Or, a story of how and why Mr Lawwell consigned resolution 12 to the deepest grass;
by Finloch
“It’s about history and being neighbours”, young Elisabeth said to her mum.
And it has to be done for tomorrow, Elisabeth said.
“I’m supposed to ask in an in-person interview about what life was like where an older neighbour grew up and what was life like when the neighbour was my age.
It’s not my fault that we’re new here and haven’t spoken to our old, next door neighbour yet and don’t even know his name.
“I’ve an idea her mother said, why don’t you make it up.
Pretend you’re asking him questions and then write down the answers you think he’d give”.
“It’s supposed to be true”, Elisabeth said. “It’s for News”.
“They’ll never know”, her mother said. “Just make it up.
The real news is always made up anyway”.
I was lucky enough to catch Ali Smith at the Edinburgh Book Festival.
I was part of a very diverse audience and unusually for this kind of event nobody in the sold-out Charlotte Square tent had a Scooby about what she was going to share with us.
Most would have been expecting a reading or two from her recent short story collection, Public Library, about the cynical, thoughtless and almost silent and unpublicised demise of Libraries up and down our land.
Our libraries.
Our land.
Ali is always value for money though and was amazing, reading from her as yet unpublished “Autumn” book, the first she said of a four-book series.
As I listened to her, I was also thinking and juggling around at the back of my mind about what I was going to write for this blog, having been asked for my thoughts, as a non-involved, non-Celtic supporter, on how I see the Resolution 12 situation.
Well Ali’s words stung like a bee and proved quite inspirational. The wisdom and clarity in her new books is highly relevant to all of us who care about Scottish Football and Resolution 12 including Mr Lawwell, Mr Doncaster, Mr Regan, Mr Petrie and us too – the real stakeholders.
Ali also shared with us a Bernard Maclaverty insight from when he once visited a school as part of (I think) a Scottish creative writing initiative and in the course of his talk asked some youngsters,
“What is fiction” ?
Someone put their hand up and said “Please Sir, it’s made up truth”.
Near the end Ali also got to talking about post Brexit Britain and used the chaos to ask the bigger question.
“Why do we never seem to have real debates about anything and why in any “debate” we might see or read that there never seems to be room for to-ing and fro-ing on points because everyone seems to have already made their minds up and just wants to maintain their status quos, achieve their own personal agendas or to steamroller us all to their point of view”.
“People in power seem to be genuinely scared of honest debates”, she said.
She asked how without more real discussions and insightful and open minded debates can any of us (and the debaters themselves too) learn because without that we will just get more of what we’ve had.
And that’s not good enough.
So thanks Ali I’m going to combine these three things from your hour along with two personal career experiences and review Mr Lawwell and his company’s reaction to the bona fide Resolution 12 raised by some of his shareholders a few years ago.
(My career experiences were as the head of a small, and treated as unimportant, company that was part of a worldwide group of companies run (badly) out of the US; and my time as head of a trade association that had two very dominant and troublesome members).
My Five Insights to review Resolution 12 are.
- Some people think “made up news is fine” and feed us all with it all the time.
- Don’t expect real discussions or debates about anything in your club. No two way dialogues, except from those about money once a year.
- “Made up Truths” become gospel not to be challenged.
- The people running the club know they are smarter and more important than any of their minority or remote stakeholders.
- All decisions that really matter in football or indeed in any business are pre-agreed and never discussed in the open.
So now to what I think of Resolution 12.
My starting point is to say this. It is wrong to see or to discuss Mr Lawwell and Resolution 12 as being about the awarding of a license – or the boardroom processes since The Requisitioners first raised it.
Sadly, I’d suggest Requisition 12 was history before it was even raised.
In the late Murray days at Ibrox and in the early Whyte ownership period there had been rumours, and I’m certain deep and meaningful business discussions between the heads of the SFA and SPL and their key committee members.
You can be sure that the SFA, SPL, Celtic and others were all watching the post Murray Rangers situation closely, and the new regime at Ibrox and related financial stuff would have been the talk of the exclusive football steamies.
Despite what some Celtic fans believe, the reality has always been that while Rangers may have dominated (just) all things SFA and SPL, nothing was ever done without the knowledge of and input from the green side of the Old Firm business model.
Sadly, I’d suggest Requisition 12 was history before it was even raised.
Scotland’s unique, idiosyncratic, religio-political old firm business model was not just about driving the individual Glasgow teams to their leviathan duopoly in Scottish football. We all knew (because we were told so) that it was also the commercial bedrock of the business that is Scottish Football.
And yes, for a while David Murray thought his club was bigger than the Old Firm, but he and his ego had moved on when all this stuff happened.
Put simply, Regan who was quite new, was convinced at the time – and still is absolutely certain – that the SFA and Scottish Football needed a dominant Celtic and Rangers, and he also personally needed and needs the support of their CEO’s.
Doncaster too was convinced that the SPL needed Celtic and Rangers arch rivalry with all it entails, delivering TV monies and maximizing his bonuses. He too also personally required and requires the support of the Old Firm CEO’s.
Lawwell the astute numbers man, under a constant watchful eye from Dublin, needed Rangers to ensure his business plan did not develop un-fillable black holes.
And yes, for a while David Murray thought his club was bigger than the Old Firm, but he and his ego had moved on when all this stuff happened.
Importantly, Peter was also one of a small influential football group who effectively controlled the actions of Regan and Doncaster. Nothing strategic would ever have been done by either of them without his involvement and input. That doesn’t mean he necessarily knew all the detail about Craig’s UEFA license shenanigans but he’d have had his suspicions.
And you know something, – at a squeeze I think he and Desmond might have thought keeping a Rangers team alive (for its future dependable revenue streams) was maybe even worth one season’s lost Champions League status.
There is no doubt in my mind that in 2011 Peter and the Celtic Board were worried but supportive of and committed to keeping the Rangers company alive.
Looking back I don’t know when Lawwell and Desmond actually discovered de facto that Rangers should not have been awarded the license.
Was it before it was awarded?
Was it after by which time it was too late anyway?
Those would be two good questions to ask them.
I’d suggest that by the time they knew for sure it was too late, but I could be wrong.
Anyway history shows that pretty quickly after McCoist failed in Europe, Lawwell committed his club to the complex and complicated secret Five-Way Agreement and all it entailed.
Celtic were senior signed-up members of the attempt to help protect and leverage the future blue revenue streams into the SPL then the SPL 2 then the bottom level.
It was all about the blue pound.
It was all about the blue pound into the future.
It was all about the blue pound into the future being central in the business model at Celtic that needed (then and now) a blue pound generating Rangers.
We all know now that compromise was somehow reached ahead of the Brechin cup tie in the summer of 2012.
Many – in fact most of – Scottish football fans were glad that football had once again broken out, having become fed up with all the politics, and were glad to return to talking about players and stuff.
Football gossip is after all more comfortable than finding out we’d all been cheated for years.
Not all fans were ready to “Move-on” however.
Some, like many of us on this site and others like it wanted to dig deeper and examine just what happened and who did what.
Some wanted Celtic as the most wronged club to do and say more about Sporting Integrity.
Some wanted to rub their old rivals into the dirt.
Some wanted a full and frank review because they believed that without Sporting Integrity we would make the same mistakes in the future.
I’d be one of these fans.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Celtic shareholders who pieced together the jigsaw that led to Resolution 12, correctly identified that their club were illegally denied a place in the Champions League and denied substantial revenues.
Fair play to them.
If I was a Celtic shareholder I personally would have wanted to know why my board had not pursued these significant revenues that were due to my company.
It was and is a big deal.
No it was and is a huge deal.
It remains an open sore and everyone involved seems to have ducked any blame.
I applaud those Requisitioner Shareholders for how they have gone about the process, and I have a huge respect for everything they have done on behalf of Celtic and fans of all Scottish clubs.
However in my opinion it was always doomed to failure because of the simple fact that their own club, having been an integral part of the whole murky “Armageddon” process, had already moved on into the new world they had helped to forge, and did not and could not look back.
So Resolution 12 was treated politely but cleverly by the club in the finest traditions of Sir Humphrey.
They did not want to fight their shareholders corner then and I’d suggest still don’t – and wont.
So going back to my five points earlier.
- Mr Lawwell et al did not want to establish the real truth, which they already knew. Hey had already signed up to what had been reported, moved the club on and spent his personal bonuses along the way no doubt.
- Mr Lawwell et al did not want a real debate because he and his small team had already done what they believed at the time to be right for the club they were paid to manage.
Nothing more to say.
And yes he could mumble agreement that Sporting Integrity is important when cornered but between us chaps it wouldn’t ever have filled the yawning gaps in the stands at Celtic Park without a Rangers counterbalance. - Rangers are now back and the Old Firm is once again dominating Scottish Football.
The truth at Celtic Park is we need each other and season book sales and TV revenues are up proving my point all along. - We tolerate the intellectual end of our support, just, but they are hard work and you’d think they own the club.
We even quite enjoy some of their stuff sometimes as long as its not too political but we have a business to run and quite frankly sometimes they just don’t get it. They should realise the SFA and the SPFL are there to do a job for us and we keep them on a short enough leash. - We will always be grateful to Fergus for what he did. We benefited at the time from the fan’s money and now run a very successful shareholder liaison programme. Once a year we have an AGM and try to manage the reality of running a business while having to hear from people who would prefer us to regress to what we were in the 1880s. Shareholders are fine but this club is a business and must be run as such.
My Five Insights sum up the position and stance of the Celtic Board.
I don’t know what will happen to Resolution 12.
The club never wanted it because they are a business and see the world differently from the group of fans who see themselves as the Celtic soul.
I applaud these Celtic fans.
Celtic does not deserve you.
Can I reiterate the request someone made earlier to Dundee fans, please? As the only home team to date against TRFC*, how did the match programme refer to them? Was it a ‘welcome back’ and ‘the last time we played was nineteen canteen’ sort of approach or did they manage to fudge it? I’m guessing they certainly didn’t call out the new club or we’d have heard all about it. Surely we must have some Dundee fans here?!?1
I know we’re all interested in seeing how Celtic treat TRFC* when they play at Celtic park soon, but can I make a suggestion? Rather than wait and complain if Celtic welcome them back, is everyone planning to email Celtic beforehand and let them know what true Scottish fans expect Celtic to do?
And yes, I know if we do that with Celtic we should do it with all clubs and I don’t have a problem with that, but I think Celtic is next? Am I right in that?
Apologies if this comes across as trying to tell the forum what to do!!!
JINGSO.JIMSIEAUGUST 21, 2016 at 19:32
The Rangers fans I converse with who go to the games week in week out will not be in the least bit surprised about the yellow card count under Warburton. Statistics show in his first season in charge, their card count dropped by 28% and their free kicks conceded dropped by 32%.
Their 2 red cards last year were a joke also.
Looking at the stats, they have conceded 8.5 fouls per game in both competitions which is the lowest of all the top 12.
Not seen Barton this season but by all accounts they still dont have a player who likes a juicy tackle and its all about passing and movement, successful or not, of course.
In fact a few of them bemoan the thought they dont have a clogger in the team, which is bonkers.
ALLYJAMBO
i see your poiny mate, i would rather he said nothing if he is only going to give us half or one side of story,publish the questions to uefa then it can be put to bed,as i said,simple
The first episode of a BBC series on Scottish football, “Scotland’s Game” is to be broadcast on the evening of Tuesday 23 Aug 2016. This will be just over 4 years after they broadcast “The Men Who Sold The Jerseys” which named many of the RFC plc. players who received EBTS during the cheating years.
Two points struck me about this broadcast
Firstly
Will “Scotland’s Game” attempt to re- write the narrative of “The Men Who Sold The Jerseys”?
i.e.
Will the BBC take this opportunity to publicly “correct” those elements of “The Men Who Sold The Jerseys” which TRFC find objectionable? Even though TRFC didn`t exist on 23 May 2012 when the documentary was broadcast?
Would they even go so far as to publicly sign up for the big lie?
That the club RFC plc currently comatose in a filing cabinet at the BDO office in Anderson Quay is the same club as TRFC ltd at Edmiston Drive?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Secondly
By a remarkable coincidence UEFA have chosen the same date for the Beer Sheba vs. Celtic match as the BBC chose to launch their 4 part Scotland’s Game series(Aye that`ll be right)
So what will be the top Scottish football story on Wednesday 24 Aug?
Will it be the Celtic result or the BBC documentary?
IMO
The main story will be the Celtic match if they fail to make the CL group stage
And
The main story will be the BBC documentary if Celtic qualify for the CL group stage
Why?
It’s always been that way with the Scottish MSM
Bury good news Celtic stories wherever possible
Paulmac2August 21, 2016 at 18:19
Mark.
I think you are correct…I believe it may have been a Link to the Bowan report that redirected me to a BBC piece…so I will stand corrected on that…
I will try and find the link again just to be sure.
Thanks
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The suggestion that the Police intervened at half time in the LC Semi at Hampden in Feb 2015 to ask Celtic not to score again as they had intelligence that The Sevco would invade the pitch at 0-3 was made on the John James website today. Shocking if true! But he seems convinced.
I recall watching the game at the time and being puzzled as to why Celtic never gave Sevco a right pumping that day. I suppose the Old Firm needs to be preserved in the end.
Roddybhoy
The problem with Leighs booking is, on first view to me he over exaggerated his fall which would suggest it was a dive…I would have been inclined to caution him as Craig Thompson did based on his angle, speed and distance…it is only after closer inspection and from different angles can you see there is actually contact…
Leigh does what most professional players do in that situation they attempt to encourage a referees decision by over reacting to the contact, which in most cases will push a referee the opposite way.
Craig Thompson certainly needs to improve his decision making…especially the important ones…based on the 2 games recently discussed and I do not know what other games he has had this season…he should be demoted into the lower leagues for a period of 2-4 weeks. Less pressure…less spotlight…more opportunity to get your head together.
Bogs Dollox
No I think the item I read referred to a Hibs Hearts game….
However…hearing what is being suggested around that game makes perfect sense…if I remember correctly Celtic did appear to drop into 2nd gear in the second half…if true were both clubs given the same advice? What about the match officials and the match delegate?
And if you recall in the first half with the score at 2-0 the referee pulled the game back to correctly award Celtic a free kick around the half way line…however it was clear to everyone the ball had instantly gone to a Celtic player with a clear run on goal and a clear attacking advantage…so maybe not so far fetched.
Mark C
That makes perfect sense…I wish more managers would do the same.
There are things players could and should avoid…kicking the ball away…dissent…taking your top off….running into the crowd.
Sometimes it is easy to forget why FIFA originally brought in the caution for running into the crowd after scoring…fan safety…
Football is a highly emotional game…and when goals are scored at vital times or for season defining moments players will always get caught up in the emotion….I remember Van Hesselink scoring a late winner at Inverness and running into the crowd…the only problem was he had already been cautioned and was subsequently cautioned again and sent off…
It is the cloggers referees should concentrate on…unfortunately the assessor in the stand places additional pressure which means taking your shirt off is considered as bad as going through the back of a players legs…bonkers
The punishment system needs looked at….certain offences should not be punishable on the field but administered retrospectively…i.e…take your shirt off or run into the crowd to celebrate as many times as you like in a game…no caution…but you are given a penalty point each time you do and as soon as you reach 5 penalty points for non cautionable offences you are suspended for a game.
The game needs to be moved forward.
“PAULMAC2AUGUST 22, 2016 at 01:00
However…hearing what is being suggested around that game makes perfect sense…if I remember correctly Celtic did appear to drop into 2nd gear in the second half…if true were both clubs given the same advice? What about the match officials and the match delegate?
And if you recall in the first half with the score at 2-0 the referee pulled the game back to correctly award Celtic a free kick around the half way line…however it was clear to everyone the ball had instantly gone to a Celtic player with a clear run on goal and a clear attacking advantage…so maybe not so far fetched.”
Im sorry but this idea does not make anything like “perfect sense” and is as “far fetched” of an idea as ive read in a long long time in what can only be considered as the mindset of extreme paranoia.
Back in the 80s and early 90s, it was far more likely something like that could happen however in 2015, with such intense scrutiny on the game, on betting, on social media and with so much money depending on outcomes, its preposterous to think this happened.
Think of all the Celtic fans who had Over 2.5 goals or Celtic with a -2, -3, -4 + handicap betting on the game. Imagine, as hard as it can be to do so, that the utterly dire Rangers team, broke up the park and a Celtic defender clipped someone in the box, got sent off and conceded a goal only for Rangers to turn it around. Are you telling me Celtic would have turned around and said “A policeman was to blame because he told us to stop scoring” ?
I think people need to step away from the keyboard and consider what they are saying here.
If this actually happened then it would be a clear case of match fixing and as the only team involved, Celtic would be responsible for match fixing.
I also think with Social Media being the way it is nowadays, somebody at the Club would have broken rank by now and it would have been leaked.
Im sorry, but this is 100% made up.
St Johnstone and tickets. Surprised how little interest there was in this. All I will say is imagine it the other way round. Imagine St Johnstone quickly sell out their allocation to Parkhead – will home tickets stop being sold? Or Hearts rapidly sell out the pitiful away allocation at Ibrox (for all clubs other than Celtic of course, who get an entire stand to themselves), will the Bears still be able to buy home tickets? Wish I didn’t have to say this, but I emphasise this isn’t anti-Celtic, this is anti-nonsense if anything the finger is to be pointed at Police Scotland as both clubs are pretty much powerless to argue.
Oh and BP, no a sell out isn’t usual when Glasgow clubs come to call, apart from anything else while I have a soft spot for Patrick and attended many of their games during my time in Glasgow, alas I can’t recall the last time they had a sell-out game. I’d be delighted if our resident Patrick fan can prove me wrong?
Match rigging. I said on SFM directly after that cup win for Celtic that if I was a Celtic fan I would be demanding my money back. That game maybe wasn’t rigged per se, but Celtic sure stopped playing once they went 2 clear. After that it was like an exhibition match. Odds on they were pre-warned not to make it a trouncing. Up until the 2nd went in, a trouncing was most definitely on the cards so one-sided was the game.
Tayred,
I wasn’t suggesting your ticket post was anti-Celtic nonsense at all, I thought you were having a go at St Johnstone.
I think St. Johnstone fans online made it clear about the circumstances (and the minimum impact on Saints fans), as did Stuart Cosgrove on radio at the weekend, particularly with respect to the logistics of segregation at the ground.
The fear I believe that exists with Police Scotland is that if the Celtic allocation is oversubscribed, then Celtic fans will try to get tickets for the home areas. A pity that we have segregation, but it is necessary I believe.
With respect to other clubs, the reverse situation at Celtic Park is unlikely. In my seven years working at CP, the away allocation (save for RFC) was sold out only once – and not at a league match.
I am very much with Mark C on the League Cup semi-final between Celtic and TRFC. It is unthinkable that a story like police intervention wouldn’t have got out. I also think it is very difficult to instruct a team to go down the gears. Much more plausible that the Celtic guys did exactly what they did on Saturday at Perth (and Wednesday at Celtic Park) – except TRFC weren’t as adept at taking advantage as Saints (or Hapoel) were.
Though heavily redacted, because of ongoing actions, the full letter from UEFA is available on the following link to Celtic Underground. Although it clearly defines TRFC as a new club, I find cause for concern that, from the text shown, UEFA have decided not to investigate purely on the grounds that RFC is no more/didn’t take part in further UEFA competitions. This, sadly, lets the SFA off the hook for their part in the matter. Unless, of course, the redacted part, and the further R12 action, means an investigation into those who passed the basket case for the UEFA licence is still on the cards.
Whether or not the Resolution 12 guys get the satisfaction they certainly deserve, this clearly defined statement from a high ranking UEFA official puts the OC/NC debate to bed, and well done to Celtic Underground for providing us all will demonstrable evidence of the fact. Nothing etheral there☺
http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Sport/Football/SPL/Celtic
BP. No, I don’t think you can lay any blame at the feet of either club. This is a Police Scotland decision. It seems unfortunate that a team cannot sell tickets to its own fans through fear of the fans of team B not respecting segregation rules. But I doubt there was any real risk of trouble even if they did – is there any history of St Johnstone and Celtic (or any other club for that matter) fans having a go at each other?? Of course, if security were doing their job the interlopers could and should be removed as soon as they are identified.
Pretty sure Aberdeen regularly sell their allocation at Parkhead, I’d imagine Hearts too?? I could easily be wrong, its been a long time since I attempted to buy such. As for teams going down gears – I wish to god Aberdeen would stop doing that, get a goal instantly McInness seems to want to sit on it. Scary business when you have someone like Ash Taylor at the back!
Re Goal celebrations.
Stephen Craigan said in the after match comments on ST J v Celtic game that Police Scotland (yes them again) were involved in the directive to book players running off the pitch towards the crowd and that referees were instructed to book any player for doing so. Which obviously should mean that the ref at Ibrox will be reprimanded for not doing so on Saturday – aye right!
In the Euros this year almost every player that scored celebrated with their fans and not a single one was booked, I had hoped that would continue in our own own season. I have no issue with players running to their own fans when they score. (Running to opposing fans is different of course).
As an aside, on the 1st day of the season, Marvin Johnson scored for Motherwell against Kilmarnock and went behind goals to celebrate for which he was booked despite the fact that there were no fans in the bottom tier of that stand as the Motherwell fans had all been placed in the upper tier!
To my mind, it’s simple, if a player runs to the crowd, or removes his top, or any other non-playing offence, don’t book him, fine him! That way his team is not penalised and games aren’t affected by inconsistent refereeing. Not only that, the ‘problem’ would soon end as players realise the damage they are doing to their bank accounts! No need for the ref to get involved in deciding what’s an offence, either, as the fourth official can report it and have each incident reviewed on TV. At games not covered by TV, there will be no problem as ‘crowd surge’ will not even exist!
The problem re the difficulty of how to treat celebrating players was highlighted last year with Leigh Griffiths at Tynie in the league Cup.
Griffiths scored a good one and his momentum took him off the pitch towards the Hearts fans in the corner of the Roseburn/Wheatfield.
Given the tightness of Tynecastle one cannot expect a jubilant player to simply haud his wheesht in front of the opposition fans or indeed avoid getting close to them.
His celebration, which one could describe as ‘natural’ and non-confrontational, went (rightly) unpunished even though it was directly in front of his opposing fans.
However, to my mind, Griffiths did get booked for deliberately doing a u-turn to celebrate in front of his own fans when everyone else had done their bit and were heading back to the centre circle.
Whether the booking was for noising up the away crowd or time wasting I am not sure.
Later on in the season Walker scored v Celtic and the same end but his momentum took him on the other diagonal towards the Celtic fans. The initial ‘natural’ celebration then deteriorated to Michael Jackson groin tugging effort and Walker was rightly booked.
However as discussed yesterday re ‘marginal gains’ both bookings were easily avoidable.
A simple Denis Law fist in the air would do it for me and leave it to the fans to do all the daft jumping about, shouting and gesturing.
AllyjamboAugust 22, 2016 at 10:32
‘.. this clearly defined statement from a high ranking UEFA official puts the OC/NC debate to bed,’
_______
Aj, it will not be finally put to bed, of course, until the SFA forbids TRFC to suggest, by shirt badges or other advertising and spurious claims and aims and targets, that they are anything other than a 4-year-old club; and takes steps to ensure that the record books clearly show that RFC(IL) never played, and could never have played, in any match and that therefore they could never add to such record of honest football attainment that they had obtained prior to Liquidation; and end the fiction that somehow ‘the Old Firm’ survived.
That is the plain, objective Truth, and for the SFA to deny it is both ridiculous, and a great stain on the integrity of Football as any kind of honest Sport, and on the personal moral integrity of any individual prepared to sustain and propagate an utterly vile untruth.
John ClarkAugust 22, 2016 at 12:59 6 Votes
AllyjamboAugust 22, 2016 at 10:32 ‘.. this clearly defined statement from a high ranking UEFA official puts the OC/NC debate to bed,’
———————————————————————————————-
It is clear now in the public domain from UEFA they are a new club/new company. As mentioned the SFA will really struggle to actually acknowledge this as the final truth for whatever reasons. As fans we now this is the truth, our clubs should also acknowledge this as the truth. A way our clubs could move forward truthfully without fear or favour is when they have their first game against the new Rangers they could welcome the NEW club in the match day programme. Does anyone know what Dundee put in the match programme when the played the new club?
Big Pink
With respect to other clubs, the reverse situation at Celtic Park is unlikely. In my seven years working at CP, the away allocation (save for RFC) was sold out only once – and not at a league match.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
March 2015 Aberdeen sold out their 1800 allocation in 48 hours but were refused further tickets despite there be nearly 20 thousand available. Doesn’t happen often though I must say and not surprising with some of the pumpings we got when Skovdal/McGee were in charge. Celtic park is not a place I look forward to going to.
It may have been a bit of tit for tat as Aberdeen have in recent years cut Celtics allocation from 3.800 to 2,000
tayredAugust 22, 2016 at 08:40
I’ve been at Firhill when all the available tickets have been sold but there are still many empty seats ,probably for security reasons(usually when a Celtic or a Rangers comes a’calling). On these occasions, we also have to share the Jackie Husband with away supporters, and the banter from them can be a bit extreme . A club like ours needs the money ,but sometimes the cost is too high .
I wonder if Mr Rodgers had any one in mind with his quote about “a marquee signing that can’t run”.
PADDY MALARKEYAUGUST 22, 2016 at 14:11
Can’t help but think that the segregation of fans has, over time, brought about a feeling in some folks that they can shout any vile abuse they want at opposing fans with impunity. Much like anonymous keyboard warriors.
To borrow a phase used a few months back there is an element of ‘de-humanising’ the opposing fans and not seeing them as fellow football supporters who are in the majority out to watch a good game.
While I am not saying there wasn’t problems in the old days and harsh words would have been spoken!!
However these days when drink is not as big an issue and a more family atmosphere is promoted by most clubs, I think there are a good number of games that would pass without incident, as they did in the past, if segregation was done away with. I think the odd nutters would settle down after a while and tone down some of the abuse.
ValentinesCLC
Quite an informative article from E Tims on the matter.
http://etims.net/?p=9642&utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork
I note the Joe Garner transfer has been finalised but despite big talk from PNEat the weekend all they are saying is an ‘undisclosed fee’.
Therefore less that everyone was talking about, IMHO.
As an aside, nice to see Bjorn Johnson getting started at Tynecastle on Saturday.
I am assuming Fifa told the owners of the new CSKA Sofia that the lad’s contract with a club that legally no longer existed was non-transferable, kapoot etc, using Rangers as an example.
I remember a time when there was much discussion about allowing “Anglos” to play for the Scotland national team . Given the number of home-based Scots in the pool to play Malta, it may be time to consider it again .It would be an incentive for those who ply their trade in our leagues to stay and perform . What’s the worst that could happen – not qualifying for tournaments ?
A positive post about Scottish Government funding and the SFA, for a change.
I went out to Heriot Watt’s Riccarton Campus on Sunday morning to watch Hearts U17s play Dundee United. While I was there I had a wander round the new £25M National Performance Centre (NPC), which is getting ready for its formal opening next Monday (29th), and was holding an open day.
The facilities are superb. The centre piece is the full size indoor pitch for both football and rugby. The white roof of the building is visible from miles around the capital. There is also a multi-sports hall which was being used by around 200 Karate enthusiasts while I was there. A new strength and conditioning suite has been fitted out along with a hydrotherapy pool. Existing facilities at the Hearts Academy and University sports centre buildings have also been upgraded.
All the outside pitches (5 x grass football, 2 x grass rugby and 1 x 3G football) have all been upgraded and relaid.
The investment is sports facilities is clear for anyone to see and is one for which the SG and SFA should be congratulated. The NPC is not all about football, but I would hope that the facilities will be used to their max and provide for sustainable improvement in Scottish sports performance across the spectrum.
Separately, I asked a question of Craig Levein in a recent Q&A re Hearts access to the new facilities. It appears that while Hearts will benefit from upgrades to their existing facilities they will not automatically have access to the new facilities (unless they pay for it like everyone else), which should knock back any suggestion that Hearts will receive a significant benefit from being based at the NPC.
Ironically, one club that has taken up residence at the NPC is Hibs. They intend to play their home Development League fixtures on the new indoor football pitch throughout the coming season. I think it must be a first for Scottish senior clubs to play competitive football in an indoor arena. Hibs first game at the NPC is tomorrow afternoon, against ………… you’ve guessed it, Hearts! I plan to go along and hopefully will see some good football from both sides.
Interesting clue in theTimes2 quick cryptic crossword today, no640 by Mara
4down Substitute possessed by Rangers at Zagreb.
er•satz (ˈɛr zɑts, -sɑts, ɛrˈzɑts, -ˈsɑts)
adj.1. serving as a substitute; synthetic; artificial: ersatz coffee made from grain.n.2. an artificial substitute for something natural or genuine.
Any chance the compilers christian name is Conne?
easyJamboAugust 22, 2016 at 18:43
‘A positive post about Scottish Government funding and the SFA, for a change.’
_________
eJ ,any idea where the name ‘Oriam’ comes from, or is it an acronym? Your post prompted me to go on to the web-site, and to read the website and read the ‘Scotsman’s summary account.
It certainly looks worth a visit.
And the SFA’s cash contribution (only £2M?)seems to be remarkably small for the facilities made available to Football !
John Clark August 22, 2016 at 21:50
easyJamboAugust 22, 2016 at 18:43 ‘A positive post about Scottish Government funding and the SFA, for a change.’ _________ eJ ,any idea where the name ‘Oriam’ comes from, or is it an acronym? Your post prompted me to go on to the web-site, and to read the website and read the ‘Scotsman’s summary account. It certainly looks worth a visit. And the SFA’s cash contribution (only £2M?)seems to be remarkably small for the facilities made available to Football !
============================
As far as I’m aware Oriam or I am Gold comes from the Gaelic for said metal.
I understood that the SFA’s contribution was more than that from talking to Paul Goodwin a couple of weeks ago.
I tried uploading a picture from inside the building but the upload facility doesn’t seem to be working, so I’ll link to an “Imgur” version.
Any ideas BP or Tris?
http://i.imgur.com/9to4vNL.jpg
Compare the height of the goals at the far end to the height of the roof supports. The pitch in the image is split into four 60m x 40m sections.
Have a wee read http://stv.tv/sport/football/1358000-uefa-won-t-investigate-resolution-12-rangers-euro-licence-claims/
notice new club/company changed
A UEFA spokesperson told STV: “As a consequence of decisions taken against Rangers FC in 2012 as well as the administration of the club and the events and measures that followed (including the club being ineligible to apply for a licence to participate in UEFA competitions for three seasons), there is no need for UEFA to investigate this matter any further since the club was not granted a licence to participate in the 2012/13 UEFA club competitions, the club entered the fourth tier of Scottish football and it was not able to play in UEFA competitions for the next three years in any event.”
STV asked the governing body for further clarification on whether an investigation took place, and on whether they were satisfied the correct procedure was followed. UEFA replied that they had no further comment to make.
I can only surmise that they are allergic to the truth maybe they are afraid they will go into anaphylactic shock if they tell the truth.
Mark CAugust 22, 2016 at 03:10
If you think pre match briefs of the type suggested about the league cup semi final do not take place…then you are being a tad naïve.
It would be wholly irresponsible for a match commander not to share match intelligence with match officials and or club officials before a high profile match or a any match where there is a threat of disorder.
In my time as a match official I had regular pre match briefs with club security and the Police….however on a few occasions the pre match brief from the Police commander did cover intelligence surrounding the away support of certain clubs regarding the numbers attending and how many were considered football hooligans…
The conversation would go along the lines of what may happen in the event the game went badly wrong…or if decisions went against their team…the brief would also include what actions we should take and what actions the home club and Police would take in the event of crowd trouble on or off the pitch…as officials we had to determine how we would proceed with the game knowing what might happen based around decisions we made…it does not take a great leap of faith to realise that limiting the possibilities of trouble is in your control…
So no it is not far fetched…and I would suggest that whilst there may have been a pre match brief in that game….there would not have been a clear directive from the match commander to limit or determine the result of a game…but the intelligence would have been shared in such a way to make as to make it difficult to not to place significant importance on it.
Shug
The signed new club/company UEFA letter copied to SFA and Celtic preceded the e mail from UEFA Media posted by STV Grant on Twitter yesterday by about a week.
So SFA knew what the signed letter said. Perhaps that worried them enough to try and muddy the waters and kill Res12 at same time?
Alternatively there is no connection and E mail from UEFA Media was result of separate enquiry by STV Grant who, to be fair had shown a keen interest earlier in June about whether Celtic had written to UEFA or not in support of Res12, having pursued Celtic Company Secretary after the SFA AGM along the street looking for a comment.
http://m.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport
Had STV waited until the Res12 guys provided an update on 8th July on CQN before publishing their article that revealed why UEFA unwilling to pursue Res12 ie RFC defunct and TRFC new club/company who could not be sanctioned then the current “wtf?” would not now exist.
One explanation is as valid as the other,
However as Res12 letter to UEFA in late May never brought up any issue relating to status of TRFC or RFC, one has to wonder what UEFA were asked mid June to elicit a reply very similar to the unsolicited one already provided by UEFA a week before with the key words new club/company that were missing from what the main stream published.
You would think the main stream folk at STV and the Herald, who ran with the STV Article, would get clarification from SFA or UEFA with regard to UEFA’s position.
That last sentence is what you get when you stop taking the tablets.
Auldheid re yours at 1.24
You are the one guy that I would go to first and foremost for an explanation re Resolution 12.
i know that tonight I have been more than celebrating my daughters birthday but I really have struggled with your post tonight.
Is there any possibility that you could have another read at your post and offer a better explanation.
I am sorry to say that tonight I am lost.
in the meantime thanks for the great work, and apologies if it’s only my over indulgence in the Courvoisier that has caused my confusion.
Folks,
a couple of posts moderated this morning because they made the assumption that Stephen Craigen’s reported remarks re. Police involvement in booking directive is correct. Apologies to those who were affected.
No disrespect to Stephen Craigen, but I don’t think we should regard his utterances (no doubt delivered in good faith) as established fact. I suspect that there is a chance he may be extrapolating from the Cup Final report paragraph on celebrations – that they may have an impact on crowd behaviour. There is of course also the fact that it long been understood that the reason players are booked for this practice is a crowd safety one, and one which concerns police and stewards at any match.
Not the same argument as the consistent application of any rule of course, but it would be irresponsible of the mods to let an assumption take root as fact – and turn up the conspiracy alert level to DEFCON 2.
We have contacted the SFA by Twitter and email for clarification. They usually ignore us in the bunker – probably assuming that our questions are loaded 🙂 – but perhaps on this occasion they will take the opportunity to clear things up.
BillyJ1
I am a bit confused myself. I think I know what he means – but he will no doubt expand later 🙂
SHUGAUGUST 22, 2016 at 22:57
Have a wee read http://stv.tv/sport/football/1358000-uefa-won-t-investigate-resolution-12-rangers-euro-licence-claims/notice new club/company changed A UEFA spokesperson told STV: “As a consequence of decisions taken against Rangers FC in 2012 as well as the administration of the club and the events and measures that followed (including the club being ineligible to apply for a licence to participate in UEFA competitions for three seasons), there is no need for UEFA to investigate this matter any further since the club was not granted a licence to participate in the 2012/13 UEFA club competitions, the club entered the fourth tier of Scottish football and it was not able to play in UEFA competitions for the next three years in any event.”STV asked the governing body for further clarification on whether an investigation took place, and on whether they were satisfied the correct procedure was followed. UEFA replied that they had no further comment to make.
______________
What we know about that peice by STV is that it is a response to a question, or questions, they put to UEFA’s media and PR department, and not to any high ranking UEFA official. We do not know, however, what question, or questions, were asked and how they were couched. We can all ask questions couched in a way to elicit an answer that will somewhat match what we require, and ‘journalists’, even those within the SMSM, are well versed in that particular art. What’s more, I’d suggest that UEFA’s media and PR chaps will have a cosy wee relationship with most media companies, it is, after all, the nature of their job, and will be happy to frame replies in a way that suits those they might be looking for favours from at a later date.
Maybe I’m way off the mark here, but is it beyond the realms of possibility that the ‘question’ asked was, ‘can you provide us with the text of the reply to the Resolution 12 question, without any reference to ‘new club/company’?’ Who knows just how cosy things are between such bodies? I certainly wouldn’t trust either!
We will have to wait and see if STV releases a copy of that question, and then decide if we believe it is genuine! Who knows, there may not be anything to provide a copy of, as the ‘question’ was maybe put in a phone call to some accomodating media contact!
Terrible though it may be, but I just don’t trust anyone in the media to tell the truth, unless it suits their agenda!
Tris @ 09:06
————————–
I have had a post removed. If you want clarification of the SFA stance have a look at the Twitter time line of Darryl Broadfoot.
PADDY MALARKEYAUGUST 22, 2016 at 17:42
I remember a time when there was much discussion about allowing “Anglos” to play for the Scotland national team . Given the number of home-based Scots in the pool to play Malta, it may be time to consider it again .It would be an incentive for those who ply their trade in our leagues to stay and perform . What’s the worst that could happen – not qualifying for tournaments ?
=============================
Its no secret that I firmly believe Gordon Strachan is doing an appalling job. I find his squad and team selections baffling. I find his arrogance insufferable. I find his belittling of domestic Scottish football completely incompatible with his role within the SFA. Frankly I can’t be bothered with the guy, and I am one who had the immense pleasure of watching him week in week out destroy opposition on the pitch.
I’m not alone in this, reading my usual Aberdeen fan site this morning revealed a lot of ill feeling and downright anger about his role. I copy in part of one post below (forgive me pacman if you are reading) and whether you agree with it all or not, this posters feelings say a lot. The line about his win record actually took me aback a little. Needless to say, a lot of the posts are a lot more forthright in their opinions, I could add many more lines to that posted below, but the strapline is pretty much a unanimous “I couldn’t give a *%$ about Scotland any more”. Something that should be setting off alarm bells at Hamden, but they remain oblivious or maybe they just don’t care about the fans opinions – yeah wouldn’t that be a shocker!
tayredAugust 23, 2016 at 10:28
‘……reading my usual Aberdeen fan site this morning revealed a lot of ill feeling and downright anger about his role. I copy in part of one post below (forgive me pacman if you are reading) and whether you agree with it all or not, this posters feelings say a lot. …’
_________
I have no pretensions,tayred, to being knowledgeable enough about national team selection matters:
but I wholeheartedly endorse two really critical points made by your fan-site extract:
“The manager called for “manipulation” to be used to promote Hibs, Hearts and Sevco”
and
” A lot of fans have been alienated”
Who would respect a football manager who is so ready to call for the abandonment of Sporting integrity?
And who would not be alienated by the cheating mentality of the SFA , or give a tuppenny toss about a national team run by men of no sporting integrity whatsoever?
What would be the point? What would it all be about?
We cannot let this rot continue, if we have any pride in ourselves and our national sporting endeavours.
TAYRED
AUGUST 23, 2016 at 10:28
Excellent post. The SFA and Strachan appear to constantly trott out the same old stuff and hope that magically a different result will emerge.
Both appear to take action that is wholly at odds with their responsibilities to the domestic game.
I have long said that we should be developing good domestic talent and if they end up playing elsewhere and are good enough for the national team then so be it.
However, currently, I have doubts about what the tried and tested (failed) oldies and some of the lower league Anglos have to offer as opposed to some of our own domestic players.
Thanks for the input auldheid grateful as always.
Just on the key part of Res12 re the issuing of the licence. Am I right in saying that some of the other European clubs caught in the net set up to trawl for euro-participating defaulting clubs between the original March cut off date and the June and September updates did receive penalties, and for those failing to qualify the following year this was usually a ban on competing at the next point of entry. I understand the 3 year distinction that they refer to in the now famous letter for NEW members which wouldn’t have applied in any case without a Scottish Cup win but were UEFA minded to lay down a penalty at the next point of entry to the old club then that point in time hasn’t actually occurred yet (but was obviously very close in May).
Its not something you’ll get an answer for, since UEFA have already stated that it doesn’t apply in any case, it just occurs to me another key distinction that is getting lost in the fug.
UPTHEHOOPSAUGUST 23, 2016 at 09:56
Doesn’t clarify it for me UtH. I have asked him via DM to make it easy for me BP
================================
So he follows you then if you have been able to DM him. You’re well in at Hampden!
PS I can’t see what he doesn’t clarify on Twitter.
Darryl Broadfoot @DarrylBroadfoot Aug 21@DarrylBroadfoot Has been a long-standing directive from Police Scotland to mitigate safety issues caused by crowd surges
SMUGASAUGUST 23, 2016 at 12:40
Glad it is not just me that is lost in the fug.
The Uefa letter still has some funny stuff in there and fails to answer all the questions.
It seems to me there are three strands in the letter
It says, in relation to not getting a Euro Licence :-
1) as a consequence of decisions taken in 2012;
2) as well as the administration of club;
3) and the events that followed (including the newclub/company being ineligible to apply for a licence in the next three years)
Does anyone have any idea what Item 1 is referring to as it seems to be separate from the other ‘events/measures’ that are more related to items 2 & 3.
Item 2 seems clear cut in that admin resulted in the club having outstanding social taxes so any application would have been quashed from the start.
Item 3 appears to to state that the new club/company would have needed the three year period before gaining a licence. However, the mentioning of being in the fourth division muddies the water being that we know a SC win would still allow Euro Qualification.
Why was this mentioned as if it were somehow significant? If the new/club needed three years then it shouldn’t have mattered what division or league they were playing in or what cups they won?
Re: Scotland team / Strachan.
Don’t they know that “Scotland Supporters are More Than a Number”?!
It says so on the SFA website, so it must be true.
If I was Regan, [God forbid], long before now I would have told Strachan to get his backside down to Wales and then off to Iceland mibbes for a week each – to try and glean from their FA set up/team managers just what they did/changed to achieve Euro’s qualification and their subsequent, tremendous runs in the tournament.
I would tell Strachan to drop any pretensions, show humility – and learn as much as he could.
He would also give me/Board a full blown report after his travels – along with several NEW suggestions on how to improve the Scotland team’s chances of qualifying for a tournament in the near future.
…but that would be stating the bleedin’ obvious !
[Apologies in advance if Strachan has already done this, but I’m unaware.]
Wottpi
NoT sure what one and two referred to – could be the 5 Way and what went with it but you are wrong on the third.
The Scottish Cup route does not give automatic right of entry to UEFA competition . That clause is there to allow clubs who are not normally subject to the usual UEFA standards which apply to teams who are in top tier, where those standards apply, to be considered for entry.
UEFA make the final judgement and had TRFC applied before August 2015 they would not as a new club met the 3 years membership of the SFA requirement.
That is a point lost in the fog. To UEFA the new club/company have not been members of the SFA for more than 4 years now from August 2012. It’s got nothing to do with 3 years accounts. The requirement is to be members of the SFA for more than three years.
Had SFA Membership indeed been continuous UEFA would not have decided TRFC were ineligible. So who is wrong? SFA who have said nothing to confirm or UEFA who have?
SFA really have to clarify and justify their position.
Smugas
Again to clarify. The word was that if TRFC beat Hibs they would have been allowed a UEFA place this season.
By 2 or 3 August 2015 TRFC would have had 3 years membership of the SFA and so were eligible for any UEFA competition they might qualify for from then subject to satisfying lesser criteria not published.
So the Scottish Cup is a meaningless reason to question what UEFA said. It is totally consistent with events since 2012.
The only inconsistency has been in presentation of UEFA’s position which could be derived from the fair play principles they try to promote paricularly Article 12.
It was always going to come out because that is how it is.
Auldheid
Yes, but to square the triangle (never was much good at that Jomtry) UEFA appear to have said in the letter (which you have the benefit of having seen hence I can only paraphrase) that ‘normal’ procedures would not apply with regards to the old club given what then followed. Bampots like us stupidly refer to what then followed as ‘liquidation.’
If the continuity addicts are correct then had the magically transferred club, resplendent with its old, dusty and crucially >3yrs membership qualified for Europe by winning the Scottish Cup THEN the question of ‘normal procedures’ would have come into play. But because the old club, were it still equally magically to be with us, did not technically qualify for Europe then the question of ‘normal procedures’ presumably bringing a continuing block to entry because of 2011 misdemeanours is a moot point and hasn’t actually been tested yet.
And of course, nor will it, since if/when they do eventually qualify UEFA will be treating them (I understand identically to if they were the old club as at least 5 years will have passed) as a new club per your letter in any case.
Sorry, that made a lot more sense in my head! The point is there were something like 26 clubs cited in that infamous summer 2011 trawl some of whom did not qualify for European competition in 2012. My memory assures me that some of the non qualifiers still face or faced retrospective punishment once they technically qualified once more. It appears said retrospective punishment would not apply to RFC. The three years membership, given that they didn’t qualify during that period) is a bit of a red herring specifically in that respect.
Smugas
On your other point of when sanctions might apply, UEFA’s position relates to anything uncovered at monitoring.
Anything before that is SFA responsibility and grant applications can be refused, which is a sanction itself.
Other clubs since 2011 have been refused a licence in circumstances very simiilar to 2011, the difference being the degree of rigour applied by the national association.
When granting stops and monitoring starts needs clarification.
Smugas
Normal procedure for UEFA was application of Article 12 and they applied it.
wottpiAugust 23, 2016 at 14:46
SMUGASAUGUST 23, 2016 at 12:40 Glad it is not just me that is lost in the fug.
The Uefa letter still has some funny stuff in there and fails to answer all the questions. It seems to me there are three strands in the letter
It says, in relation to not getting a Euro Licence :- 1) as a consequence of decisions taken in 2012; 2) as well as the administration of club; 3) and the events that followed (including the newclub/company being ineligible to apply for a licence in the next three years)
Does anyone have any idea what Item 1 is referring to as it seems to be separate from the other ‘events/measures’ that are more related to items 2 & 3.
Item 2 seems clear cut in that admin resulted in the club having outstanding social taxes so any application would have been quashed from the start.
Item 3 appears to to state that the new club/company would have needed the three year period before gaining a licence. However, the mentioning of being in the fourth division muddies the water being that we know a SC win would still allow Euro Qualification.
Why was this mentioned as if it were somehow significant? If the new/club needed three years then it shouldn’t have mattered what division or league they were playing in or what cups they won?
________________________________________
Not sure if this helps, WOTTPI, but my understanding of the points is:
1) I would imagine it refers to the administration and subsequent liquidation of RFC. He may well consider that ‘decisions’ were taken that led to the administration, ie non payment of PAYE and NI, or the decision, itself, to go into administration. But, if I get the gist of your post correctly, that you are suggesting there may be something questionable we don’t yet know about, then there may be something else contained within the redacted areas that the word ‘decisions’ refers to, or makes clearer.
3) My understanding of this part is it’s saying that it was a new club that entered the fourth tier of Scottish football, and therefore couldn’t qualify, regardless of what division it was in or what competition it won, for three years. Mr Treverso could just as easily have said, ‘ it was a new club that was playing at Ibrox’, or ‘it was a new club playing in blue’, his intention would have been the same – defining, without naming, the new club. I don’t know if it’s relevant, but within the un-redacted text, there is no mention of either club (RFC or TRFC), and this may well be the reason that it is identified in this way – there can be no doubt it is TRFC he is talking about, as they were the only club to enter the fourth tier at the relevant time, and quite possibly the only new club to ever enter the Scottish league, as, as far as I know, all other new entrants, throughout history (real history, not bought history
), had been in existence for some time and had qualified on merit.
We have to remember that this un-redacted part of the letter is only being released to confirm UEFA’s stance on liquidated clubs, there may well be something even more revealing/sinister under those thick black lines!
Hope this helps, or even leads to more debate on the subject
PS On the matter of not naming the clubs involved, could it be that UEFA are not happy with the use of the name ‘The Rangers’, and so wish to avoid it’s use in official correspondence? Or maybe Mr Treviso just feels it’s best to avoid using the same name for two different clubs to avoid confusion in a letter of this nature.
From Twitter.
From latest edition of World Soccer Magazine. pic.twitter.com/msdPP6bscn
Smugas
Foggy ain’t the word?
Did those other clubs suffer liquidation or were they still going concerns the following year?
The transfer of SFA Membership is clearly not seen by UEFA as continuation of SFA Membership. If it was there would be no 3 year ineligibility period.
We don’t know what would have happened had TRFC got access to UEFA via SC before 2015, but as far as UEFA are concerned in that 3 year period they failed the national association membership requirement so I don’t see how that could be overcome and it’s speculation they would have been accepted .
JEAN7BRODIE
pedantic i know lol
https://twitter.com/PaulTyredagh81/status/768096056202649600/photo/1
UPTHEHOOPS
AUGUST 23, 2016 at 13:44
I think we knew that there was a long standing directive from police about incidences of fan/player interaction, but I have asked him to clarify whether the inference that people are drawing from that (about Police demanding bookings) is correct.
I expect – though neither DB nor the fishul SFA Twitter has replied – that the booking directive comes from the refs committee as their response to the Police advice.
TONY
Very brave of Phil G – even if he can’t get copy like that out in Scotland. You will be surprised to learn that Phil, unlike most of the folk who scribble over our breakfast tables – is an actual, trained journalist and writer.
As I say – a pity he can’t speak similar truths in the Herald.
Thanks Tony, I made an erse of that
http://www.fifa.com/mm/Document/FootballDevelopment/Refereeing/02/79/92/44/Laws.of.the.Game.2016.2017_Neutral.pdf
Law 12 tells us:
Celebration of a goal:
Players can celebrate when a goal is scored, but the celebration must not be excessive; choreographed celebrations are not encouraged and must not cause excessive time-wasting.
Leaving the field of play to celebrate a goal is not a cautionable offence but players should return as soon as possible.
A player must be cautioned for:
• climbing onto a perimeter fence
• gesturing in a provocative, derisory or inflammatory way
• covering the head or face with a mask or other similar item
• removing the shirt or covering the head with the shirt
That seems quite clear to me, so why does any outside agency (eg Police) require to be involved?
JEAN7BRODIE
no problem
http://www.extratime.ie/newsdesk/articles/7445/derry-unsuccessful-in-overturning-europe-ban/
It seems quite clear from this article hoe UEFA treat a new club.
Wed, Feb 22 2012
Derry City have today been denied a UEFA licence to compete in this year’s Europa League competition, after UEFA deciding against allowing the club compete due to a three-year European suspension. UEFA’s three-year rule at the centre of the problem applies to the club for going into liquidation after being expelled from the League of Ireland by the FAI in November 2009. The application by Derry City was supported by the FAI in the hope for relaxation of the rule. An FAI statement on Tuesday evening confirmed that the club had been unsuccessful and, pending an appeal, Bohemians would be nominated to take their place. “The Football Association of Ireland today confirmed receipt of UEFA’s decision not to grant Derry City FC permission to apply for a licence to play in UEFA competition for the season 2012-13. An application was made to UEFA for a derogation of the ‘three-year’ rule, arguing that the club was a new entity, and as such was entitled to apply for a licence. The Association will consult with the club regarding the matter and both parties will study the decision in the coming days. Should no appeal of this decision be made to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Bohemian FC will be nominated for UEFA competition in place of Derry City FC.”
JINGSO.JIMSIE
AUGUST 23, 2016 at 17:22
The police are involved in H&S JJ. They (and Sheriff Bowen in his Cup Final report) have identified players running to the fans as a risk to H&S as fans leave their seats and rush to the perimeter to celebrate. In order to co-operate with the police, the SFA have made it punishable by a booking. It is a bit of a joy-sucker, but I think I agree with the thinking behind it.
Given the circumstances of the Police advice, I wonder what recourse an injured (trampled upon) fan would have in the courts against a player who initiated such a crush.
Strong professional advice given: “celebrating with fans is likely to cause a rush which may result in injury”
Player: “but I’m very excited”
Fan with broken appendage: <Dials m’learned friend>
billyj1August 23, 2016 at 02:40 i 14 Votes
Auldheid re yours at 1.24 You are the one guy that I would go to first and foremost for an explanation re Resolution 12. i know that tonight I have been more than celebrating my daughters birthday but I really have struggled with your post tonight. Is there any possibility that you could have another read at your post and offer a better explanation. I am sorry to say that tonight I am lost. in the meantime thanks for the great work, and apologies if it’s only my over indulgence in the Courvoisier that has caused my confusion.
————————
Ok. I did mention me taking tablets.
8th June UEFA reply to RES12 solicitor signed by Traverso which has new club/company words in it.
It was copied to SFA and Celtic at same time.
By 16 June STV have been in touch with UEFA although at 16th June method not known.
16 June STV try to establish if any developments at Res12 end. Told not able to discuss and advised to hold saying anything.
20 June STV publish article. No mention of new club in it. This was commented on here subsequently.
8th July Statement on Res12 appears on CQN containing Traverso’s para of 8th June verbatim that subsequently surfaced last week.
21? August STV post on Twitter copy of UEFA e mail that they based 20th June article on. E mail more or less repeats original of 8th June but significantly leaves out new club/company reference. No date on e mail but ties in with 16 June date before or around which STV contacted UEFA.
Either a coincidence that STV of their own volition were chasing the issue and got a different version from UEFA Media from that of 8th June (but no one knows why the removal of the key words new club/company) or STV were party to getting release of the changed version.
In reporting at 20 June what was said in the UEFA Media E mail, most reading would consider Res12 dead (but its not even in administration. ) and have no idea that it differed from what was sent to Res12 solicitor.
http://stv.tv/sport/football/1358000-uefa-won-t-investigate-resolution-12-rangers-euro-licence-claims/
Why the change? