out in a big game against a team in green?
I was puzzled from the outset why the learned gentlemen inserted ‘they gained no football advantage’ in the report – this, by laymen in football terms.
Of course it should have stuck out like Fanad Lighthouse – it was the legal way of saying ‘no stripping of titles’
What shelf this report will reside on in the Parthenon of infamous cover-ups is anyone’s guess bot I suggest they will have to lower the floor to accommodate this load of rubbish.
fandanio says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 09:08
The very definition of cheating is deliberately breaking rules in any game or sport.
——
No it’s not.
The definition of cheating, though it starts with “breaking the rules”, usually includes something like “in order to gain an advantage” or “to deprive someone else of something”.
Look it up in any number of online dictionaries.
LNS, therefore, was very deliberate in saying that no advantage had been gained by Rangers FC. What his decision says – very definitely – was that Rangers FC are not cheats.
Meanwhile, Mr McCoist was quoted in yesterday’s Scotsman as saying he’d attended meetings to do with the “four or five-way agreement”, adding “but it was never agreed”.
Perhaps that’s why we’ve never seen this agreement past its draft stage – because the draft is all that ever existed.
With regard the £250,000 fine for cheating.
Presumably that would be considered a football debt and as such the new club will have to pay it as part of their agreement.
Can anyone confirm if this is the case.
It’s getting to the stage where we (or certainly I; and maybe the SPL board) need LNS’s assorted goofs set out in a list for the sake of clarity. The following is offered as an initial effort only. I’d ask our more clued-up contributors to add and amend as they see fit.
1. To be pregnant you need to be a woman. But being a woman does not make you pregnant.
SPL rule Rule D1.13 states that BOTH “as a condition of Registration” AND “for a Player to be eligible to Play in Official Matches”, all agreements providing for payment must be delivered by the club. Even if RFC’s players were correctly registered (see below) this does not automatically mean they were eligible to play. And in fact as all agreements for payment were not provided (acknowledged by LNS) the players were therefore ineligible.
Nowhere in the SPL rules does it say this rule may be ignored if it is deemed that no sporting advantage was gained.
2. The Curious Case of Mr Bryson (in fact rendered irrelevant by the above, but bear with me anyway)
Mr Bryson requires a list of its own:
(a) His interpretation of the registration rules on 28/2 flies in the face of precedent across world football throughout its history.
(b) It also flies in the face of his own Association’s actions throughout its history.
(c) And therefore, it almost goes without saying, his interpretation has no basis anywhere in his Association’s rules. It exists only in Mr Bryson’s head.
3. His Lordship and a Can of Worms
LNS’s imposition of the £250,000 fine on Oldco and not the ‘club’ (as he sees it) opens up the possibility that any club can now demand that any SPL/SFA sanction be applied to the ‘holding company’ and not the ‘club’ (as LNS sees it), i.e. completely ignore it.
Apologies for any mistakes of my own in the above. As I say, please correct it wherever necessary. Thanks to HisutePursuit, majorcoverup, itsalitany, areyouacccusingmeofmendacity, barcabhoy, wottpi and others for clarifying all this, as well as drgerhardkapl on KDS.
Auldyin, if you can be bothered, could you maybe do something similar for why the appellant body cannot be the SFA? The reasons for that seem to be racking up pretty fast as well.
On a lighter note, you know the aspect of all this so mind-boggling, so *psychedelic* almost, that it provokes in me not frustration or sadness but a sort of mad giddy laughter?
Campbell Ogilvie is still President of the SFA. He really is.
It’s also the fact that stuns non-Scots into quiet embarrassment for our little banana republic/kingdom.
The Wire was a Scottish documentary with US accents dubbed on.
Sean who’s going to be our Omar !
Appellate body CEO taking sides
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=11757&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Concerning Mr Ogilvie he must be above reproach as there have been several member’s of the MSM stating that he is a very nice honest man. Today in the paper Mr Regan gave Campbell a vote of confidence again as Mr Ogilvie is such a nice man.
Mr Ogilvie is so conflicted with being at rangers for twenty odd years and now head of SFA.
He had an EBT (a nice man may have questioned this)
He was at Rangers during anti catholic signing policy (a real nice man in that position may have said something))
He had thousands of shares in Rangers (which he still has (but they are now in his wife’s name, so that must be ok). Maybe he gave them to his wife as a present as that is what nice men do.
Beetlejuice
Beetlejuice
Beetlejuice
Please say he has now gone to where all nice men go.
How many heads or members of the SFA have either been a director at Rangers or a supporter of Rangers. Possible another world record?
angus1983 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 15:09
fandanio says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 09:08
The very definition of cheating is deliberately breaking rules in any game or sport.
——
No it’s not.
The definition of cheating, though it starts with “breaking the rules”, usually includes something like “in order to gain an advantage” or “to deprive someone else of something”.
Look it up in any number of online dictionaries.
===================================================
Someone already did, a few pages back
Definition of CHEAT;
Definition from Merriam-Webster;
1: to deprive …….. by the use of deceit
2: to violate rules dishonestly
Definition from The Free Dictionary;
1. To act dishonestly
2. To violate rules deliberately
3. To deceive or practise deceit
Definition from Dictionary.com;
1. to elude; deprive of something expected
2. to violate rules or regulations
3. a deliberately dishonest transaction
Definition from Macmillan Dictionary;
1. to behave dishonestly, or to not obey rules
Definition from Oxford Advanced Learner;
1. to trick somebody or make them believe something which is not true
Definition from Cambridge Dictionary Online;
1. to behave in a dishonest way in order to get what you want
Definition from ARD;
1. someone who leads you to believe something that is not true
2. deprive somebody of something by deceit
3. engage in deceitful behavior;
Definition from WordReference.com
1. to deceive or practise deceit
2. a deliberately dishonest transaction
Lets go back to season 1989/90.
Forfar field an ineligible player, Vince Mennie, in a league game against Airdrie (which they lost). Sanction – a two point deduction
Rangers field an ineligible player, Bonni Ginzburg, in a Skol cup tie against Arbroath (which they won 4-0)
Sanction – a £200 fine
’twas always thus
Tic 6709 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 13:39
2 0 Rate This
tomtomaswell says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 12:38
Tic 6709 says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 12:27
1 0 Rate This
broadswordcallingdannybhoy says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:40
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:16
===============================
Thanks for replying – and apols if I misrepresented you.
(there’s a lot of residual anger at what’s happened recently, you caught some collateral damage)
I have a flight to catch but will be online later tonight.
=========================================
Away to pick up Clint Eastwood ?
========================
Sorry to be pedantic but Richard Burton was Broadsword
=======================
He’s dead.
—————
So are Rangers but their corpse is still being bandied about as if it was alive and kicking 😀
Regan’s recent comment about “moving on” is, considering his organisation are the so-called appellant court, severely embarrassing and, well, amateur!
Whatever is past successes, this event more than perhaps anything else (even his Twitter calamity) underlines just how out of his depth he is.
It is more embarrassing than corrupt, but in his own words, it makes the SFA “heavily conflicted” in terms of their suitability to hear any appeal – in fact with the Bryson evidence, it makes them unqualified to hear any appeal.
However I suspect that this outburst was just the first salvo in a PR campaign, kicked off because he knows for a fact there will be no appeal.
Still rank amateurism though, and a man drowning in the sea of corruption which has now completely engulfed the game in this country.
As ever, it is the cover-up which is the bigger sin. Rangers have behaved appallingly over decades, but the if SFA (the clubs), stand back and do nothing , they are at least as bad, and probably worse.
Regan? He is just a paper boy who keeps delivering the Citizen to the Times readers 🙂
tomtomaswell says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 15:56
==============
You win,For the life of me I can’t top that.
Big Pink says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 16:03
As I said before the ruling was released there were really 2 decisions to be made.
1, Were Rangers guilty of the charges against them and if so
2, What penalty would be imposed on them.
The answer to 1, would reflect on Rangers, the answer to 2, would reflect on our footballing authorities.
We now all know the answer to both. The only thing left is really a matter of opinion, was the punishment fair, given the seriousness of the offences and any available precedent.
Personally I think it was overly lenient, given what has happened to other clubs. And I’m afraid that is the crux of the matter. Given this, allied to other decisions, it is perfectly clear that Rangers were and are treated as a special case. They are not dealt with in the same way as other clubs.
yakutsuki says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 13:32
17 0 Rate This
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:31
Well done on supporting your team – if only more people in Scotland did the same it would be a better state
======================================================
It really depends on the motives for supporting their team pedro.
If the main driving forces are hatred, intolerance, denial, getting in for just a few bob, getting it up
the rest of fitba fans, (“Kicked us when we were doon!”), or any number of other negative reasons that might be listed, then I’m afraid the answer is, no, it wouldn’t be in a better state.
Oh, how’s the sectarian issues coming along? I suppose Sevco players are openly blessing themselves these days without fear, yes? No?
————
Or they are Rangers fans and have decided to stand by their team, whether you call it Sevco or not. Getting in for a few bob ain’t a negative reason btw, its common sense. If more teams charged less they may get bigger attendances.
