How Celtic Turned the Tables on their Glasgow Rivals by Stephen O Donnell:
A Review by Auldheid.
Stephen’s previous publication, Tangled Up In Blue provided a detailed history of the rise and fall of Glasgow Rangers FC PLC from 1872 until their demise in 2012. Clearly a lot of research had been done to cover the period in such detail and his follow up publication Fergus McCann v David Murray etc carries on with that tradition. It is a smorgasbord of a book with many different issues succulently served up in its 350 pages.
It tells of events under David Murray’s tenure at Ibrox which began in November 1988 and ended in May 2011 when he left Craig Whyte holding the rope that became a noose just under a year later in April 2012 when Whyte was found guilty of bringing Scottish football into disrepute whilst Murray claimed he was duped.
Readers of the book will come to the conclusion that if anyone did the duping it was David Murray and it wasn’t just Craig Whyte he duped but Scotland’s national game. If ever Murray were to be tried for crimes against Scottish football then this book would be cited as evidence.
It was against the background of David Murray’s tenure at Rangers that Fergus McCann first arrived on the scene in April 1989 with proposals to inject £17M of New Capital into Celtic that the Celtic Board rejected as per minutes:
Proposals put forward by Fergus McCann to provide finance for various capital expenditures were unanimously rejected by the Directors’; and then again in August of the same year: ‘Mr McCann’s latest proposals were discussed and it was hoped that this was a final discussion on the subject. Latest proposals were rejected by Directors.
Fergus later returned to the fray and the chapter on how he was successful in ousting the Board in 1994 is an informative read, particularly if in that period single parenting cares took precedence over caring for Celtic.
I was amused reading the tale of discontent aimed at the old Board after a Ne’erday 4-2 defeat to Rangers in January 1994 when a bemused Walter Smith was watching the hostility aimed at the Celtic Directors box, one fan in the main stand screamed at him, ‘What are you looking at, it’s got fuck all to do with you.”
For me anyway there were a few “not a lot of people know that” moments like that in the book.
The contrast between Fergus McCann’s and David Murray’s style was immediately evident, but the impact of Fergus’s shorter tenure from 1994 to 1999 became more than evident after McCann left and the author does not miss the role servile journalists played and hit the wall for turning Celtic supporters against McCann during his tenure, whilst they dined on Murray’s succulent lamb. A role that in the end helped bring about Rangers end, but not the culture of servility when covering the activity of Rangers FC PLC successor club from 2012.
Sky TV get it in the neck too and if David Murray played the part of Colonel Mustard in killing Scottish football through his financial recklessness and duplicity, Sky are the lead pipe whose toxicity still dictates the nature of the current state of play.( I said it was a Smorgasbord)
Fergus kind of did what it said on the tin. In his case a tin of nippy sweeties, but it was interesting to read about his early years when even then he was described as “a cheeky upstart” but his “idiosyncrasies” and appearance under a bunnet, disguised a sharp if impatient business mind where for him getting straight to the point was akin to procrastination.
So too has Murray’s early years been covered including his rejected attempt to buy Ayr Utd, a rejection by Ayr Directors, who considered Murray was too hot headed and most volatile, that infuriated him.
Their conclusion that he was trying to get Ayr United on the cheap with only £125k of his own money involved was an indicator of his strategy of using other people’s money to invest and not his own. Other people including unsuspecting taxpayers to a tune of £50 million or so.
As you follow the narrative of both Fergus McCann and David Murray and the events that surrounded them, you end up wondering how so many could have been fooled for so long by one guy, but when you have the Scottish media in your pocket it was difficult to separate fact from fiction during the tenure of both. You also wonder how Murray remains a Knight of the Realm since.
Luckily for Celtic Fergus knew business fact from PR fiction and avoided the illusion in which Celtic’s main rivals continue to struggle to this day.
The great pity is that few, if any of the Scottish main stream media will even give this book a mention, because if you don’t write about it, it never happened, except it did and this book is proof.
I therefore recommend anyone interested in the future of our game buys it and asks, is it not now time to revisit the purpose of Scottish football?
Auldheid
Aye, JC, initially Keen wasn't too keen on resigning.
But, fair play: he's eventually done the right thing.
John Clark 16th September 2020 at 20:24
======================================
That would be the private individual breaking the law, not the post breaking the law.
The point is that the Lord Advocate, whoever that happens to be at the time, is no longer immune. That immunity (as was) there does not extend to people working on his (or her) behalf.
Homunculus 16th September 2020 at 18:47
'..It's funny what you can do with statistics. Or more importantly the ones you chose to quote'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
reasonablechap 16th September 2020 at 18:11
332: Rangers
It is the amount of days since each team were last awarded a penalty in the SPFL premiership.
………..
Was that the 4 in one game?
Long gone are the waghorn (Pen) days, when it was said the ibrox club get a lot of penalties because they are an attacking team and most of the play is in the opposition box so more chance of penalties. Maybe this ibrox team don’t get in the other teams box enough.
Cluster One 16th September 2020 at 16:51
I would suggest "some" instead of "most" .
Read the stuff about them trying to get refunds . Every penny appears to be a prisoner .
The point I was aiming for is that TRFC fans have finally woken up to the fact that clubs can die and that their club is in great need of funds/donations to prevent happening . Unfortunately , they seem to forget that the lack of their support assisted in the demise of the club the originally supported until it was sent to liquidation .
paddy malarkey 17th September 2020 at 15:09
They were too big, too important to Scottish society to go into administration. It simply couldn't happen.
They were too big for that administration to fail, for the club to be liquidated. A CVA would be agreed, they would pay pennies in the pound and come back debt free and stronger than ever. Everyone would ensure that.
Given the above, they simply don't acknowledge that it happened. Well it happened but not to their club, to something which conveniently appeared out of nowhere.
Perhaps forgetting that the "holding company" already existed, it is called The Rangers FC Group Limited (previously Wavetower Limited). Which isn't actually being liquidated.
And there was me thinking it's over eight years since Rangers had a penalty. But to be fair it was a penalty that will never be forgotten – the death penalty!
Just a thought.
King's name has been mentioned online recently.
You would think he'd not be keen to get involved 'hands on' at Ibrox again – even if he could?
But, IIRC he still holds his – largest – share stake in RIFC, and he does have an outstanding loan payable to him.
Is it just a coincidence that King's name pops up around the time that Campbell Dallas is due to sign-off the RIFC Accounts?
Has King been asked to offer any financial guarantees to mitigate the expected / repeated Going Concern risk(s)?
Again IIRC, King gave a guarantee in the past, (but didn't actually honour it?)
Of course, I'm only guessing.
But – on the face of it – King would still be the single, largest loser if RIFC went bust.
StevieBC 17th September 2020 at 18:00
If I remember correctly his holding, via New Oasis is just over 25% of the shares (meaning he can block special resolutions). So I think you are right, he has the biggest holding and as such stands to lose the most.
That's to say nothing of any loans which may be outstanding to him.
Would using taxpayers' money to secure an NDA be legal? It implies that any due settlement would be inflated at our expense to avoid embarrassment to the authorities
StevieBC 17th September 2020 at 18:00
Homunculus 17th September 2020 at 19:50
If I remember correctly
There was to be a share issue in January and it never happened. kings parting shot at his last AGM was he would rather own shares in the club rather than in the holding company.And the RIFC was to be wound down or something,maybe it is still the plan but events out with football put an end to any plans. I believe kings loan is due to be repaid by 2021
spikeyheid 17th September 2020 at 21:49
‘…using taxpayers’ money to secure an NDA be legal?..’
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
What I don’t know for sure is whether, if there was no settlement and the case went to trial ,the trial would be before a jury?
Apparently, in Scotland, it is the jury that determines how much damages are to be paid if the claimant wins, and although the judge can give guidelines , the jury can ignore these. And Scottish juries are apt, apparently, to be far more generous than the Courts in England..
If that is so, then Whitehouse and Clark might be best advised not to accept settlement of less than their respective claims, if they believe that they would a) win in Court and b) that the jury would be inclined to award them what they claim [ with the judge throwing in a few more thousands as ‘exemplary damages’ for the ‘malice’ aspect of the wasteful, abandoned prosecutions]
As against that, perhaps, the admission by the Crown is only that they prosecuted wrongly: they clearly don’t admit liability for the amounts of damages claimed, and might conceivably convince a jury that the claims are way over the top, so that something considerably less is awarded, less even than the offer that a settlement might might provide!
I expect that the duo will settle, to be sure of at least 85% or 90% of what they variously claim(plus legal costs), rather than run any risk of getting less than that.
But it is no secret that both Whitehouse and Clark are angry bunnies, especially Whitehouse, who was white and fizzing with rage and anger on at least one occasion when we saw him in Court, tugging at his solicitor’s sleeve to get him to pass a message to his Counsel about something the Crown Office QC (Mr Moynihan) was saying.
And that anger might make them determined to reserve the right to speak about their cases rather than tape their mouths with an NDA!
I hope they choose not to settle, so that we might all hear a bit more of the foul -up and who was responsible!
Not taking sides, of course, but these things are far too important to be kept hidden. If public officials make serious errors of judgment, or are cavalier about the exercise of the powers we invest them with, we need to know.
Because one day any one of us ( who could not look at the eye-wateringly huge expense of bringing an action) may be victim of error or cavalier attitudes.
Poetic justice or what?
Get to extra time by two penalties, and lose in a penalty shoot out!
I watched with enjoyment the game between Coleraine and Murrerwell.
Not a lot of silky football, but huge effort, and gutsy performances.
But I think Motherwell were not really ready for the determined fighting, attacking mood of Coleraine.
Pre-match complacency? A deadly thing!
Overall, I'm happy that the team of my dad's young days won through.
Exciting development for SFM possible with a new radio startup talking with us to provide football coverage.
Of course it may come to nothing, but anything that helps raise the platform is good.
John Clark 18th September 2020 at 00:33
Poetic justice or what?
Get to extra time by two penalties, and lose in a penalty shoot out!
I watched with enjoyment the game between Coleraine and Murrerwell.
====&====
I’m sure the SMSM and wee Nicola will be all over this anti-social distancing procedure.
https://twitter.com/craigfowler86/status/1306632492418502657/photo/1
Or perhaps they fall under a party of up to 30 who were shooting grouse. ?
Breath holding exercises commence.
The SPFL at their usual reactive best with today's statement.
There is so much irony in their desire to "protect" their beloved Premiership elite from the unwashed (and untested) masses. What happened to all the £50k donations to each SPFL club which were anticipated to provide the necessary level of testing? Why were Kelty and Brora invited to take part in the Betfred Cup when they were neither part of the testing regime, nor beneficiaries of the £50k handouts? Why the different regulations for the "colt" teams?
The Premiership clubs that are complaining about having their players exposed to untested opponents are exactly the same Premiership clubs that are advocating the return of thousands of untested fans into their stadiums and risking the health of their own employees involved in various roles working on turnstiles, catering, cleaning and security.
It should be the Premiership clubs who should be forfeiting matches if they are unwilling to play against untested opponents. After all, the SFA, the JRG and the Scottish Government (subject to protocols being adhered to) have already sanctioned adult and youth matches involving untested players. The Premiership players will still benefit from their regular testing regimes following any matches.
easyJambo 18th September 2020 at 18:30
'.The SPFL at their usual reactive best with today's statement…'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
You make a number of telling points, eJ, anent the SPFL Board's decision.
And it is the Board's decision, with no hint that it came after consultation with the membership as a whole.
It surprises me that the membership, having previously knocked on the head the ( sensible, I think) suggestion that the Board should be given explicit powers to take action in urgent matters arising from the effects of the pandemic and measures required to deal with such effects, should be content to let today's 'decisions' pass without comment.
I'm sure the non- SPL clubs must have thoughts to express?
Big Pink 18th September 2020 at 11:17
'..with a new radio startup talking with us to provide football coverage.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
That does sound interesting. Can you tell us a little more?
John Clark 18th September 2020 at 21:50
easyJambo 18th September 2020 at 18:30
‘.The SPFL at their usual reactive best with today’s statement…’
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
You make a number of telling points, eJ, anent the SPFL Board’s decision.
===================================
As examples of the inconsistency a Hearts XI played East Fife (who fielded a different XI in each half) tonight and another XI will play Spartans tomorrow. Hearts operates within the testing bubble, but I’d be surprised if both East Fife and Spartans will have tested their squads in advance of the games.
fitbawfan 18th September 2020 at 14:52
'…I’m sure the SMSM and wee Nicola will be all over this anti-social distancing procedure.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Oh, I think maybe it'll feature in 'Off the Ball' tomorrow!
I'm sure Cosgrove will make some remark to Tam about hoping that the Murrerwell directors aren't in the same 'bubble' as their coach and players!
Will Aberdeen ask for guarantees before turning out for Sunday's game?
If individual players can be ( rightly) hammered for breaching covid protocols, then perhaps company directors of football clubs should be pilloried as well.
And the UEFA delegate!
