Good Try Mr. McKenzie

Avatar ByGuest Blogger

Good Try Mr. McKenzie

Guest Blog by Shyster and Shyster

Anyone hoping for some “on the record comments” made under oath in the Kinloch v Coral case is Court last week would have been sorely disappointed.

Like many people I followed James Doleman’s tweets from Court with interest. However, it became clear very early on in the proceedings that there was to be no seminal moment in the OCNC debate – despite the obvious defence available to Coral which would have made it so.

A tweet from Mr Doleman (see below) makes it clear that Coral sent a letter to Mr Kinloch explaining the reason why they would not pay out on his bet.

The reason, in a a sentence was that “Rangers were demoted, not relegated”.

Here is that Tweet from Mr Doleman.

I assume then, that an employee of Coral communicated this letter to Mr Kinloch without getting it “legalled” first.

That is extraordinary for a number of reasons; firstly, it is factually incorrect, and secondly it can be argued that this position leaves Coral open to exposure in other areas.

I find it difficult to imagine how this letter left Coral without the approval of their legal people, especially given that £250K plus legal costs was at stake.

If I was in Kinloch’s position, I would on the phone to the nearest no-win-no-fee lawyer I could find, because in the light of their explanation for refusing to settle the bet, and using terminology that Coral would understand, he is better than evens to win the case.

I think it would be fair to conclude this employee may be facing disciplinary action, and that this action will turn up as a case study in the training manuals sitting on shelves in every bookmaker shop in the country.

However just because the OCNC debate sat on the bench last week it doesn’t mean there wasn’t something juicy on show.  The SPL’s legal representative, Rod McKenzie – a defence witness in the case –   made some very interesting comments in his evidence.

Before I go into his comments further I would like to address some unfair criticism aimed at Mr McKenzie.  As most of us know, he is the lawyer who helped create in elusive 5 Way Agreement.

Nothing has blurred the lines of the OCNC debate more than this document, and Mr McKenzie himself is most likely to have authored the 5 Way Agreement, and provided a rationale for his client, the SPL signing up to it. But the SPL would have outlined what they wanted in the Agreement, so any anger directed at McKenzie is misdirected.  He was, quite rightly, looking after the interests of his client.  It is not his fault that his client is an idiot.

Notwithstanding this, Mr McKenzie said – or rather didn’t say – some very interesting things.

  • He told us that the 5 Way Agreement contains (what appears to be) nuclear grade confidentiality clauses.
  • He couldn’t – or wouldn’t provide a definition of Relegation.

The man who wrote the rules for the SPL says he cannot define relegation.  Well he can, but he chooses not to.

Conclusion? I can only infer that there is something in the 5 Way Agreement that precludes him from saying more.

I have seen (online) what are alleged to be draft versions of the 5 Way Agreement. In Football term though, and despite of existing Corporate Law,  the OCNC debate cannot be fully settled until the actual and final terms of this agreement are known.

If only there was a way to see that document.

About the author

Avatar

Guest Blogger author

Guest Bloggers are drawn from SFM members and beyond. The opinions in Guest Blogs are not necessarily shared or endorsed by SFM. If you would like to submit a guest blog to SFM, let us know.

358 Comments so far

Avatar

bfbpuzzledPosted on1:04 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Large defeats are one thing but the 25 pass ole type passages of play and numerous back heels and similar are another type of thing entirely. Perhaps contempt is the wrong word but there was certainly an element of the dismissive in the Hearts performance after the fourth goal.
One of the greatest joys of teaching at any level is the sight of someone suddenly seeing something as the proverbial penny drops. There might have been some of that in Hearts yesterday evening. Similarly there might have been the opposite effect among the TRFC old timers -shark jumping perhaps.
I had a great day out a few years ago at a Scottish Cup tie when Hibs led by a less than svelte Finnish fellow beat the bully wee 6-1. Perhaps that is the sign of true diddiness when such days are part and parcel of the thing. I enjoyed a beating of Falkirk by the same score more right enough.

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on1:08 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Euro campaign pay-outs

https://stv.tv/sport/football/1379700-scottish-clubs-share-1-75m-in-euro-2016-player-payouts/?utm_content=buffercb70b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/liverpool-tottenham-make-3million-uefa-9743769 

Farsley Celtic done well eh….Other clubs, not quite so well. 

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on3:05 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Saw the goals and some highlights from last night.
[Fair play: the SPFL highlights package of league games appears on YouTube promptly after games, and are good quality.]

The TRFC scorer took his goal very well, and looks a player.
Was very pleased for the Jam Tarts and Cathro in particular for an uplifting display.
Mibbees this will put the SMSM sports ‘journalists’ back in their box, even if only temporarily.

And that’s the beauty of sport: nothing is guaranteed, and a team playing as a team should always do OK.

[And looks like social media/the SMSM are now implying that Warburton’s TRFC stint could soon be ‘pan breid’ ? 09 ]

View Comment

Avatar

bfbpuzzledPosted on3:30 pm - Feb 2, 2017


corrupt official
Careful now, Farsley AFC official website describes that club as emerging from the embers of administration of Farsley Celtic and acknowledges that it is a new club- of course that could not posibly be any kind of precedent since the old club included the word Celtic in its name-they were not the people.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on4:11 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Big Pink and I during one of our “putting the world to rights” conversations spoke of the impact playing at Ibrox facing a team in light blue jerseys has on the physche of other players.
Having watched a deplorable display last weekend by Motherwell I did think that Ibrox presence had to be a factor.
Then I watched Hearts give a not very impressive show  v Celtic and could not have predicted the outcome and  performance leading to it last night.
Mind you falling asleep at the wheel defending by TRFC  helped in that goals help confidence.
Celtic were as comfortable v Aberdeen  as they were Hearts but Dons defended better for longer.
However Hearts last night might just have put a dent in the TRFC mystique and bolstered their own confidence, making the run in very interesting.

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on6:55 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Amazing how much coverage and analysis a Rangers defeat gets on here. Rarely if ever mentioned when they win well. Not the first team to be well beaten away from home against a rival and won’t be the last. Perhaps a little perspective, that thing that the SMS are always being chided for not showing when it comes to Rangers. 

View Comment

tony

tonyPosted on7:00 pm - Feb 2, 2017


RYANGOSLING
why havent you been on when say motherwell or thistle have been well beat(no pun)you might not agree but rangers(il) and the sfa/spl are why we are here in the first place.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on7:17 pm - Feb 2, 2017


RYANGOSLING
FEBRUARY 2, 2017 at 18:55 
Amazing how much coverage and analysis a Rangers defeat gets on here…
=======================================================

In the interests of accuracy RG: we never discuss Rangers defeats on here.

In fact, we rarely even discuss Rangers at all these days.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on7:19 pm - Feb 2, 2017


RYANGOSLING
FEBRUARY 2, 2017 at 18:55
=======================================

Or people were discussing a good home win by Hearts, for a young manager who has been struggling since he came in. Someone suggested the team were perhaps guilty of a bit of showboating which might be considered disrespectful to the other team. 

It’s not all about Rangers you know. In spite of what the support think. 

Discussing games isn’t for me, but if the mods have no issue with it I don’t see the problem.

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on7:26 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Homunculus that may ring true if it weren’t for the fact that the majority of the posts since last night have largely been about Rangers. The first five referencing the game in fact were all focussed on a Rangers defeat rather than a Hearts win. 

Tony I haven’t been on when other teams have been well beaten because gloating over other teams’ defeats is not really in line with what I thought was the purpose of this blog. 

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on7:29 pm - Feb 2, 2017


StevieBC if you are refusing to use Rangers as the term for the “current” Rangers then you are factually incorrect; defeats by the “old Rangers” are discussed frequently, usually in the context of accelerating the demise of the club. And in fact, seldom a day goes by when “old” Rangers are not discussed at length so I have to say you are wrong on both counts.

View Comment

tony

tonyPosted on7:51 pm - Feb 2, 2017


RYANGOSLING
nobody said come on to gloat,if,say thistle got beat 10-0 if that is not a talking on point on a site called scottish football monitor then i don’t know what is

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on7:57 pm - Feb 2, 2017


RYANGOSLING
FEBRUARY 2, 2017 at 19:26   The first five referencing the game in fact were all focussed on a Rangers defeat rather than a Hearts win. 
==================================================

It’s the same thing.

If it would make you happier people describing it as Hearts beating Rangers, rather than Rangers losing to Hearts I’m quite sure the people who want to discuss these things will oblige. 

I’ve never met anyone upset by syntax, another new experience on the internet. 

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:13 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Ok i will mention the game last night.
It has taken a defeat.A big defeat by hearts a team that celtic beat without a striker, for fans to start asking what happened to the millions Mr king promised.
Or was it the reminder from Mr sutton when he said live on tv were is the millions Mr king promised.Was it this stark reminder and a heavy defeat that has sent fans over the edge and begin to ask questions?

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:24 pm - Feb 2, 2017


To late to edit.
Did the penny drop for fans when MW  said We’ve just lost 4-1. We’re Rangers* Football Club, we don’t lose 4-1. 
Many fans may have started to ask then if that’s true why are we losing 4-1?

View Comment

Avatar

ChristyboyPosted on9:19 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Oops, I’ve lost me video post. Ah well…..

A wee bit naughty CB!
BP

View Comment

Avatar

bordersdonPosted on9:41 pm - Feb 2, 2017


I think RG is correct.
This is predominantly a Celtic site obsessed with the “downfall” of the new club! I have ,I think, consistently said that if NEW RANGERS can admit to being just that I will welcome them. They will be a bigger and ultimately, because of resources, a better team than mine but that is the inevitability of Scottish football (monopoly or duopoly). As long as busses/trains leave towns like Aberdeen, Dundee, Perth even bloody Inverness every week to support (for reasons I will leave each to think about) we will always be in this position. Redistribution of cash would help though? Thoughts!
BP I will send a wee donation because I look in every day and feel I should but I fear the site is dying.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on10:00 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Bordersdon,

The site won’t die if good posters like you keep posting. 04

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on10:06 pm - Feb 2, 2017


BTW, I love a lot of other clubs in Scotland.  Aberdeen, Dundee Utd., St. J. Hibs, we have better football than we are credited for.  And Shotts Bon Accord. 03 

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on10:07 pm - Feb 2, 2017


BORDERSDON
FEBRUARY 2, 2017 at 21:41
=====================================

I genuinely don’t think I have ever been “obsessed” with anything in my life. If I have it certainly wasn’t a football club I don’t even support.

To be fair I was told I was “paranoid” for years as well. Turned out I wasn’t that either.

I have always found the use of emotive words and hyperbole interesting. I believe they are one of the staples of propagandists.

The {insert group here} are guilty of {insert specious claim here}, say it often enough and it becomes conventional wisdom. 

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on10:10 pm - Feb 2, 2017


OOPs, and Hearts now and again!  I used to work in Edinburgh they are by and large lovely fellows and ladies.

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on10:17 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Bordersdon,

Ryan may well have a point, but you appear to be accepting the MSM myth that only Celtic fans have a gripe with Rangers. I think you ought to know that is simply not true.

Numerically you are correct in as much as Celtic fans make up about 45% of the readership of the site, but sticking a Celtic badge where there isn’t one is exactly what the MSM have been trying to do for years in their efforts to belittle reporting of the truth.

I have no doubt that SFM will eventually steam into the sunset, but if the enthusiasm and determination of people who subscribe to the site is anything to go by, it won’t be any time soon.

Our recent appeal for £1500 is only £150 or so shy of that target after a short three weeks. Last year we were barely halfway to our target by then.

Rumours of our death therefore, are greatly exaggerated.

Anyhow, even if the numbers trail off with the passing of time, we will simply reduce costs by cutting moderation, closing the office, transferring to a free server with a lighter bandwidth, and cutting the podcasts.

The message will still get out there though, delivered through the uniquely cross-partisan & respectful platform which will still be available to you and others to have your voice heard.

SFM isn’t going anywhere.

 

View Comment

Avatar

BigGavPosted on10:34 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Cluster One
February 2, 2017 at 20:24
—–

Impeccable logic, Cluster One.

– “Rangers Football Club don’t lose 4-1”
– “We have just lost 4-1”

It therefore follows:
– “We are not Rangers Football Club”

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on10:51 pm - Feb 2, 2017


BIGGAVFEBRUARY 2, 2017 at 22:3404

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on10:53 pm - Feb 2, 2017


Would it be OK if I were to say a big well done to the Hibs fans with regards supporting their team.

I realise that football attendance figures are a bit misleading. As I understand it they include season ticket holders, whether they turn up for the game or not. So “customers” might be a better description. On that basis and with Hibs being in the SPFL Championship I find it impressive that Hibs have the fourth highest attendance figures in Scotland. 

Celtic, Rangers and Hearts are ahead of them, with Aberdeen being a bit behind.

Well done to the Hibs support, getting behind the team in their time of need. Supporting them both on and off the field. 

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on3:11 am - Feb 3, 2017


Warbs made a peculiar comment regarding hooking off the loan Ranger boy. (I forget his name), stating that he had a duty of care to his parent club. I am in no doubt that they have, as they should have to any employee, employed directly or otherwise.
 However, injuries and fatigue, are part and parcel of the game. I’m sure that any parent club would understand this.
   That is primarily what insurance is for.
   However the level of insurance comes in many shapes and forms, with premiums gauged pro-rata with the level of cover, and value of player.
   We have all seen the photos of Garner in A&E. Have the boys parent club said, “If you break him, You fix him”, and minimal limited cover is the cause of his concern?.
     It of course could very well be, that he was managing the boys fitness, and he doesn’t want to lose the boy for the short time he has him, but it did make me wonder how, and who, would be responsible for his insurance cover in a loan situation?
   I imagine it would be raised in the contract negotiations, and an agreed situation reached should any mishaps occur. 
   To my thinking, it would fall on the receiving club, to provide the appropriate insurances, but that a parent club could possibly be perceived as being negligent, should the boy be farmed out on lesser cover than they themselves provided. 
   Warbs has already put it out there that player contracts were above his pay-grade, which a questioning SMSM would not have missed or skated over. 
   Could it be that TRFC only have minimum cover for the boy, but are contractually obliged to underwrite to the level he currently enjoys? ….As I said in opening. It’s a peculiar statement to make, that perhaps a more questioning SMSM might have quizzed further. 
   
   

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on3:39 am - Feb 3, 2017


CO, yes a strange quote from Warbs and I can’t recollect a manager saying something similar in the past about a loan player.

Is he really saying that during an important league game Warbs was actually thinking about the best interests of the loaning club?
And he was so considerate that he happily changed his formation by hooking arguably the best player on the pitch in blue?
He wanted to protect another club’s asset?

Doesn’t make sense.
Mibbees Warbs was just feeling a bit exposed for taking him off – and his reason given for doing so was simply off the cuff – and provided the quote which he might be ruing now ?

(I have no idea about insurance cover – but if I was the loaning club I certainly would not assume that TRFC had provided suitable insurance cover, and I would insist on maintaining the insurance cover for the loaned player – and that would be a cost recharged to TRFC.)

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on7:00 am - Feb 3, 2017


Corrupt officialFebruary 3, 2017 at 03:11 
Warbs made a peculiar comment regarding hooking off the loan Ranger boy. (I forget his name), stating that he had a duty of care to his parent club. I am in no doubt that they have, as they should have to any employee, employed directly or otherwise.  However, injuries and fatigue, are part and parcel of the game. I’m sure that any parent club would understand this.    That is primarily what insurance is for.    However the level of insurance comes in many shapes and forms, with premiums gauged pro-rata with the level of cover, and value of player.    We have all seen the photos of Garner in A&E. Have the boys parent club said, “If you break him, You fix him”, and minimal limited cover is the cause of his concern?.      It of course could very well be, that he was managing the boys fitness, and he doesn’t want to lose the boy for the short time he has him, but it did make me wonder how, and who, would be responsible for his insurance cover in a loan situation?    I imagine it would be raised in the contract negotiations, and an agreed situation reached should any mishaps occur.     To my thinking, it would fall on the receiving club, to provide the appropriate insurances, but that a parent club could possibly be perceived as being negligent, should the boy be farmed out on lesser cover than they themselves provided.     Warbs has already put it out there that player contracts were above his pay-grade, which a questioning SMSM would not have missed or skated over.     Could it be that TRFC only have minimum cover for the boy, but are contractually obliged to underwrite to the level he currently enjoys? ….As I said in opening. It’s a peculiar statement to make, that perhaps a more questioning SMSM might have quizzed further. 
______________________________

I may be wrong, CO, but I believe TRFC have borrowed the two loanees for free, or, at least, on very favourable terms to themselves. It might not be too far a stretch to assume the parent clubs have stipulated quite onerous conditions in terms of player time management and care.

There has to be some reason for a club to lend a young player for free, and perhaps having a bigger say in what the player can, and can’t, do is one of them.

On the other hand, StevieBC might be correct and Warburton is now ruing a tactical mistake, and a poor effort at excuse making.

Or maybe he’s just trying to manufacture his own dismissal!

View Comment

Avatar

PortbhoyPosted on7:23 am - Feb 3, 2017


May be of some interest, ..
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/528030/mark-warburton-qa-read-every-word-of-the-rangers-boss-defiant-defence-after-humbling-defeat-to-hearts/

View Comment

Avatar

joburgt1mPosted on8:31 am - Feb 3, 2017


CO and AJ

Maybe Warburton just seen the writing on the wall, 3-1 down, Hearts well on top, the games a bogey, just save the lad for the weekend.

View Comment

tayred

tayredPosted on9:13 am - Feb 3, 2017


Morning Folks. Just to say I have a lot of sympathy with RyanGoslings post, and agree entirely with Bordersdon (no surprise there perhaps!). This site appeared because of the RFC financial fiasco, and has had its aim at RFC/TRFC/SFA/SPFL/SFL – and quite rightly so. Despite its stated aims this site is lacking in that there is very little discussion about Scottish football beyond an acceptance that it isn’t what it should be.

There is no discussion about where our game could go, how it could attempt to solve its problems, beyond the widely accepted step one of getting rid of Regan, Doncaster and all their fellow shysters. There have been attempts, and again Bordersdon had a go earlier, to get a discussion going about what to do. BD raised the issue of fairer distribution of cash, a topic which has been approached many times. This inevitably gets a few voices speaking up in support, more voices screaming “Why should Celtic hand over hard earned cash?”, but mostly the silence of collective navel gazing. 

Celtic are romping away this season, whats it gonna be at the end of the season, 40-50 points clear? Is anyone happy with that? I mean seriously, Celtic fans are you happy that this team are taking all the records set by the great Lisbon Lions team? This team aren’t a patch on that great team, that mighty team set their records in a league where they did have competition, not in this massively uneven contest of boys against men. Last time I came on here a poster (sorry I forget who) commented upon the lack of away support turning up at Celtic park – why would they come to Parkhead? Whats the point in wasting hard earned cash to watch another gallant but inevitably doomed defensive performance? I’d imagine most teams home games against Celtic are showing dwindling numbers too.

There is a complete lack of acceptance amongst many, that Celtic rely on the other league members for their position (I can hear the outrage and indignation at that comment). Its true folks, Celtic need a league of teams to play against. At the moment the top league consists of 11 teams, with one playing with their own ball in a league of 1. This isn’t about blaming folks for this state of affairs, the blame game gets us nowhere but I would say the UEFA model is killing us. I can’t see the league being any better next season, nor for many seasons to come. Who does that serve? The 11 diddies that make up the premiership? Sure, for most of us its not about winning, we don’t need or expect to win the league often if at all – but some semblance of a competition is kind of a desirable feature.

But what about Celtic…. are folk gonna buy a season ticket just to ensure they can buy their Champions League tickets? Are folk really gonna pay for and turn up to watch forgone conclusions week after week? I would suggest not, so while many see it as Celtic wasting money by sharing it more equitably, I’d argue they are the ones that most need to share it out to let the league regain some semblance of being a competition.  When football ceases to entertain it is doomed, there are so many alternative ways for folks to spend their increasingly limited spare cash. I look forward to Aberdeen v Hearts, or St Johnstone or Dundee…. how many games now do Celtic supporters really look forward too? There is THAT game of course, I’m sure many will never tire of that, but for those same people I’m not sure that particular source of enjoyment has much to do with football.

So, Celtic are the ones that need more equal sharing of money earned. They work hard to earn it sure, but only on the shoulders of the rest of the Scottish league. All the other teams “earn” their share too. I can hear screams of we need that money to compete in Europe. Those days are gone, no Scottish team will ever compete in Europe again. Even reaching the Champions League group stages will become more and more challenging for Celtic. The financial gap is just far too big, no team can compete with the financials being offered to players elsewhere.

Scotland could be (needs to be) bold and be the first to switch the model completely – we make our game stronger, we make our players better, we do that by making our league as competitive as we can – then and only then have we a cats chance in hell of any form of competition in Europe or Internationally. If that isn’t a solution that appeals to you then lets hear what other suggestions folks have, cos continuing as we are frankly isn’t an option especially for Celtic.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on9:18 am - Feb 3, 2017


My thoughts exactly Joburg.  

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on9:51 am - Feb 3, 2017


Tayred,

3 simple initial steps. 

1/  Oust the conclave responsible for getting us here.  It cuts out the rot and displays a determination by the clubs to remove it.

2/  Shift all the marketing effort now to the race for 2nd and the relegation/promotion battle.  The race for 1st is both done and boring.  The race for 2nd-5th isn’t.  What about next week on Sportscene we start with (without checking the actual fixtures) the Hibs game and the Caley game with extended breakdown and critical analysis of both.  End the programme with a cursory 3 minute segment on “and by the way Celtic beat (whomever) again.”  I say cursory only to highlight a manner that will be all too familiar to supporters of several of the other clubs.  Its not a dig, at least not at Celtic.   

3/  The flip side of 2 needs to be a greater effort by the clubs to recognise this wider picture.  This singular focus on “race for the title” is worn and broken in current circumstances and currently doesn’t apply to 11 of the 12 participants anyway.  That’s not the 12th participant’s fault and its not up to the 12th participant to do anything about it.  I’ll leave the relegation battle for their own supporters (and its joyous for an Aberdeen fan of recent decades to be able to say that!) but of the “race for 2nd” Tynecastle and Ibrox are basically full because of recent histories (and I’d argue Easter Road also) with their current league positioning almost being a secondary complement to that.  I still see very very little effort at Pittodrie (outwith the playing/management efforts) to alter their circumstances.  The attitude still seems to be “we might come second we might not so shrug your shoulders and come along if you’ve nothing better on.”  Make no mistake coming 2nd this year should define Aberdeen for the next few years and with a new stadium and training complex proposed (and still no more than proposed) it’ll be a pretty momentous period.  In some ways I commend them for going about their business quietly, efficiently and cheaply.  But as ‘Biscuits’ pointed out on Saturday on the radio they’re currently punching above their weight in budget terms and still appear somehow uncomfortable in doing so. 

Theres nothing radical and redistributive in any of those. 

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on10:26 am - Feb 3, 2017


With regards to a few posts being placed re T’Rangers defeat at Tynecastle  I remind everyone, including Ryan, that it is accepted by all and sundry that Scottish Football needs a ‘Strong Rangers’.

Therefore who are we not to be concerned and discuss the implications of a poor result that could be seen as potentially being the undoing the world as we know it. After all it is the career for a future England manager, England Goalkeeper and a £6m Leipzig wunderkid that are at stake here.

I have paid my money here so was fully entitled to post about the game on Wednesday, even gloat at the result and the manner in which Hearts played, but I resisted the temptation as I am acutely aware the wheels could easily come off at Fir Park tomorrow.

Last night the radio shows seemed to do the usual, concentrate on T’Rangers being defeated first before looking at Hearts. It is just the way it is and always has been.  

If the MSM actually started to focus on good play and achievements as opposed to failure then we may actually start getting somewhere with the game in this country.

As for positives,  at Tynecastle last night the main truss for the new stand has been erected and now towers above the old stand. 
(Pictures and video on the Foundation of Hearts twitter page for anyone interested.)

It is impressive that the architect Jim Clydesdale future proofed his design of the other three stands so that the truss simply sits on the existing tower structures at each end of the ground.

A significant and visible sign that progress is being made off the pitch by Ann Budge and her team and hopefully Cathro and his team can match that on the pitch as well and kick on from Wednesday’s result.

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on10:39 am - Feb 3, 2017


tayredFebruary 3, 2017 at 09:13

I agree with much/most of what you say, it’s blindingly obvious, in fact, but the solution is not going to be found by discussing it on here, again and again. It’s fine to discuss these matters, and you’ve raised them so it’s open to everyone to put in their tuppence worth, but, in the meantime, if we see one club, one player, one manager getting high (but undeserved) praise while another is getting slated before he’s kicked a ball, or put a team on the pitch, or signed multiple, or not signed many/any, players during a transfer window, then it is surely the purpose of this blog to raise it and comment on it. It is also the case that whenever someone, or some thing/club is ludicrously built up before an event/match that should they subsequently come a cropper, then everything they, and their compliant, sycophantic press have said is open to ridicule. That ridicule should continue during the excuse making process, too. If that ridicule leads to even just one sports writer’s embarrassment and his eschewing the lamb, then it will have been worthwhile.

I think one of the things RG will agree with is that Rangers downfall was aided by the compliance of the press and their constant bigging up of the Govan club, hiding the cracks that would otherwise have been so obvious. Here we are, at crisis point number umpteenth since the new club was formed, and Ryan is suggesting we should be less critical of his club, because we don’t praise them when they are winning. Maybe Ryan would be better served reminding the bears of how past papering over the cracks turned out, over on the sites that are currently chest thumping, to try to encourage them to open their eyes, even just to the possibility that their club is in Queer Street and should be looked at with un-blue tinted magnifying glasses!

On the valid points you make about re-distribution of income within the SPFL, which is basically saying, take money away from Celtic. That, in my opinion, would be ludicrous, and give Celtic some justification to further their attempts to leave Scottish football behind, whether or not they would ever be accepted into the English League it would give them a good case. Apart from anything else, it’s just not morally justifiable.

To force Celtic (and other clubs) to gate-share in order to create a level playing field wouldn’t be much different than telling them they can’t play their best eleven every week because everyone else deserves a chance!

On the other hand, the SFA and SPFL should change the distribution of their income into a much more level system, and, much more importantly, UEFA should pump much more of the massive income they make directly into their member associations for distribution around their clubs, rather than the current model of ensuring it goes to the already over-pumped ‘big clubs of Europe’.

Strangely enough, that would probably help Celtic more than the rest of us by creating a much more level playing field in Europe, but, even if everyone on here agreed with me, and every football blog in the UK did too, it’s not going to make one iota of difference to how the money is distributed, nor stop Celtic’s relentless domination of Scottish football.

On the other hand, by constantly keeping the message in plain sight that Scottish football has been, and continues to be, rigged, and this rigging has been, and continues to be, known by a number of the men once trusted to out such wrongdoing (the media lamb munchers), all to the benefit of one club and it’s facsimile, we can keep the hope alive that, one day, the game can be a true sport (I’d say ‘again’ but I’m not that certain it ever was!).

View Comment

Avatar

FinlochPosted on10:46 am - Feb 3, 2017


Celtic winning by 30 points is not a sustainable league model and will lead to unplanned and unforeseen consequences and decline.
It will erode and eventually destroy the TV money as most games become irrelevant and people get fed up of watching one or two teams.

The power in Scottish Football is not in the hands of Regan or Doncaster. They are working for and with their committees and the key committees are controlled by some of the leading chairmen whose names we know. These chairmen have been savvy enough to see these SPL and SFA committees as a way of helping their own clubs – even to the point of being seriously to the detriment of others.And self interest is rife and a cancer.
Their very self interest is a also a self defeating strategy in the long term. 

Rangers is a rogue case study and takes up too much of our time but I can understand why.
Its easy in hindsight to see our chairmen saved the blue club with all that makes it what it is because of the TV money and to a lesser extent the blue pound.
Aberdeen and Inverness and Ross County and Kilmarnock and Dundee and Dundee United need the blue pounds from crowds and TV.
Celtic like that money too but most of all they need a peculiar type of rivalry to maintain their over performance in fan recruitment.
I hope resolution 12 finally bites but the majority of Celtic fans see titles and football ins and outs as more important than corporate shenanigans in 2011 and 2012.

We’re losing the future fans too.My two boys (born in the 80s) and their pals were all season booked weekly attendees at Tynie.
They don’t even look for results now despite Hearts being on a roll.They look elsewhere for their football.
Interestingly they have never bought a newspaper between them.

Also interestingly they think I’m mad for caring.

I care because for years all the money I was spending on season books was on a competition that was flawed then because of SDM’s endeavours and is worse now.

Scottish football needs this site but we are currently under-performing and feeding off scraps.

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on10:54 am - Feb 3, 2017


wottpiFebruary 3, 2017 at 10:26

Yes, WOTTPI, I watched the raising of the truss last night on periscope, a pretty impressive sight it was too. But could we have managed it without a strong ‘Rangers’? Or did we just need strong towers and one man’s foresight?

View Comment

tayred

tayredPosted on11:35 am - Feb 3, 2017


ALLYJAMBOFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 10:39

I agree with much/most of what you say, it’s blindingly obvious, in fact, but the solution is not going to be found by discussing it on here, again and again. 

Surprised you feel that way, I don’t think this problem is ever really discussed at all and yet it is the single most important problem facing Scottish football. You can say all you want about TRFC, but that is to some extent a side show. A complete breakdown of competition like what we are facing now will lead to death of the game.

As for finances – gate sharing isn’t the answer. Indeed I don’t know what the answer is, but what we have now is completely broken and has been for years. What has impacted massively now though is the hideous amount of money UEFA hand out to those able to reach group stages of Champions League. One years progress into the CL groups stages must be worth the same as the profit made by the rest of the entire Scottish league makes in what 2-3-4-5 years? I honestly don’t know, it could be more. Its ludicrous, dangerous and will probably prove lethal if left unchecked. 

But folks don’t think its worth discussing? Then what is the point of SFM? Brings us back to Ryans point really – what would bring folks here if it wasn’t for the demise of RFC?

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on11:49 am - Feb 3, 2017


Apart from football, I love architecture.  Some stadia leave me cold, like Hampden.  On the other end of the scale I really like Almondvale, nice wee compact ground (10k?) but good atmosphere and all the staff really friendly.

I can’t wait to see Aberdeen’s new stadium and Heart’s new stand.  I hope they keep it steep and close to the pitch.

I was a season ticket holder during the redevelopment of Celtic Park.  Every time a new stand was erected was joyous.  I just wish they would knock down the main (south) stand and complete the job.  But wee Fergus thought against this, would bring the capacity too high for all but a few games per season.  Got to keep the atmosphere.  Think what it was like during Ronnie Deila’s term with the top tier closed.

Finally, for a junior team, I think Hannah Park, home of Shotts Bon Accord is a very fine ground.  Great pitch, it’s as wide as CP.  And a good stand.  And the weather is always lovely!  02021216

BTW, Hannah Park used to get used for reserve games by senior clubs.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on11:57 am - Feb 3, 2017


Just noticed that was my 901st post!  My goodness I cant half talk some nonsense.

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on12:46 pm - Feb 3, 2017


tayredFebruary 3, 2017 at 11:35 
ALLYJAMBOFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 10:39
I agree with much/most of what you say, it’s blindingly obvious, in fact, but the solution is not going to be found by discussing it on here, again and again. Surprised you feel that way, I don’t think this problem is ever really discussed at all and yet it is the single most important problem facing Scottish football. You can say all you want about TRFC, but that is to some extent a side show. A complete breakdown of competition like what we are facing now will lead to death of the game.
As for finances – gate sharing isn’t the answer. Indeed I don’t know what the answer is, but what we have now is completely broken and has been for years. What has impacted massively now though is the hideous amount of money UEFA hand out to those able to reach group stages of Champions League. One years progress into the CL groups stages must be worth the same as the profit made by the rest of the entire Scottish league makes in what 2-3-4-5 years? I honestly don’t know, it could be more. Its ludicrous, dangerous and will probably prove lethal if left unchecked. 
But folks don’t think its worth discussing? Then what is the point of SFM? Brings us back to Ryans point really – what would bring folks here if it wasn’t for the demise of RFC?
______________________________

I do think this problem has been discussed on here, a number of times, with no viable solution ever being put forward. That doesn’t mean it is something that shouldn’t be discussed, and the powers that be should certainly be discussing it in depth, but to suggest the TRFC shenanigans are just a sideshow by comparison, is way off the mark. TRFC are a spiritual continuation of the entity that spent ten (at least) long years cheating Scottish football, and I see it as the duty of SFM, and other like-minded sites, to keep an eye on what’s happening there, and to highlight it as best we can, to try to ensure they can’t get away with it again; for they did get away with it, right up to their end, and beyond! Furthermore, I don’t see a situation where we are facing a ‘complete breakdown of competition’, for that disappeared a very long time ago, unless you think that competition between what was known as the Old Firm was good! I think it was sh*t, of the highest order, made worse because it led one of the chosen two to cheat to maintain their ‘rightful place’ in that duopoly.

As I intimated earlier, I think the only financial solution is for a more equitable distribution of income gleaned by UEFA from the promotion of the game, itself, with particular emphasis on a sharing directly to the participating FAs and leagues, who should then disperse it accordingly in an even handed way taking a limited account of league positions and cup progress as prize money. That would be a distribution of monies the game has produced, not the monies a club has legitimately earned by and for itself.

That said, I cannot imagine such a situation arising where anything like that will come to pass, no matter how often we, or supporters from all over, discuss and demand action. Imagine, if you will, we discuss equitable distribution of income for so long, and so well, that a respected journalist, like Alex Thomson, takes up our argument and highlights it on Channel 4, do you think anyone, at any FA, is going to take up the mantle and petition UEFA to do the right thing? Of course not, for they know UEFA won’t listen to anyone other than the big clubs at the big leagues, and they love it just the way it is.

Maybe you think the SFA will listen to us, or Alex Thomson, and what if they do? Do you think there is enough money in Scottish football (without that huge hand out from UEFA) to make any impact on Celtic without something tantamount to theft from the Parkhead coffers? As things stand, UEFA pay Celtic, every season or two, upwards of £30m over and above their matchday income and huge merchandising operation, how is an equitable distribution of the paltry few millions Scottish football garners going to allow any team to come close to Celtic’s income, unless some way is found to pass the bulk of that income to the club most likely to challenge them? And just who might that be, or be seen to be?

In my opinion, the only thing that is going to break Celtic’s monopoly is for one club to have everything fall into place, all at the same time. Young exceptional talent breaking through, wise investment in available experienced players, and, most importantly, a manager/coach with ideas no one has come up with before, allied to Celtic taking their eyes off the ball with some sort of internal crisis.

I cannot see how any money Celtic earn for themselves, gate receipts, merchandising, European prize money, can legitimately be taken from them, for it would have to be ‘taken from them’, but it would be different in the case of monies earned by UEFA and Scottish football competitions, as that money is initially paid direct to these bodies to distribute in a way their members decide or endorse. Besides, in what other business would anyone expect a company to build it’s infrastructure and customer base, only to give some of the income it produces over to their rivals?

One thing we should always remember, there is nothing wrong with ‘Sporting Advantage’, as long as it’s gained honestly. To take away that honestly gained sporting advantage, though, would create a false competition which would be worse than anything we have now.

View Comment

Avatar

stevoPosted on12:56 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Apropos of nothing, would anyone care to guess how many times Rangers (oldco and newco) have finished below Celtic in the  Scottish league system? #goingfor55

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on1:00 pm - Feb 3, 2017


jimboFebruary 3, 2017 at 11:49 
Apart from football, I love architecture.  Some stadia leave me cold, like Hampden.  On the other end of the scale I really like Almondvale, nice wee compact ground (10k?) but good atmosphere and all the staff really friendly.
I can’t wait to see Aberdeen’s new stadium and Heart’s new stand.  I hope they keep it steep and close to the pitch.
I was a season ticket holder during the redevelopment of Celtic Park.  Every time a new stand was erected was joyous.  I just wish they would knock down the main (south) stand and complete the job.  But wee Fergus thought against this, would bring the capacity too high for all but a few games per season.  Got to keep the atmosphere.  Think what it was like during Ronnie Deila’s term with the top tier closed.
Finally, for a junior team, I think Hannah Park, home of Shotts Bon Accord is a very fine ground.  Great pitch, it’s as wide as CP.  And a good stand.  And the weather is always lovely! 
BTW, Hannah Park used to get used for reserve games by senior clubs.
________________

Really nice wee post, Jimbo, and maybe something we could introduce to the blog more often, reminiscences etc, to remind us of all the things we love about football, and especially Scottish football. ‘Get yer macaroon bars here!’

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on1:21 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Gary Ralston in the DR taking up the cudgel for Dave King it would appear.

‘Rangers endgame is fast approaching for Mark Warburton after recruitment drive leaves him out of gas’ says the headline, with the story informing us that, contrary to popular belief money is available to strengthen the squad this summer! Which might suggest to the target audience that it was available in January, but went unused by a slipshod manager!

There is more, and I’ve only seen a part of the article, including mild criticism of King for saying he’d put in £30m but with a note that he, along with the Parks, have put in £20m, but it would appear Level5 are back onboard with King and turning the spotlight of blame on the once future England manager.

NB This post isn’t criticising Warburton or TRFC, but drawing attention to the SMSM’s preparedness to go with whatever they are handed from King/Ibrox via Traynor! 

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on1:42 pm - Feb 3, 2017


jimboFebruary 3, 2017 at 11:49
Apart from football, I love architecture. Some stadia leave me cold, like Hampden. On the other end of the scale I really like Almondvale, nice wee compact ground (10k?) but good atmosphere and all the staff really friendly.
I can’t wait to see Aberdeen’s new stadium and Heart’s new stand. I hope they keep it steep and close to the pitch.
I was a season ticket holder during the redevelopment of Celtic Park. Every time a new stand was erected was joyous. I just wish they would knock down the main (south) stand and complete the job. But wee Fergus thought against this, would bring the capacity too high for all but a few games per season. Got to keep the atmosphere. Think what it was like during Ronnie Deila’s term with the top tier closed.
Finally, for a junior team, I think Hannah Park, home of Shotts Bon Accord is a very fine ground. Great pitch, it’s as wide as CP. And a good stand. And the weather is always lovely! BTW, Hannah Park used to get used for reserve games by senior clubs.
=======================
Hearts new stand will be the same height as the others, but the rake will not be as steep, allowing an extra 7 rows of seats to be accommodated, when compared with the Wheatfield stand.  The front row of the new stand will actually be about one metre closer to the pitch, so I don’t think the atmosphere will be diminished.

I’ve been at the grounds of all the East and West Region Junior sides (around 120).  While Hannah Park is big, I think the spectator ares are too far away from the pitch.  My favourite junior grounds are at Troon (best playing surface), Pollok and Linlithgow (both tidy and tight grounds), Sauchie (great setting at the foot of the Ochils) and Tayport (good surface and setting by the Firth of Tay).

There are many more nice grounds in the junior set up, but equally so, some spartan grounds in the lower leagues, reflecting the financial reality of clubs “surviving” on home gates of 40 or 50.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on1:58 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Easy, you been to a Bo’Ness V Linlithgow Game?  I hear they are a bit bothersome.  I am good friends with SJFA official who says there are as many policemen/ women at that game than many senior games!

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on2:03 pm - Feb 3, 2017


I think that almost all Scottish clubs have done particularly well to sustain the crowds that they have over the last 30 years when there was a duopoly winning the league every season.

To quote Jim Spence, “It makes no difference if it is a one horse race or a two horse race, if you are not on one of those horses.”

Success within your own expectations will still attract the crowds, whether it is 2nd, 3rd, 4th in the premiership, winning the Championship, or managing a good run in the cups.

The biggest risks of significant numbers of fans not turning up in the short to medium term is borne by two clubs.  Celtic need to sustain interest in a one horse league race, in which they are currently succeeding through relative success in Europe, managing to attract a decent standard of players, and with medium term goals of 10 in a row.  Rangers are equally at risk because their fans show little inclination of being able to accept a level of mediocrity, which is familiar to the 40 other clubs in the league set-up.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on2:19 pm - Feb 3, 2017


jimbo February 3, 2017 at 13:58 
Easy, you been to a Bo’Ness V Linlithgow Game?  I hear they are a bit bothersome.  I am good friends with SJFA official who says there are as many policemen/ women at that game than many senior games!
===============================
I’ve been to a few.  A couple of years ago, they played one another twice within two or three weeks in a Scottish Junior Cup tie and in what was effectively a league decider, both at Prestonfield.  There were around 2,000 at the cup game and maybe 1,700 at the league game. There was a visible police presence but for the most part it was just banter between groups of the rival fans. 

I think that Auchinleck v Cumnock is more of a powder keg.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on2:19 pm - Feb 3, 2017


My nephew is a season ticket holder at CP, he phones me often for a blether about a recent game.  He is fed up with the monopoly.  I think most fans are only a few seasons behind his thinking.  You need challenge.

View Comment

Avatar

erniePosted on3:05 pm - Feb 3, 2017


I don’t think that Scottish fitba is at the terminal stage …yet.  Currently the panic over Celtic’s gap  is primarily because it’s nae fair on Therangers.  (That’s why, Ryan, any TRFC light relief is leapt on here and on some other places: most of us are sick of the p*sh that is poured upon us re magic hat (potential English manager last year), £6m squirrels, going for 55 etc. However, I digress)
The “problem” will eventually come about when, and if, Celtic  fans really do get fed up with the lack of competition because , as has often been said it makes no difference to the rest of us whether it is a two or one horse race.  I’m nae sure the big two get that but believe me it is the case. But long term the problem could be the gap and it’s sustainability to Celtic. This “gap” is not a given, it’s only 6 months since Celtic had a management and squad that didn’t really reflect the, fully deserved, huge advantage due to their resources versus the rest. They seem to have cracked that and there is no reason to expect that they will not keep the level and the gap going.  I have to say that I am in two minds about whether I’d like it fixed because I believe the only fix would be to change the structure of our game completely.  It would have to be driven by Celtic of course as their would be no reason to change unless they see it as a longer term benefit to them.  (Let’s face it, they have a brilliant problem!)
The fix would require a USA type approach to league sport with tv and prize money shared out, academy approach to youth players (i.e. shared out basically) and a lot less teams.  Gate money and merchandising retained.  It would make the game better but I’m not sure I’d like it.
I’ve kept this short but have thought and argued this subject a fair bit!  I’ve come to the conclusion that we all expect Celtic to get fed up…. I wonder if that’s just not more SMSM p*sh?  Would we be having a similar discussion if TRFC were running away with it to the same extent?  Also, would it really be disastrous if Cetic didn’t get a 50k crowd per week?  My lot average 13k and we’re having fun, it’s a game of fitba.

View Comment

tayred

tayredPosted on3:09 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Allyjambo – you miss my point. It is Celtic that stand to lose if nothing changes. The rest of us, as you say, can find some level of excitement in the race for 2nd, and having an extra weeks summer holiday before the qualifying starts for the qualifying round of qualifying for Europa league. As Jimbo highlights above, it is Celtic fans that are going to get turned off attending games, for the rest of us its just 4 games a year that are becoming pointless.

As for your comment:

Maybe you think the SFA will listen to us, or Alex Thomson, and what if they do?

Uhm – not sure what to make of that. So we shouldn’t bother discussing things because the SFA won’t be paying attention to us? You don’t see the need for change, fair enough. I’ll go back in my box.

View Comment

Tincks

TincksPosted on3:35 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Some posters on SFM get a bit irritated by Mark Warburton and some of his pronouncements but overall he seems to cope reasonably well with operating in a goldfish bowl.  We know that the lamb munching sycophants in the MSM were always going to turn on him as soon as they were ordered and we may well be approaching that particular point.

My suspicion is that he is doing a pretty good job of keeping the footballing side of the Ibrox operation in better shape than it might otherwise be.  The Summer transfer dealings were not the best but was the Barton debacle MW’s fault?  At the time the whatsit hit the fan over Barton things could easily have fallen apart completely but he seems to have kept the team playing as a solid unit for 90 minutes each week. 

However, he does not have the strength of squad to compete against the other top teams.  At the moment the top five mini league reads: P9 W2 D2 L5 F10 A18.

Should MW manage his team to second place it will be quite an overachievement in my opinion given the resources at his disposal.  Ignore wage-roll and focus on the mess he inherited from the Super Salary years.

What he could never hope to do was to live up to the “going for 55” nonsense that was bandied about over the summer.  Common sense dictates that unless there is some sort of implosion at Celtic the current gap will take several years to bridge even if TRFC were in the hands of a stable and first class board of directors with a realistic and workable plan.

The fear in the Ibrox boardroom right now must be of a substantial falling off in season ticket sales for next season as the reality of the years ahead dawns on the support that has been fed so much tosh by the MSM.  Hence MW will be offered up as a ritual sacrifice and promises of money to spend for the new manager will appear in the press.  It has started today. 

The danger is that once players get the understanding that a manager is on his way out commitment to the cause can soon drop off.  TRFC are on a tightrope at the moment both financially and in terms of a top three finish (much may depend on how things pan out at Hearts).  To misquote Jay Z, “Rangers have 99 problems but Mark Warburton ain’t one.”  I hope the Rangers support stay behind him and his team when the MSM campaign is turned up to Level 5.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on3:48 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Ernie,

Precisely, but since the perception (and I have to say its not the reality amongst the bears in my immediate circles) is that a certain support don’t like being reminded that they’re in a battle for second ergo lets not mention the battle for second emphasising instead the continuing “sh!teness” of the battle for 1st.  All well and good, but certain clubs, particularly our own, need every help they can get in advertising said battle for 2nd-4th to try to get bums on seats.

I will say in all fairness that I am a recent convert to BTsport and, the pantomime horse of Butcher and Sutton aside (decide yourself which one is the bigger erse) their coverage of Scottish Football is so superior to the bland southerly offering of their competitors.  

View Comment

paddy malarkey

paddy malarkeyPosted on4:38 pm - Feb 3, 2017


What are the chances of this happening up here ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38860676

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on5:16 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Great spot PM!

“…Whether the FA’s structure makes reform impossible will also be examined and the government may be called on to intervene in the matter.
In July, sports minister Tracey Crouch said the FA would lose its £30m to £40m of public funding if it did not reform…”
==============================

In a supposed ‘united kingdom’, you would think that Scottish taxpayers would be afforded the same opportunity to have change imposed on our own FA – to correct their mismanagement of our national sport.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on8:09 pm - Feb 3, 2017


The thing I find most interesting about people saying money should be “distributed more fairly” is the assumption that it isn’t shared fairly.

Currently it is Celtic who get an unfair cut apparently.

So what income do Celtic receive which is not fair.

Season ticket income from their support.
Matchday income for home games. By the vast majority, their own support.
A cut of the gate for cup games.
Merchandising income, I’m guessing their own support buying it.
Sponsorship money, from people who want to associate themselves with the club.
Prize money, based on their position in the league and in domestic cup competitions.
Prize money for playing in European competition.

What is unfair about that. Which part of it would people give to other clubs

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:22 pm - Feb 3, 2017


TINCKSFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 15:35       13 Votes 
Some posters on SFM get a bit irritated by Mark Warburton and some of his pronouncements but overall he seems to cope reasonably well with operating in a goldfish bowl.  We know that the lamb munching sycophants in the MSM were always going to turn on him as soon as they were ordered and we may well be approaching that particular point.
My suspicion is that he is doing a pretty good job of keeping the footballing side of the Ibrox operation in better shape than it might otherwise be.  The Summer transfer dealings were not the best but was the Barton debacle MW’s fault?  At the time the whatsit hit the fan over Barton things could easily have fallen apart completely but he seems to have kept the team playing as a solid unit for 90 minutes each week. 
However, he does not have the strength of squad to compete against the other top teams.  At the moment the top five mini league reads: P9 W2 D2 L5 F10 A18.
Should MW manage his team to second place it will be quite an overachievement in my opinion given the resources at his disposal.  Ignore wage-roll and focus on the mess he inherited from the Super Salary years.
——————–
So far so good as they say.But this is were you get down to the nitty gritty the second half of the season.Mw summer transfers were not the best and we will know soon enough if the winter transfers are any better(even if they are he won’t get to keep them) no matter what kind of a Newcastle loan player spin we could get to sign him for good next season…remember that one?
Anyway… Ignore wage-roll and focus on the mess he inherited from the Super Salary years.
I’m sure i read somewhere the best players at ibrox just now are players Ally signed (think about that for a moment)

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on9:11 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Tayred,

“There is a complete lack of acceptance amongst many, that Celtic rely on the other league members for their position (I can hear the outrage and indignation at that comment). Its true folks, Celtic need a league of teams to play against. ”

That is very true.  I don’t know what the answer is, Celtic are very rich in Scotland relatively speaking.  Poor compared to English clubs.
I’m not boasting, but Scottish football is packed out with players who were trained in our academy or are on loan.  Lennoxtown costs a lot of money to run.  Not many make it to the first team.  Maybe that is a way we give back to the game in Scotland?

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on9:26 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Tayred and Bordersdon

If you want to raise points on SFM, you are free to do so. Nobody is stifling debate and there are few topics which are not up for discussion; and in fact the topic of cash distribution modelling has been discussed often.

I think there is most definitely a self-interest thing going on amongst fans of bigger clubs in terms of gate sharing; Celtic, Rangers, Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen (and many of their fans) are wary of the subject being discussed at all, and in fact, a recent poll we did on Twitter resulted in (to my dismay) in 70% against the idea.

If you are frustrated that your favourite topics are not being given enough exposure, you are more than welcome to contribute a blog – in fact I would be delighted (as would Tris) if someone would set the ball rolling.

None of us are daft enough to believe that without RTC (which itself was a single issue blog owing its existence to the anger over RFC’s behaviour) we would even exist, but neither are we misinformed enough to deny that we have broadened the discussion.

What we took from RTC was the cross-partisan ethos of respect, genuine cameraderie, and often valued friendships. That is what we identified as being worth preserving. I think that is still a valuable and unique thing in football.

Whatever the frustration you have, we have all shared the idea, up to now, that the game itself is bigger than each club. If you think that the Celtic contingent here de-legitimises our aims then I am sorry to hear that, but that doesn’t really square with that ethos I mentioned, and I reckon most of our readers and contributors find the cross partisan element of what we do enriching – and not divisive at all.

A number of Celtic fans have even abandoned us over the course of the past couple of years precisely because in their view we have have not been aggressive and single-minded enough in our posture toward TRFC; and the same accusation was laid at our door recently when we were attacked by another blog.

We were criticised for refusing to give Charlotte Fakes an exclusive platform, mocked for refusing to accept “truths” like the Great Water Supply Swindle and the “RoofGate” – and roundly criticised for continuing to question perceived truths on both sides of the football debate. 

Does having a contingent of fans of ANY club make our assertions about dishonesty of the MSM and the football authorities less valid or less true?

I am really disappointed if you think so.

And I ask you, if you believe in your own analysis;

Now that you have identified what is wrong with SFM, what should we do about it – and how can help us achieve what you think we should? 

All ears. Seriously.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on9:52 pm - Feb 3, 2017


HOMUNCULUSFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 20:09

I take your point but isn’t that to the heart of the matter.

Celtic have and will have a monopoly, as far as the eye can see,  in ensuring they get every single penny the Scottish game has to offer them for their successful achievements.

I have no problem with that as a lot of it is down to history and Celtic have done nothing dodgy to be in that position. However for heaven’s sake lets not hear any more complaints about not having any domestic competition and how that then puts them at a disadvantage in European competition.

The Scottish game as whole is in a destructive cycle where it looks like no-one will ever be able to make up the gap.

Celtic and everyone else has to just acknowledge that’s the way it is or people have to be willing to come up with some way of redressing the balance.

Maybe Celtic could tell some folks to support their local club instead of glory hunting, stop taking players like Scott Allen out of the Scottish game and then having them out on loan or warming benches. Agree that if they make the Champions League group stages they will not take the previous season league winning cash prize and redistribute it to the other clubs. When they sell Dembele on for £40m do they really need an extra £3m or could all the other premiership clubs better use circa £275k for domestic player development or simply pass it on to Project Brave .

Maybe the above is from left field and certainly would cause trouble when the aim of a Plc is basically to look after yourself and stuff the rest but it is going to take something like that to provide any sort of redressing of the balance.

As I say its either that or we all just shut up and accept where we are – and that includes Celtic being hamstrung by being a big fish in a small pond.

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on9:55 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Homunculus,

I don’t know if anyone is making accusations of unfairness. Even if they were that is missing the point. It is not about a lack of fairness, it is about a lack of foresight and poor management. 

If the wildy skewed disparity isn’t corrected somehow, then my guess is that the clubs at the top will ultimately suffer the most in the long term because the current situation simply isn’t sustainable. If competition collapses completely, fans will simply lose interest and the game will collapse financially – perhaps not beyond the event horizon of extinction, but certainly into obscurity.

I think bigger clubs refusing to consider some form of gate sharing formula is short sighted. Not surprising though since the  long game has seldom been played at boardroom level in football. 

I disagree with those who offer up the rationale that they only pay to watch their own team. It seems to me to be quite ridiculous since nobody would be watching at all if there was no opposing team turning up each fortnight.

I disagree with those who object to “subsidising” (their verb not mine) other clubs who can’t manage their own affairs in a manner they see as appropriate. None of my business how any club manages its affairs as long as it doesn’t gain an unfair advantage over mine.

I disagree with those who say that the bigger clubs will evolve and move out of Scottish football, because although in a free market, that may hold true, the reality is that football is heavily regulated, and moving out of Scottish football is just not ever gonna happen.

Ironically, the same self interest that digs its heels in over gate sharing in Scotland is doing as resolute a job in England by maintaining a closed shop for Engliash and Welsh membership of their leagues and closing the door firmly on northern invaders.

The trouble is that Celtic, Rangers, and to a lesser extent Hearts Hibs and Aberdeen all harbour dreams of playing in England, and whilst that fantasy infects the mindsets at those clubs, nobody will address any realistic solutions to fix the game in Scotland.

As i say though, we can all agree to disagree on those points, but the debate isn’t assisted by a straw man defence. Create the illusion that people are attacking you because of your wealth and circle the wagons with the support base.

Nobody seriously is accusing Celtic of being “unfair”, but in order to grow the game in Scotland properly, wealthier clubs should realise that competition also needs to grow. A structure that can move goalposts in order to protect one of its major brands, can surely see that some regulation is necessary to assist fair competition, and that football is interdependent.

We could of course take the alternative view that nothing requires fixing.

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on10:05 pm - Feb 3, 2017


WOTTPI

I believe you have said by and large – and a tad more eloquently – what I wanted to say.

Like all of us here, I am a passionate supporter of my club – Celtic. However i don’t think that winning ten in a row is even close to being as important as having a sustainable club over the next hundred years.

I passionately believe that the only way this can be achieved given the English stance on cross border participation, is to wholeheartedly participate in fixing the game in Scotland, and encouraging competition.

I believe it is the only right way to do it too, because I have zero interest in Celtic playing in the English league. This our home. This is where the clubs with whom we have had a relationship with for a century and a half also live. 

Maybe gate sharing isn’t the only way to help competition, but for sure, there is nobody out there in football land who is asking the question. Consequently, no-one will find any answers. Possibly not enough clubs think there is actually a problem.

View Comment

Avatar

Bogs DolloxPosted on10:07 pm - Feb 3, 2017


HOMUNCULUS

 
 
 
 
 

 

11 Votes

The thing I find most interesting about people saying money should be “distributed more fairly” is the assumption that it isn’t shared fairly.
Currently it is Celtic who get an unfair cut apparently.
So what income do Celtic receive which is not fair.
Season ticket income from their support.Matchday income for home games. By the vast majority, their own support.A cut of the gate for cup games.Merchandising income, I’m guessing their own support buying it.Sponsorship money, from people who want to associate themselves with the club.Prize money, based on their position in the league and in domestic cup competitions.Prize money for playing in European competition.
What is unfair about that. Which part of it would people give to other clubs
==============================
But the point isn’t so much about what is fair but what creates a vibrant and competitive environment in Scottish football in general. At the moment there is no competition and the quality of the game is poor as is its ability to produce decent players who can represent Scotland.
We can address those issues or leave things as they are. Even Celtic fans will get bored with regular defeats in Europe after a while. But I suppose so long as they are better than Rangers nothing else matters. 

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on10:44 pm - Feb 3, 2017


WOTTPIFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 21:52

 However for heaven’s sake lets not hear any more complaints about not having any domestic competition and how that then puts them at a disadvantage in European competition.

=================================

I don’t recall ever having said that, either here or anywhere else. 

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on11:50 pm - Feb 3, 2017


HOMUNCULUSFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 22:44
I know you didn’t and I never said you did.

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on11:54 pm - Feb 3, 2017


Why “redistribution” of wealth at all? 
    Who can say, that spreading income from the top clubs onto lower clubs will produce increased competition,and not some new tables and chairs for the social club?… The off-set being the top clubs are weakened, ergo Euro coefficients and solidarity payments reduced, with subsequent knock-ons
   Wealth creation is the way forward. It is what the top clubs have done, and are doing, with Aberdeen and Hearts both implementing massive stadium improvement plans for example. 
   This was not done by popping down the road to see their mate with a haulage company, and filching some scaffolding poles to hang his board on. It is being done by professional clubs being professional. Showing ambition, drive, and optimistic enthusiasm.
   It is hard to say this without appearing to be mocking of some lower clubs, but the bottom line is some of them like the way their club already is. I cant, and won’t knock them for that. It is their club, they run it, and that is what they want. 
   They don’t want hundreds turning up, where there are tens, They don’t want thousands turning up, where there are hundreds.   They wouldn’t all fit in for the dinner dance. 
   The “social” aspect of their club, is different from the “social” aspect of higher clubs. 
   That is not to say all smaller clubs do not want to grow. Any wealth distribution that does take place, should be split with this differential in mind. A block of butter can only spread so many bread slices before it becomes both a waste of butter, and bread. The distribution pool first needs narrowed. 
   Then the funds should be used in an encouraging fashion. Perhaps based on average attendance increases, showing the club is doing their bit, or maybe on turn-over, with performance indicators to include increased sponsorship and fund-raising the club does for itself, or maybe players transferred to a higher division, showing the club has an eye for a player. 
      I absolutely do not mean or wish any harm on smaller clubs who do not wish to partake of such a way, but lets be honest.
    We are talking about providing increased competition for top clubs, and a move away from monopolies or duopolies. but either way you look at it, it is a move intended to improve on the current “business” model. That is the nuts and bolts of it. Business.
      There can be no sentimentality about it, no matter how long your club has been a member. KPI’s are all that matter.
   That is what income redistribution boils down to. Some clubs will be worthwhile investing Scottish fitba’ money in, but sadly, some won’t. Financial assistance to some clubs will simply be a waste of a valuable and very limited resource. Cash .
     

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on1:23 am - Feb 4, 2017


WOTTPI
FEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 23:50
=================================

Apologies, you seemed to be replying to my post.

View Comment

Avatar

artesianPosted on2:23 am - Feb 4, 2017


CORRUPT OFFICIALFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 23:54
Very True -although every industry I have worked in has relied on a steady stream of raw talent of sufficient quality being available to enable it to flourish and grow .That’s not the case in Scottish football .We have a system whereby the vast majority of “Students” cannot meet the standards required to be a professional footballer. 
Why is that ? -Quite simply the system in place is substandard .In fact there is barely a functioning system at all .

Let me put it another way -How good would any of us have been at Maths /Science /English(pick a subject ) had it only been taught a couple of hours a week by someones dad ,who couldn’t play football , in the p~~~g rain in winter .How good would Nicola Benedetti have been at violin if her teacher was a rank amateur, who couldn’t read music ,couldn’t play the violin  (and was only taught in winter ,outside in the p#####g rain ) .Not very good I suspect .

Until we address this fundamental issue Scottish football is going nowhere .

View Comment

Avatar

FinlochPosted on9:01 am - Feb 4, 2017


Some pretty fundamental stuff in some posts.
The reality of football everywhere is it is about economics.
Economics is all around and influencing a lot of what we’ve seen and will continue to frame our options and the future.
The 5 way agreement was created to continue revenue streams to Scottish football and one entity benefitted but the bottom line was the blue pound.

Football has changed and wont go back to where it was pre-Europe, that jack is well and truly out of the box and 1967 with two top European teams out of Glasgow will never return.
If I was a Celtic fan (and when they play in Europe I am) then I wouldn’t want to hand over my domestic or European revenue to other clubs and I also wouldn’t want my Inverness fans to go to Tulloch Stadium or my Greenock fans to Cappielow or my Edinburgh fans to Easter Road.
I want them to come to Celtic Park and buy Celtic strips for their kids.
It might be “quasi pals” in the SFA board rooms but it is and always was dog eat dog when it comes to revenue.

So the reality and the stark stark facts of economics are without change is Celtic will have nowhere to go.
They are runaway and worthy champions here, the best business and the most solid club and will continue to be so.
But the fact is because of their wee Scottish SPFL league they are consigned to be bit part players in Europe.
Nobody can deny Scotland is a failing football country run for self interest by well paid administrators and self interested clubs.
Yes incompetence means we are punching below our weight but Scotland is not a country I’d be saying is a place to locate a top world football team.

I don’t have the answers but extrapolate what we have today forward and in 10 years from now when Celtic have won another 10 years of most trophies, when Rangers have picked up one or two cups but still struggle on with their debt and expectation burden, and Aberdeen and Hearts reach occasional finals but survive on scraps will we be in a better place?

I don’t think so.

We are witnessing a macro economic  decline caused by the unalterable fact that 6 million people cannot sustain the level of competition we aspire to as fans and Celtic, while they might be the biggest winners, will also be the biggest losers if they don’t find a new bigger pond. 

Revenue sharing and stuff like that might give us a better league here (MIGHT!?) but won’t give Celtic a bigger shot at what it sees as important.

It will never happen.

View Comment

Avatar

The Ungrateful DeadPosted on9:13 am - Feb 4, 2017


The size of  fan base of clubs in Scotland has always been skewed because of the nature of the OLD FIRM rivalry which sees fans from all over Scotland travelling to their matches instead of supporting their local clubs. However the idea that a well run club like CFC should redistribute some of their HONESTLY earned revenue is absurd imo.

View Comment

Avatar

erniePosted on10:08 am - Feb 4, 2017


An interesting debate and, especially given that the SFM community are probably a more “considered” cross section of the general fitba public, I think my assumption that Celtic and their fans will not get fed up of being top dog is correct.  Quite rightly I add quickly!  I have no problem with that, I look forward to seeing how much of a dent they can make on the next level and, more importantly to me, how the Dons can make a dent on them.  
So Scottish fitba will be fine and will generally reflect the social and political market driven agenda. As for TRFC, they’ll be ok, any team that can sell 40k season tickets can (important word selection there) survive and thrive.  All they need is 5 or 6 spiv free years.  Unlikely to be in my lifetime but thrive they will.
As there is no appetite for radical change I agree with previous posters that we need to concentrate on developing our players but I fear this too will be all about clubs’ self interest rather than what’s good for youth development.  I also still believe that a key issue is that we have too many clubs in our PFL but I’m not volunteering to scrap the Dons any more than anyone else is their team!  Perhaps a good start might be financial criteria that require strict adherence?

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on10:17 am - Feb 4, 2017


Big PinkFebruary 3, 2017 at 21:55
_____________________________________________________
And here was me thinking that the game in Scotland was fixed…16

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on10:31 am - Feb 4, 2017


Celtic go on a record breaking run and it’s all Doom and Gloom no competition etc,etc.
Was there talk of doom and gloom the last time celtic had a great run from the start of the season?
I’m willing to bet they never had the same great run the following season. All the talk of celtic running away with it and no competition.well i don’t know, celtic are having a great season and breaking some records, good for them they are 25 points clear wow! there is only a 25 point difference from second to bottom, that is your competition only 25 points from the second place to the last place.
Celtic have went on a great run 25 points clear this time last year they were only 4 or 5 points clear, who knows this time next year they may be only 4 or 5 points clear. Enjoy celtic’s success this year and great run of games as in football you never know what will happen that is why we love it
As for the doom and gloomers celtic are having one of those years, you never know next year it may be your club

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on11:19 am - Feb 4, 2017


Corrupt officialFebruary 3, 2017 at 23:54 
Why “redistribution” of wealth at all?      Who can say, that spreading income from the top clubs onto lower clubs will produce increased competition,and not some new tables and chairs for the social club?… The off-set being the top clubs are weakened, ergo Euro coefficients and solidarity payments reduced, with subsequent knock-ons    Wealth creation is the way forward. It is what the top clubs have done, and are doing, with Aberdeen and Hearts both implementing massive stadium improvement plans for example.     This was not done by popping down the road to see their mate with a haulage company, and filching some scaffolding poles to hang his board on. It is being done by professional clubs being professional. Showing ambition, drive, and optimistic enthusiasm.    It is hard to say this without appearing to be mocking of some lower clubs, but the bottom line is some of them like the way their club already is. I cant, and won’t knock them for that. It is their club, they run it, and that is what they want.     They don’t want hundreds turning up, where there are tens, They don’t want thousands turning up, where there are hundreds.   They wouldn’t all fit in for the dinner dance.     The “social” aspect of their club, is different from the “social” aspect of higher clubs.     That is not to say all smaller clubs do not want to grow. Any wealth distribution that does take place, should be split with this differential in mind. A block of butter can only spread so many bread slices before it becomes both a waste of butter, and bread. The distribution pool first needs narrowed.     Then the funds should be used in an encouraging fashion. Perhaps based on average attendance increases, showing the club is doing their bit, or maybe on turn-over, with performance indicators to include increased sponsorship and fund-raising the club does for itself, or maybe players transferred to a higher division, showing the club has an eye for a player.        I absolutely do not mean or wish any harm on smaller clubs who do not wish to partake of such a way, but lets be honest.     We are talking about providing increased competition for top clubs, and a move away from monopolies or duopolies. but either way you look at it, it is a move intended to improve on the current “business” model. That is the nuts and bolts of it. Business.       There can be no sentimentality about it, no matter how long your club has been a member. KPI’s are all that matter.    That is what income redistribution boils down to. Some clubs will be worthwhile investing Scottish fitba’ money in, but sadly, some won’t. Financial assistance to some clubs will simply be a waste of a valuable and very limited resource. Cash .
______________________________

‘Who can say, that spreading income from the top clubs onto lower clubs will produce increased competition,and not some new tables and chairs for the social club?…’

A bit harshly put, CO, but a valid point nonetheless.

It is important, especially if we are looking to create more competition at the top, that any ‘solution’ has the clubs who can mount a challenge, in the right conditions, not ending up penalised by any such solution. And looking at the clubs who might become the ‘challengers’ to Celtic – Aberdeen, TRFC, Hearts, Hibs (if they can build after promotion as Hearts have done) – any solution that includes gate sharing will hurt them, much more than it will Celtic! For Celtic, even though they would stand to lose the most money, are in the best position to be able to absorb that loss. What’s more, as CO points out in his post, both Aberdeen and Hearts are setting out on high cost ground developments, developments, I’m sure, that they wouldn’t even contemplate if the revenue from that development had to be shared.

I am, as I’m sure you are all aware, no lover of TRFC, but gate sharing would surely kill them, even more certainly than continued overspending would, and, in my opinion, that would be a wrong, inflicted on them, and that is not what this blog’s about. I wouldn’t bat an eyelid if, at their own hand, TRFC were to die, but it would make me very angry if it came about because other clubs sought, and got, a share of their gate money!

I can’t offer a solution to the dilemma Scottish football finds itself in, other than to repeat that a financial solution could only come about with a huge increase of money in the communal pot. That increase could only come about if UEFA stopped giving the huge profits that the game creates to the clubs that do well (we all know what that has created) and instead used it to the benefit of all their member associations by passing them the bulk of the profits, equitably, for distribution to all their member clubs.

That’s not going to happen, for greed rules at UEFA, so I doubt we will ever see the amount of money required to give each club in the Premiership, say, £5m per season (the minimum amount I’d suggest required to start bridging the earning gap), but the SFA and SPFL could try, and it’s their job to actually do this, to build up the image of the game to create more income through TV, sponsorship etc, and maybe one day we might see an additional sum, £1m perhaps, going to each club, annually. This £1m would be in addition to any prize money, which, in my opinion, is something that should have the differential further reduced.

Now, that £1m would also be going to Celtic, but it would mean less to them than, say, Aberdeen, who could, if they used that extra £1m wisely, year on year, build a team that progressively gets closer to Celtic until a season when Aberdeen have everything click into place, good players, good manager with different ideas, and a good slice of luck, just at the time Celtic have taken their eye off the ball, and the worm turns…

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on11:46 am - Feb 4, 2017


If all is doom and gloom in Scottish football and it has no future what do the Aberdeen fans think about their club trying to get permission to build a new stadium. Or the Hearts fans think of their club extending the existing stadium’s capacity by increasing the size of the main stand.

Are these exercises in futility.

http://www.afc.co.uk/stadium.php

http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/5098

View Comment

Comments are closed.