I am sure some of the Rangers support is intolerant and have hatred in their blood. I see much intolerance all across the west of Scotland and further afield. It is sad – people live in the past and won’t move on. Much like Scottish football just now actually….
I get you and many others are annoyed that Rangers/Sevco/Zombie Utd (whatever – none annoy me) fans didn’t abandon ship, that the so called defiance has continued into March. It might wane eventually. It might also not wane. Its also worse as other clubs supporters, so vocal about sporting integrity back in the summer, have actually not bothered to support their team – Sell Out Saturday – whatever happened to that.
Scottish football would be in a better state if fans did support their team – you turned my perfectly normal and sensible comment into a point scoring exercise.
As for sectarian issues – its a bigger issue that just Rangers. But it needs to be better, I have mentioned above it needs education and more fans involvement to police.
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 17:04
0
0
Rate This
yakutsuki says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 13:32
17 0 Rate This
texaspedro says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 11:31
Well done on supporting your team – if only more people in Scotland did the same it would be a better state
======================================================
It really depends on the motives for supporting their team pedro.
If the main driving forces are hatred, intolerance, denial, getting in for just a few bob, getting it up
the rest of fitba fans, (“Kicked us when we were doon!”), or any number of other negative reasons that might be listed, then I’m afraid the answer is, no, it wouldn’t be in a better state.
Oh, how’s the sectarian issues coming along? I suppose Sevco players are openly blessing themselves these days without fear, yes? No?
————
Or they are Rangers fans and have decided to stand by their team, whether you call it Sevco or not. Getting in for a few bob ain’t a negative reason btw, its common sense. If more teams charged less they may get bigger attendances.
I am sure some of the Rangers support is intolerant and have hatred in their blood. I see much intolerance all across the west of Scotland and further afield. It is sad – people live in the past and won’t move on. Much like Scottish football just now actually….
I get you and many others are annoyed that Rangers/Sevco/Zombie Utd (whatever – none annoy me) fans didn’t abandon ship, that the so called defiance has continued into March. It might wane eventually. It might also not wane. Its also worse as other clubs supporters, so vocal about sporting integrity back in the summer, have actually not bothered to support their team – Sell Out Saturday – whatever happened to that.
Scottish football would be in a better state if fans did support their team – you turned my perfectly normal and sensible comment into a point scoring exercise.
As for sectarian issues – its a bigger issue that just Rangers. But it needs to be better, I have mentioned above it needs education and more fans involvement to police.
=====================
Couldnt resist hoisting the ‘Attendance Banner’ and having a go at every other supporter in Scotland by degrading an action taken to show that they are here and need to be listened to. As experts in the act of boycotting maybe you could advise us on the finer arts the next time we feel the need to be heard. It worked so well for you guys recently did it not?
Carfins Finest. (@edunne58) says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 17:18
0
Couldnt resist hoisting the ‘Attendance Banner’ and having a go at every other supporter in Scotland by degrading an action taken to show that they are here and need to be listened to. As experts in the act of boycotting maybe you could advise us on the finer arts the next time we feel the need to be heard. It worked so well for you guys recently did it not?
——–
I didn’t have a go at anybody – i said that more people going to games is good for football. More money, better atmosphere (in theory).
If you are going to take my comments as having a go (and I’m pretty sure people were having a go at me for daring to suggest that) then technically its not at all fans in Scotland, its only the ones that said they would go back and see their local team to make up for the lack of money and who have actually done nothing.
Is Regan actualy telling us that no matter what ,its over,stop attacking sevco as we will not be doing anything to them ,get over it move on ,you are all starting to annoy us at the SFA .pesky bloggers,
yourhavingalaugh says:
Sunday, March 3, 2013 at 18:35
Not only that, he is doing it during the time when an appeal by either side is still possible.
Which is a strange thing to do for someone with a leading role in the body which would hear any such appeal.
Absolutely appalling, he is effectively consigning Rangers to be branded as cheats forever. I know the club is dead but it’s support and former owners should be able to clear it’s name. Or at least get a fair hearing to try.
Notably, perhaps the most respected dictionary, i.e. the Oxford English Dictionary, is missing from the list above:
“Verb: Act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage.
Noun: A person who behaves dishonestly in order to gain an advantage.”
(edited entries)
Whether I personally think Rangers FC cheated is irrelevant – what I’m saying is that it appears to me that LNS deliberately phrased his decision to refute the informal charge of “cheating”. He could have just said “they didn’t cheat” – which would be perfectly acceptable. Better to keep the waters a bit murky, though.