Over this last wee while, I have been having a look at the business pages of 'The Scotsman".
Why?
Well, I've noticed that the 'business ' reporters seem to do nothing but act as advertising agents for companies that send in 'news' about their latest acquisitions or deals ,or staff promotions business extensions and such like without any comment whatsoever. ( I conclude that the newspaper must be taking money from the companies on whom they report, and that the reporters credited with a byline are on a bloody good thing ,cutting and pasting with no journalistic element to their work whatsoever!)
Anyway, today my eye fell on a piece by a Perry Gourley ( above his byline is the Twitter address of McGill's Buses) reporting as follows " The former Watt Brothers department store in Glasgow city centre has been bought by businessmen brothers Sandy and James Easdale who are planning a £20M revamp of the site,"
The puff-piece carries on with a quote from Sandy "…we believe the building has great potential for hotel and residential use…" and further information about other development projects that the Easdales are involved in.
The other 'business' items (three by Emma Newlands, one by August Graham, and a second by Perry Gourley) are of the same stamp- free publicity without any kind of critical comment whatsoever.
No harm, of course, to any of the companies mentioned or to the 'reporters', but surely these pieces should carry the words "advertising feature" or 'advertorial' , rather than be passed off as 'journalism'?
Easyjambo
i have to disagree with that.
The inconsistencies coming from the Scottish Govt are getting rather alarming.
Pro sport was allowed to restart based on setting up protective bubbles and having a testing regime in place. Football were allowed to move to one weekly test until the incidents with Aberdeen players and Boli.
if they are being asked to comply with that regime then it’s reasonable to protect the “bubble” otherwise why have it?
The changes to other levels of sport are nonsensical. We can’t meet more than 6 people from 2 households but organised sports can train and do contact training with up to 20 players in groups of 5. So either it’s all testing or no testing
my prediction – the mood music on further lockdown restrictions will see the end of contact training for non tested sports teams
John Clark 19th September 2020 at 13:18
Over this last wee while, I have been having a look at the business pages of 'The Scotsman". Why?…
======
Yes JC, it's become very noticeable recently that newspapers are ditching journalism in favour of copying/pasting press releases – in general – along with property schedules, opening of new pubs, new 'hot products', etc.
During the stabbing/shooting incident in Glasgow city centre a few months ago, it was pretty obvious that The GT had no reporters on the ground – down the road from their offices!
Their "Live" coverage was simply lifting Tweets from the public and Police Scotland.
I've noticed that The GT has simply not even mentioned some incidents locally, such as shootings.
Seems that the journalists have been replaced with copy/pasters – who are perhaps unable to add comment?
It just makes the SMSM online content worthless: why would anyone pay a monthly subscription to read adverts posing as "News"?
Apropos of nothing in particular, Michael Stewart is part of the Celtic TV pundit team.
It was refreshing to listen to him today, one normally expects the pundits on teams own channels to be very one sided. However when they were discussing the Livingston penalty he explained why he considered it a good decision. When they went on to discuss Celtic having a penalty claim rejected by the referee a few moments earlier he explained why that was a good decision as well.
Just him doing what he does and calling things the way he sees them I suppose, nice to see (hear) though.
John Clark 19th September 2020 at 13:18
…………..
Nothing to add, but when i have the time i will do the same
As a matter of minor irritation to me, I note that the following cases are still subject to reporting restrictions:
Charles Green v Rangers International Football Club Plc, Court of Session, Edinburgh, 12 November 2015
HMA v Craig Thomas Whyte, Gary Martyn Withey, David Henry Grier, David John Whitehouse, Paul John Clark , Charles Alexander Green and Sheik Imran Ahmad known as Imran Ahmad, High Court of Justiciary, Edinburgh, 16 October 2015
HMA for restraint order re Craig Whyte, Court of Session, Edinburgh, 11 September 2015
The Rangers FC Group Ltd re Adjudication of Claim, Court of Session, Edinburgh, 15 March 2016
Of these, I attended hearings related to two of them.
In particular, I attended the first day of the Indictment hearing in the case of the 'conspiracy' charges involving Whitehouse and Clark, in the High Court in Edinburgh ( before it was transferred to Glasgow).( I think that eJ was also present, but wouldn't swear to that.)
This evening, while looking for something else, I came across the wee notebook in which I took notes of that hearing before the restriction was imposed.
I can scarcely believe that the 5th anniversary of that indictment hearing is coming up soon!
My notes contain nothing startling or revelatory: but I think I can say that it was then that the feeling grew in me that the prosecution was not going to be handled well.
(Frankly, it was, in my humble, layman's opinion, fkuced-up right from the off, as I think I have previously opined.)
And I don't think I am in breach of restrictions if I mention that the question of whether there ought [ given the extensive use even in 2015 of social media communications] to be 'restrictions on reporting' in cases which any member of the public might at will wander into Court to hear.
Quite unconnectedly, and for anyone interested in the matter of police standards and police discipline, I found this judgment , published on 16 September, of great interest:
SECOND DIVISION, INNER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION [2020] CSIH 61 P105/18 Lord Justice Clerk Lord Menzies Lord Malcolm OPINION OF LADY DORRIAN,
In particular, I liked Lord Malcolm's view wee analogy ( in his concurrence with Lady Dorrian's decision)
( I am a fan of Lord Malcolm's style, as I may have mentioned before. Utterly genial, tolerant, unfussy, unruffled, but can slide in the wee killer put-down as he smiles.)
Not altogether off topic on SFM, perhaps.
"Andy Halliday in surprise Rangers red card verdict as Michael Stewart silenced on Sportscene
Gabriel McKay 2 hrs ago"
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
What would you make of that as 'journalism'?
There is 'truth:' of a sort: Stewart did not get to speak, but that was because of time restrictions ( and possibly stage-managed-we know what the BBC is like)
But the deliberate, evil (in my opinion) use of the word 'silenced' with the connotations that that word has, shows to my mind a malevolent hope of stirring up controversy, by a newspaper dying on its feet. (May it die a quick death)
The angelically named 'journalist' might more fitly have been named after a quite different angel-Lucifer!
And we know what he was like!
Honest to God! What we have to put up with with the likes of the DR!
Anent my post at 22.58, I've looked on 'Scotlandspeople', and the only birth registrations of persons named 'Gabriel McKay' are three in number:
one in 1954 (charles gabriel) (who will now, I hope, be happily living as a young 66/67 year old)
one in 1989 (fergus gabriel) (now aged 30/31)
and one in 2018 (Rafe Gabriel)!( who I hope is a happy wee 2-year old boy)
[Of course the Gabriel McKay of the DR might have been born in any part of the world]
Is Fergus Gabriel the guy who used the word 'silenced'?
Shame on him, if so.
The SMSM today has returned to the 'story' that Lille are interested in Morelos – this time with an alleged £18M bid.
As per: no quotes from Lille or French sources.
The quote is from a Colombian individual on a website I've never heard about.
Any prospective sale – to any club for whatever amount – is presumably too late now to appear as a Post Balance Sheet Event Note to the Accounts, due out next month.
So, I'm guessing Morelos – and his agent – have now come to some agreement with TRFC?
He looks fitter, seems to be training better – and back in the starting line up, and scoring goals.
…another payrise?
Shirley, the bears are also laughing at the SMSM coverage of the 'Morelos transfer rumours' ?
StevieBC 21st September 2020 at 12:41
'..As per: no quotes from Lille or French sources.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
And what about this crap?
from Joel Sked in today's 'The Scotsman'
"Rangers have received a new €20million offer for Alfredo Morelos from Lille.
The Colombian was on the score sheet for the Ibrox side in their 2-2 draw with Hibs at Easter Road on Sunday, following a double against Lincoln Red Imps on Thursday in the Europa League
It appeared interest from the French side had waned after they had recruited Jonathan David from Gent for a reported €30million.
Yet, according to reports in Colombia, the Ligue 1 side have reignited their interest in Morelos"
-an absolute statement of fact ,followed by 'according to reports in Colombia'.
Journalism of that kind is Trumpian in its intention to deceive, and the people who practice it are doing a great disservice.
May they soon be unemployed.
There have been reports of a new Alfredo Morelos bid. Picture: SNS
Lille are not the only side keen in the 24-year-old with West Brom and Serie A’s Fiorentina monitoring the situation.
“Andy Halliday
Is this the new go to guy? All those videos put out over the summer are paying off then?
And to crown everything here is a quote from English: on Sportsound a few minutes ago:
"as a journalist I crave honesty"
Has he ever mentioned the fact that RFC of 1872are in Liquidation and that TRFC cannor possibly be that club.
I thought not.
Mike Ashley has been a person of interest on the SFM blog because of his connection with TRFC as being a shareholder of RIFC plc until June 2017: and, of course, as the owner of SDI.
It's a quiet night, so I was trawling through BAILLII for fun
https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2017/1553.html&query=(sdi)
and came across a case , totally unconnected with football, in which Ashley was involved.
I give you this;
"The trial of the action is due to begin in a week's time on 3 July 2017. The claim brought by Mr Blue is based on an oral agreement allegedly made between himself and Mr Ashley on 24 January 2013 in relation to the share price of Sports Direct International Plc ("
SDI"),
a company in which Mr Ashley owns and controls the majority of the shares.
The agreement allegedly made was that, if Mr Blue deployed his experience, skill and contacts in corporate finance to get
SDI's
share price above £8 per share before 24 January 2016, Mr Ashley would pay Mr Blue £15 million.
Mr Blue contends that the condition was fulfilled and the money is therefore payable.
Mr Ashley denies that any agreement was made. He also says that it was necessarily implicit in any oral agreement of the type alleged that the share price of
SDI
would need to rise to £8 by reason of Mr Blue's actions in order for the contractual sum to become payable and that Mr Blue cannot show that his actions were the effective cause of the rise in the share price'
—
So I look up 'Mr Blue' (Jeffrey Ross Blue) on Companies House.
And, God forgive me, and not in any way making any equation with Mr Blue, I was put in mind of the pin-striped-suited Del Boy type who got a couple of grand from CW to help with his rent.
Being of labouring class origins, I was, and still largely am, ignorant of the world of finance.
Worse than that, I tended to believe that these guys up there in the 'financial' market, speaking glibly about 'investment' were honest and knowledgeable .
I cannot now believe my own naivety and gullibility!
Think back. The MBMB? The bottomless pockets of SDM? The multimillion pound players happy to accept wages hardly commensurate with their value?
What an utterly deceitful world that Scottish Football is.
With the SMSM a large part of that deceit.
John Clark 21st September 2020 at 18:35
And to crown everything here is a quote from English: on Sportsound a few minutes ago:
"as a journalist I crave honesty" …
=========
English certainly has a high/delusional opinion of himself!
"as an ex-BBC licence payer I expected honesty"
Hence, I no longer pay the TV tax: I had gradually stopped watching BBC and BBC News years ago, due to its declining content quality and questionable news coverage.
And regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Assange and his Wikileaks motivations: his extradition hearing to the USA is currently in its 3rd week.
For – obvious – public interest reasons, the hearing should be widely reported across ALL the BBC News platforms – but it is not.
Being, erm, pessimistically optimistic,
it might not be all bad if the extended covid restrictions takes a heavy toll on Scottish Senior football?
Hampden has a bl00dy cheek seeking a taxpayers' bailout.
I don't want another penny of OUR money to go to Hampden – or to the 42 clubs.
Mibbees this is the external pressure which forces change – and improvement – to the game and its governance?
IMO, there will always be a demand in Scotland for professional football.
Breaking up the game and starting again might be extremely painful in the short-term but significantly beneficial in the long run?
If it also means that – for a period of time – we don't have club representation in Europe or even have a national team, then so what?
An opportunity to finally address the domestic game: the corruption, incompetence, lack of transparency, lack of accountability, lack of trust, lack of fans' involvement, etc. in OUR game.
An opportunity to redress the influence of TV companies?
'Creative destruction' might be the solution to the festering problems since 2012 and before?
John Clark 22nd September 2020 at 00:02
“The trial of the action is due to begin in a week’s time on 3 July 2017.
……………..
By a strange coincidence JC i was reading about that myself.
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1308750144872083457/photo/1
The reason being Ashley was in the News less than 2 weeks after king had renegotiated a retail deal with Ashley that cost the club £3mill that no one knew about until a later date.
Also smack bang in the middle of the ibrox club under the management of pedro getting knocked out of europe by part timer Progres Niederkorn from Luxembourg. remember Pedro in the hedge?
Looking back the other day it was all the negative headlines about Ashley that caught my eye. Good way of distracting from a retail deal with very little detail and the club being knocked out of europe.
…………….
A deal done in a pub.
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1307765033527644160/photo/1
Que passa?
Aurellio Zen 25th September 2020 at 14:54
'..Que passa?'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Seemingly, not a lot.
And no change in the SMSM, which continues to help foster and spread aa huge sporting fiction!
Returning this morning from a 3-day break up north we pulled into Blair Atholl to have a bit of lunch. I bought a copy of today's 'Herald.'
I read with interest the report (on page 9) of the death of Harold Evans, one-time editor of 'The Sunday Times'.
The report includes observations such as " He was renowned for his promotion of investigative journalism:"
I wonder what he would have made of 'journalists'
like like Graeme McGarry who, on the back page of the Sport supplement of the same newspaper, has this:
" Rangers fans will point out that when their own club was in dire financial straits, thee wasn't exactly a queue of willing saviours ready to bail them out, or even circumvent the rule-book to allow them back [my emphasis] into the top division following their liquidation…."
What kind of person writes such nonsense, which flies in the face of actual sporting and commercial truth?
McGarry clearly does not know the meaning of 'liquidation' and appears not to have heard that the club at present claiming to be Rangers of 1872 did not exist prior to 2012 and is to be ranked as a 'sporting' cheat in claiming as its own the sporting merits of a now defunct sports club.
Harold Evans will be contemptuously turning in his grave.
And it's doubtful if McGarry's obituary however far in the future it may be will include tributes to his 'investigative journalism' whatever it may say about his skills as a propagandist.
StevieBC 23rd September 2020 at 18:11
'…'Creative destruction' might be the solution to the festering problems since 2012 and before?'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Well, StevieBC, we have to acknowledge that any 'creative destruction' caused by Covid-19 is caused by no fault of man, and that no one in the business of Football can fairly be held accountable for Covid-19!
We can't blame the SFA/SPFL for the virus ( and to be fair, I have to say that they seem to have made every effort to comply with government advice)
Whereas the destruction of any notion that Scottish Football is an honest sport is very much the fault of persons who were sports cheats( like drug-taking cyclists or crooked boxing impresarios), and other persons who were and are happy to abuse their office as the governance body of the Sport in order to accommodate those cheats!
If the effects of Covid-19 result in the removal of such persons from the sporting scene, then we will all be the better for it.
In the absence of deceitful administrators, perhaps whatever professional football may survive in Scotland will regain some integrity as a true and honest Sport!
Though I doubt that the SMSM will ever be looked upon as a source of reliable information in the matter of football reporting!( I refer to my earlier post at 18.21)
And it kind of follows that I doubt the veracity of whatever the SMSM may have to say about anything else.
The image that springs unbidden to the mind is the scene in 'The man who shot Liberty Valance' where the newspaper guy gets killed for printing the truth.
No way is any football journalist in the SMSM going to risk telling the truth that TRFC cannot possibly be RFC of 1872!
And that's a problem for the rest of us.
The bully-boy equivalents of Liberty Valance rule, and editors and 'journalists' cower and quake and to hell with truth!
And those editors and 'journalists' know, they know, that they are a disgrace to their profession.
John Clark 26th September 2020 at 00:17
No way is any football journalist in the SMSM going to risk telling the truth that TRFC cannot possibly be RFC of 1872!
…………..
One or two tried and had to then seek other employment
Things have come to a pretty pass when confirmed kibitzers like myself feel the need to contribute, even to give ourselves something to read!
Given the dearth of income which must be almost the sole preoccupation of Scottish football boards, there is little evidence of public crys of pain from individual teams.
If the SPFL or SFA have any plan (I know) to deal with what must be an existential emergency for almost every club they are staying very coy about it.
Aurellio Zen
I doubt that we'll see any more spectators in football grounds , even for test events , this side of the New Year , even if a vaccine miraculously appears . The January 2 anniversary of the second Ibrox disaster would be my target , if I was in authority , and even then , it would be dependent on there being no covid catastrophe throughout the festive season . And I reckon that the clubs must have had a nod and a wink from Nicola wrt finances , as they all seem pretty relaxed about the situation . We could also have the fun situation of the play-off v Israel going to extra time and penalties , and the pubs shutting at 22.00 – according to UEFA , kick off is at 19.45 .
The financial support of sport will be a fascinating process.
On what basis will support be given? Surely there needs to be a review of the financial position of the sports org?
The sports org must do everything available to minimise costs including salary reductions.
Do buying and selling players need to be factored in?
what happens if a sports orgs accounts are ahem not ready/still at the accountants?
All this and more will be revealed n the next episode of….
Personally not in favour of any financial assistance to any professional sport/entertainment at all. I view this as an opportunity for a long overdue 'correction' in a pastime that has become bloated,fatted and corrupted by television money and gambling (see latest reports on match fixing). I hear of footballers on wages of over £200000 a week in the EPL and am incredulous at the suggestion that taxes should somehow subsidise this? Lesser scale but same principle should apply to Scotland.If for instance Celtic* approach a high value player next season and due to continued corona virus affect ask that player to accept reduced terms then the player will be able to say no and as the contract is breached be entitled to look elsewhere for employment.Given that this is a pandemic I doubt very much clubs will be falling over each other to sign players on any terms next year if the situation continues in its current form.Celtic fc* and others are businesses they no longer answer to fans outwith their shareholding.When this is all over and please god it doesn't continue into next year, then a full reappraisal of what is important to us all as a community should be undertaken..of course vested interests will not allow that to happen.Current subsidy of the arts and culture is not an argument in favour of bailing out football. We are afforded a vote and are aware of a candidates views on such matters.
Just to add I was sad to see the loss of true supporter of football Colin Weir. This man was fortunate enough to win a huge sum of money and was entitled to do with it as he saw fit. Part of it was to support Partick Thistle fc academy and I believe Largs local football too.He and his wife contributed significant sums to charity and to see this described in some quarters as 'burning through' millions was typical smsm.
* There are other well kent clubs and Celtic is used for illustrative purposes only.
Perhaps as the crisis continues, and football finances get ever more desperate – the 'penny' might drop with the 42 clubs: there is a distinct lack of value for money from Hampden.
For example, both the unqualified SFA CEO and the thoroughly discredited SPFL CEO are reportedly on £300K+ salaries.
Incredibly expensive administrations which provide inadequate returns in terms of;
– undervalued TV deals
– lack of sponsors for national team / league / etc.
– historically declining national team: current FIFA ranking is 49, compared to the average position since ranking began in '92 of 41
– loss of tournament related revenues over the last 22 years
– lack of VAR
– lack of customer service
etc…
I’ve just caught up with the Dunfermline Athletic shareholding situation, with the German investment company DAFC Fussball Company Ltd taking a 30% shareholding , with the option to increase its shareholding to75.1% before the end of May 2022 , and with three directors of that investment company already on the Board of Dunfermline FC since 1st September.
If they end up with 75.1% by May 2004 the investment company will have the option to buy Pars United (EEP) Ltd ( which owns the football ground, East End Park)
I can’t believe that I missed the news of all that earlier in the month!
I note that the share capital of Dunfermline FC was increased by the allotment of 550 000 shares way back in December 2016 . Was that when the German company first got interested?
I’m curious about the ways of business, and decidedly ignorant thereof.
What does it all mean?
( I hope , though, that the sporting integrity shown by Dunfermline FC in battling hard to get out of Administration in order to remain in honourable existence as the very same club that was founded in 1921 will be rewarded by the success of new arrangements)
If for nothing else than to point up the shabby nonsense that allows a cuckoo club like TRFC to claim to be what it is not and a governance body, cowardly and grovellingly, to lie in endorsing that false claim, in the very antithesis of ‘sporting integrity’
gunnerb 27th September 2020 at 22:24
'..Celtic fc* and others are businesses they no longer answer to fans outwith their shareholding.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Ha ha, gunnerb, some, including me, would say that Celtic plc do not answer even to their 'shareholders resolutions'.
And may even go so far as to be deceitful , conspiratorial, when 'explaining' why they do not answer.
Did RFC of 1872 lie about their tax debt liabilities?
Did anyone in the SFA knowingly pass on that lie to UEFA, so that a UEFA competitions licence could be granted to allow a financially distressed club get a few million quid to which it was not entitled?
We do not know for sure.
We do know that the SFA shut down any investigation and we may never find out!
And that Celtic plc chose not to upset the other side of the arse of the 'Old Firm' , meekly accepting as they did the possibility that they had been bilked of several millions, and were perhaps letting a crime happen rather than have it exposed.
In those kind of circumstances who would care a fig if Scottish Football as a whole died as a result of the pandemic?
Really, to be spending money to support a sport that has at its very heart a readiness not to be concerned about truth in Sport would be a nonsense.
completely agree with your post Gunnerb
we have many more pressing issues in society to deal with than bail out pro sports clubs
Not wishing to pick on any club or group of supporters , but posting stuff like this online isn't helping to get fans back into stadia .
https://twitter.com/UnionBears_07/status/1310305183856054275/photo/4
I know that not everyone is as concerned as I am about the deceit of the SMSM , the SFA/SPFL and the BBC in the matter of the 'Big Lie' underpinning the attribution to a 12 year-old football club of the sporting triumphs and honours earned by a now dead 140 year-year-old club.
However, with apologies, but for the sake of my personal integrity, can I say that having received an unsatisfactory reply to my letter of 10 September to the BBC's new Director-General, I have sent the following response:
"FAO…..D….D..
BBC Complaints Team
BBC Audience Services
PO Box 1922
Darlington,
DL3 0UR
Dear D …D…
Ref CAS -6337313-M8R7L7
Thank you for replying, on his behalf, to my letter of 10 September 2020 to the new Director-General, Mr Davie.
I would much have preferred, of course, to see his signature over what you have written, with your reference to the (now mercifully defunct) BBC Trust's ridiculous nonsense as your justification.
The point I thought I had made clearly enough in my letter is not that the BBC refers to 'Rangers Football Club' but refers to it as if it were the Rangers Football Club of 1872 foundation, when as a matter of incontrovertible fact that club ceased to exist when it lost its membership of a football league and its membership of the Scottish FA in consequence of suffering the insolvency event of Liquidation
It was not brought out of Liquidation by the settlement of all its huge debt.
The Rangers FC of 1872 was not bought by new owners -it still languishes in Liquidation awaiting dissolution when the Liquidators have concluded their task.
The present Rangers FC was created in 2012, and could not possibly be entitled to claim to be the Rangers FC of 1872.
It is, quite simply, a lie to assert that it is, out of fear of giving offence to influential people in Scottish society (including people in Football governance)who put commercial and personal considerations above the very concept of Sporting Integrity.
It is a disgrace that the BBC not only refused and continues to refuse to challenge that lie, but actively propagates it by referring to the sporting successes of the liquidated club as if they could be attributed to the new club; and disciplines staff and pundits if they so much as mention that the present Rangers Football Club is a new club, and tries to defend that stance with the ridiculous fabrication that the old club did not lose its entitlement to participate in Scottish football but had merely changed hands, carrying on as before under new ownership.
The original Rangers FC club is dead , its sporting life ended.
It behoves the national broadcasting company to recognise that fact publicly and desist from propagating a ridiculous commercial and sporting untruth.
If the BBC can support untruth in a matter of Sport, what lies might it not support in much more serious matters of, for example, politics and national government?
Yours in some disappointment if not entirely with surprise,
me "
I listened in to the latest episode of the Whitehouse & Clark v the Lord Advocate proceedings this morning.
The main points from the hearing were as follows:
The Lord Advocate has admitted liability for the malicious prosecution and all events that followed the pair's detention. However, he has placed responsibility for the two arrests in November 2014 and September 2015 squarely on Police Scotland.
Whitehouse has agreed to drop his claim against the Lord Advocate in respect of his arrests, however, Clark, for the moment, is continuing to hold the Lord Advocate of at least being partly responsible for what he sees as wrongful arrest and detention. (I suspect that Clark will fall in line with Whitehouse, as it would expedite proceedings by elimination a proof (trial) in respect of that part of the claim).
All parties agreed that the compensation payable in respect of the arrests and detentions would be but a "flea bite" in comparison to the overall claim for loss of earnings, reputation etc..
It looks likely that the quantum of the award payable in respect of the Lord Advocate will be determined either in a proof hearing or by mediation.
Lord Tyre set out a timetable for future events and will schedule a "by order" hearing in late October or early November to track progress. There are various interim dates for the provision of witness statements etc.
The Police Scotland part of the claim remains as it was, with Whitehouse and Clark again complaining that PS was not cooperating as they should in terms of disclosure of documents (including Charlotte Fakes) and witness statements. Lord Tyre echoed that sentiment by saying that it was not acceptable for a public body such as PS to behave in that way.
Separately from this morning's hearing I noted that David Grier started a a claim against the Lord Advocate last week. Previously his claim was only against Police Scotland.
easyJambo 29th September 2020 at 13:16
"..I listened in to the latest episode of the Whitehouse & Clark v the Lord Advocate proceedings this morning.."
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Thanks,eJ, for news of that interesting sounding development.
"…It looks likely that the quantum of the award payable in respect of the Lord Advocate will be determined either in a proof hearing or by mediation…"
=======
eJ, would you know;
– if a proof hearing decided the quantum it would be public information
– if mediation decides the quantum it will not be made public?
I'd guess that the Crown Office and Police Scotland wouldn't want the taxpayers to know just how many millions of pounds they had wasted through their admitted incompetence and/or corruption.
StevieBC 29th September 2020 at 18:39
"…It looks likely that the quantum of the award payable in respect of the Lord Advocate will be determined either in a proof hearing or by mediation…"
=======
eJ, would you know;
– if a proof hearing decided the quantum it would be public information
– if mediation decides the quantum it will not be made public?
===========================
It may depend on how the "proof" is conducted. If it is a "proof before answer", then it would be likely be published as a judgement on the court website.
What I understood of a proof to determine the quantum , is that both sides will argue their case as to the financial impact that resulted from the malicious prosecution. Loss of earnings should be fairly easily quantified. Damage to reputation less so.
I don't know if the mediation process would be similar to the "arbitration" process that Heart and Partick went through. If it is, then the determination will only be published if all parties agree to it.
One other thing I took from today's hearing when discussing the case against Police Scotland. There were suggestions from their QC that what was being claimed by Whitehouse and Clark was actually criminal conduct by the police. I would expect, if that was indeed the case, then the case would have to be handled differently, e.g. there would be no requirement for the "accused" police officers to make any statements and it would be up to the prosecution (the Crown) to prove criminality with Whitehouse and Clark as the witnesses.
I think that, having gone this far, it will still be resolved as a civil matter, either in the CoS or at mediation, but it could end up with the can kicked down the road a bit further.
easyJambo 29th September 2020 at 13:16
………..
Thanks ej
As the site is quite at the moment a couple of items caught my eye today, first up
https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/18754722.chase-celtic-fans-outraged-rangers-relegation-question/?fbclid=IwAR1QHV4_OHc2Scv_8A95ZriKDXuNNz43ZSXb9vYvZP0vOUaNbooVn22X7PA
link to the Glasgow Times
But even they state the “Rangers were liquidated then relegated 3 divisions” I think not – they were expelled and had to reapply
Also presented as a Celtic vs Rangers issue which it clearly is not !
2nd up
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54345231
So a Faroe team is only 90 mins away from Champion League group stages !!
Albeit they have a good draw, Dundalk, to qualify, they beat a couple of decent teams (one 6-1 !) to get there
Just shows how far the standard of Scottish football has dropped behind everyone else
easyJambo 29th September 2020 at 20:38
"…One other thing I took from today's hearing when discussing the case against Police Scotland. There were suggestions from their QC[my italics] that what was being claimed by Whitehouse and Clark was actually criminal conduct by the police. ,"
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Interesting to see that 'The Scotsman' reports [under Amy Watson's by-line]
"..Mr Clark's lawyer said three witness requests for pre-cognition – pre-proof interviews- of police officers have been returned [unanswered]. One refusal came from a retired chief inspector 'not from his personal address' .."he has not been found". Another letter was returned with 'No trace at Gartcosh" written on the envelope" [Gartcosh is the location of the Scottish Crime Campus]
"Alistair Duncan QC for Police Scotland said 'there there is no instructions not to cooperate but, as your Lordship is aware, serious allegations have been made against individual officers'"
Lord Tyre said:" To my mind … the fact the allegations are serious is not an excuse. They should be in a position to tell their side of the story"
Mr Duncan added: "They're prepared to do that and witness statements will be lodged…but on at least two occasions criminality has been alleged against officers"
Lord Tyre said officers have the usual rights in regards to criminal allegations "
Will we ever, ever get to a full knowledge of the entire 'Rangers' saga' ?
It's brought embarrassment to the Police and the COPFS, made liars of many journalists and sports editors, corrupted the BBC…..and destroyed any notion that our football is clean and governed honestly.
It gars me greet.
Menace 30th September 2020 at 12:00
‘.link to the Glasgow Times
‘But even they state the “Rangers were liquidated then relegated 3 divisions” I think not – they were expelled and had to reapply.’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Careful, Menace, do not give any comfort to the new club by even remotely suggesting that they are the same Rangers as was Liquidated!
Rangers of 1872 were not expelled. They ceased to exist and were not around to ‘re-apply’.
SevsoScotland /TRFC as a newly created football club had to apply for the first time for membership of a league. Only on foot of being admitted into a league (the bottom division) were they then able to become a member of the SFA.
Whatever about the 'Glasgow Times', it's training young Hamish Morrison in its deceitful ways
"The answer provided by the show was Rangers FC, which was liquidated and relegated following a crisis in the club's finances. "
Liquidated but able to be relegated?
The boy's never going to be a Bernstein or Woodward if he is ready to write that kind of untrue nonsense, but he'll no doubt fit in well with his fellow-hacks.
But at least he won't be disciplined as an equivalent trainee in BBC Radio Scotland would undoubtedly be disciplined for even mentioning the subject.
You will all wish to join me in offering our condolences to Big Pink whose mother in law has passed away after a recent illness.
Thoughts are with him and his family as they endure a second elderly bereavement, his own mum having passed away earlier this year.
Menace 30th September 2020 at 12:00
On the triple relegation question posed on The Chase:
As all genuine football supporters know "relegation" in football is a specific term applied when a club, after a season finishes, ends up in a bottom position which sees them start next season in the division below. This clearly did not happen in 2012 so The Chase question is wrongly phrased.
The reason a club finishing in 2nd top spot in the top division found themselves with a new name and company number was that club in 2nd spot could no longer operate as a football club because of unpaid debts to HMRC that funded the players that helped get the club second place.
They were liquidated because they could not operate as a going concern with that level of debt owed. The judgement of HMRC was that best chance of recovering some of that debt was to sell the assets. It was also the only way other Scottish clubs could recover what they were owed. Sevco bought the assets (Ibrox etc)that enabled Sevco to operate a football club but in commercial terms Rangers were sold off to meet their debts in a process called liquidation.
Nor where Rangers demoted. There was no viable commercial entity to demote.
Finally UEFA did not recognise Sevco as a full member of the SFA with more than 3 years continuous membership of the SFA, a requirement to get a UEFA licence for CL/EL competition under Article 12 of UEFA FFP. That requirement was finally met in 2016 when 3 years had passed. I have no dog in the same club fight, but have a dog in setting out the rules that applied commercially and in football in 2012.
The genesis of the same club issue can be found in the secret 5 Way Agreement that Celtic accepted. Yet are “Rangers” fans grateful? They should be.
If proof were needed that our 'professional' game is a shambles we now have different rules for the numbers of subs allowed in different divisions, competitions and at different times of the season.
https://spfl.co.uk/news/press-release-use-of-five-subs
wottpi 30th September 2020 at 18:35
…. and the Lowland League comes up with a pragmatic solution for financially distressed clubs
Raman Bhardwaj@ramanbhardwajTV
We’re told Lowland League to start as planned on October 10. But, due to pandemic, clubs can decide to withdraw from playing before season kicks-off and in December (eg if still no fans) without any penalty. Champions Kelty to go again in LL after play-offs were scrubbed
wottpi 30th September 2020 at 18:35
‘..If proof were needed that our ‘professional’ game is a shambles ..’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””
One of the earliest football matches I was taken to was the Raith Rovers v Celtic semi-final at Hampden Park in the St Mungo Cup in1951.That was the first match I remember seeing where an outfield player had to put on the goalie’s jersey when the ‘keeper was stretchered off due to injury. No subs allowed
And in all my school and college football-playing days (and school game refereeing days -I shared a refereeing stint with Archie Macpherson in the early ’60s!) the idea of substitution of injured players seemed to be a no-no.
I followed the link you provided, wottpi, with some interest [ the ‘Americanisation’ of football into American football has always been a nightmare prospect as far as I am concerned !]
I followed up with an exploratory attempt to look at the history of football substitution. So far, I’ve found this little piece, which has (for me anyway) some surprising info, and is making me re-think my general position.
There is no ‘sport’ when a team is depleted by loss even of one player by injury, never mind two or three. So substitution for (genuine) injury seems fair.
But substitution for tactical reasons?
Have a wee read at this as a starting point:
https://www.football-stadiums.co.uk/articles/substitutions-in-football/
There must be ‘official’ IAFB, FIFA and UEFA treatises about the matter. It would be interesting to see whether the push for more ‘substitutions’ comes from the perspective of ‘Sporting Integrity’ [the game as an athletic skills challenge]or from a ‘commercial perspective’-the need to be financially successful and bugger the ‘sport’>
I’m a little bit conflicted, I have to say.
During an idle half hour(!) today, I was looking at the extent of the Australian wine industry ( having in recent years been able to visit a couple of vineyards in South Queensland) and discovered that there is such a thing as Wine Australia , and a GIC [Geographical Indications Committte] set up under the Wine Australia Act 2013.
Heaven knows how it came about, but I found myself away off on an absolutely unrelated tangent, because GIC is also the initials of a fund manager for the Government of Singapore!
And in some extraordinary way, I was into ESR ( the company that Stuart Gibson is co-executive director of ) having somehow got into ‘Mingtiandi’ (an Asian (Chinese business paper) to see this :
“GIC now committing A$480 million ($337 million) to a logistics development partnership in Australia, according to a stock exchange announcement on 24 September.
“The $453 billion sovereign fund will be upping its stake in the ESR Australia Logistics Partnership (EALP) to 80 percent with the news coming less than three months after it closed on an initial commitment to take a 45 percent slice of the core-plus platform. Hong Kong-listed ESR will retain a 20 percent stake in the vehicle, according to the company statement.”
This led me on into further non football related stuff, just out of interest in that whole world of high business, Cayman Island registered companies, Hong Kong stock exchange and Peoples Republic of China controls and the Singaporean Stock Exchange, and reflecting on the ‘Panama papers’ true journalism in relation to the World Cup and other western business .
And, oh what fun!- except that I have no idea how to interpret company accounts!( and absolutely not implying that ESR Cayman Ltd is other than an honest company)- I read the Annual Report 2019 of ESR.
And at Para 8 there is this:
8. DIRECTORS’ AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REMUNERATION (continued)
which shows that Stuart Gibson was paid US $ 567,000.
https://files.services/files/431/2020/0429/20200429061501_84090226_en.pdf
As co-founder of the company that merged into ESR, of course, Gibson will have a substantial share holding in ESR as well as receiving a ‘remuneration’ as co-chief exec. The shares today were at Hong Kong dollars 24.05 (about £2.40)
Redwood Investment Co Ltd ( which Gibson was co-founder of) has a 12.8% share ( 389,934,285 shares)
I haven’t bothered to try to find out how many shares in Redmond Investment Co Gibson personally has.
(Cayman islands registered and such)
If nothing else, being on this blog has wonderfully expanded my mind.
And causes me to wonder why the hell guys like King of Castlemilk, and Whyte of Motherwell, and CG of wherever in Yorkshire, and the pin-striped suited borrower of 2 grand from Whyte, know about ‘business” in a way that a Parkhead, Glasgow tyke like me has absolutely no real understanding of.
Fascinating.
John Clark 30th September 2020 at 13:56
Rangers of 1872 were not expelled. They ceased to exist and were not around to ‘re-apply’.
========================================
I don't think they did cease to exist, the liquidation process is ongoing, so they still exist.
However they ceased to have any assets as those were sold off.
Thanks for the messages of support folks. Been a crappy time recently, but give me a few days and I'll get back in the saddle.
Very interesting stuff right now on the D&P prosecutions. Not sure they will be able to keep a lid on this. I'm sure the cover up is being prepared, but there are a lot of establishment interests at considerable divergence here.
May yet be the first thread that unravels the whole thing. We can but hope.
Homunculus 1st October 2020 at 17:41
'.I don't think they did cease to exist, the liquidation process is ongoing,'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Yes, Homunculus, you're absolutely correct and I should always remind myself to write 'they ceased to exist as a football club entitled to participate in Scottish professional Football' or some such, as I usually do!
More CoS business next week:
Rolls of Court of Session
LORD TYRE – T Sadler, Clerk
Tuesday 7th October
Starred Motion
Between 9.30am and 10.00am
CA86/19 David Grier v Philip Gormley
More CoS business next week:
Rolls of Court of Session
LORD TYRE – T Sadler, Clerk
Tuesday 7th October
Starred Motion
Between 9.30am and 10.00am
CA86/19 David Grier v Philip Gormley
My apologies for the duplicated copy and paste effort at 19.28 above!
And this very minute I've been texting my son in Oz about the 24 penalties in the AC Milan game!
That must be a world record!
As a reminder that the shameful goings on in 2012 are still very relevant today – and will probably hang over the game for decades to come…
we have The SFA President, Rod Petrie – the architect of the secretive, 5 Way Agreement,
asking the government to allow fans back into stadiums.
The very same fans he studiously ignored and treated with utter contempt back in 2012.
Petrie speaking on behalf of the Scottish game is offensive, IMO, and just confirms the game has neither learned anything nor “moved on” at all over the last 8 years.
At the Europa League draw earlier the UEFA official commentating mentioned that Rangers were finalists in 2008! Has he not heard what happened to that club? Mind you, he did have the decency to cough after he said it!