Harper Macleod and LNS

By

Ecobhoy 1:17 pm Think our wires are still crossed. I’ll use an …

Comment on Harper Macleod and LNS by Bryce Curdy.

ecobhoy 1:17 pm

Think our wires are still crossed.

I’ll use an anology to avoid any sub judice issues. If you steal a car from Goosy Goosy and sell it to me, and I then advertise it dishonestly and TSFM buys it from me but using forged bank notes, and Goosy Goosy then steals it back again, how does any legal process resolve this?

I suppose what I’m saying is that yesterday’s events have made me pose a question I have had in my head for some time, namely how can such a complex chain of events be unravelled?

Bryce Curdy Also Commented

Harper Macleod and LNS
Ecobhoy 11:20

Unintentionally lazy wording from me. I’m not assuming illegality either, but merely asking the question what are the consequences in the event of criminal act(s) having taken place.

And when I described the situation as complex I was specifically referring to the fact that there have been a series of subsequent events (5088/Scotland, the IPO to give two examples) of questionable legality which would make any resolution potentially very challenging IMHO.


Harper Macleod and LNS
I’ll hold my hands up and recognise immediately that there are several finer legal minds than mine on this site.

My question is this. Assuming some sort of illegality is confirmed, what are the likely implications? The cynic in me believes that a big part of the overall strategy has been to create a massively complex narrative and sequence of dodgy deals that is simply impossible to unravel.


Harper Macleod and LNS
We are having our expectations managed regarding the outcome of the SFA’s attempt to seek clarity regarding Ashley’s involvement in Sevco whilst remaining Newcastle’s owner.

The expectations refer to ‘no influence whatsoever’. The burden of proof is the most marginal influence one could contemplate while the reality is that he is calling all the shots. Campbell does not need to seek clarification as the position is absolutely obvious to anyone. Our esteemed media however have stated numerous times that this will not be a barrier but do not attempt even an incoherent explanation as to why the SFA cannot say ‘Sorry Mike, that’s not allowed unless you sell your stake in Newcastle’. ‘Because’ is about the best we get. And When Campbell inevitably decrees that there is no issue here (with or without some completely contrived explanation) there will not be the rumpus there should be because, deliberately or otherwise, we have been told this is what to expect.

We had a very similar scenario with Dave King’s ‘fit and proper person’ status. Again, there really was no need for any debate; a more unfit and improper person was hard to imagine. But King intimated that he had been given a nod and a wink from the SFA that if ‘restoring Rangers to their rightful place’ (sic) required him to hold a directorship, then the SFA would not step in his way. Again, this was all about managing expectations about an outcome that should have never been in the slightest doubt.


Recent Comments by Bryce Curdy

Time for Scots Government to Take Bull by the Horns
I’ve not posted on the site for many months having contributed regularly previously. I have thought carefully about the repercussions of next Wednesday’s announcement and suspect many will disagree with what I’m about to state, but here goes:
i would rather see the Supreme Court reverse the CoS decision than for them to uphold it but there to be no consequences, which is what I fear will happen. If the Supreme Court find against HMRC then I will reluctantly accept that Rangers’ use of EBTs was within the letter of the law by the proverbial bawhair. It will of course leave the wee tax case and the five EBT recipients referred to above by Highlander unresolved. For the CoS decision to be upheld but ignored will forever leave a foul taste in my mouth.


THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight
‘Honest mistakes’ do happen. The problems start when there is a statistically unlikely excess of them either to the benefit or detriment of any particular club. To the best of my knowledge neither Real Madrid nor Bayern Munich have been favourably or harshly treated in recent seasons so I am willing to accept RM got lucky last night. But if the same sort of thing happens in the SF I will be much more sceptical, and if it happens again in the final I will change my opinion. And a single random decision going against them next season will not significantly change that position.

i don’t believe there is a conspiracy in Scottish football, but I do think there is institutionalised bias.  There is also considerable rank incompetence which helps dilute the bias signal.


The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
The two posts by Smugas and Big Pink immediately preceding this post are likely to form the basis of an end-of-season huge elephant in the room.  Celtic will win the league, Aberdeen and Sevco will likely finish second and third, or third and second respectively, with Hearts probably coming in fourth.  If UEFA’s regulations are applied correctly then I believe BP is correct; the default position would be that Celtic, Aberdeen and Hearts would qualify for Europe and the SFA would have to justify special dispensation re FFP for Sevco to receive a place at the expense of Hearts.  But you can bet your mortgage the MSM will have the default position as Rangers (sic) qualifying by default and active manipulation from the authorities being required for Hearts to be awarded qualification in their place.  The sleekit MSM realise how important it is to define and manage expectations making it so much easier for the utterly corrupt SFA to cheat yet again.  I sincerely hope Mrs Budge realises this already.

Edit – Homunculus posted while I was typing. Alludes to very similar.


History, Neighbours and Made Up News
Tayred, Highlander
Any Celtic fan I have ever spoken to about the matter would bite your hand off for Scotland to use foreign referees.  There is a dedicated thread on the Kerrydalestreet forum called Ref Watch I think.  Nearly everyone acknowledges that we have benefitted from two decisions not just in our favour but in a row!  The in a row bit honestly feels unheralded.  In my lifetime I am utterly convinced that up until liquidation Rangers benefitted from an X point handicap compared to Celtic and the other clubs every season of my life.  The quantity of X is up for debate and varied from season to season.


History, Neighbours and Made Up News
Highlander 08:07
I accept that Celtic have benefitted from a couple of dubious refereeing decisions at the start of this season, but disagree entirely that this is the norm and part of a bigger picture where Celtic as a ‘supposed giant’ benefit consistently rather than randomly at the expense of ‘the diddy teams’.  I will not pass comment on any other ‘supposed Giants’.  My memory is perhaps a little selective but I honestly believe that overall we have suffered more than we have gained over my lifetime (49th birthday next month) as a Celtic supporter.  And before you or anybody challenges me on this reflect that cited proof that ‘these things even themselves out’ includes a thrown in on the half way line in the 1989 Cup Final and an incorrectly awarded corner against Motherwell in 2008.


About the author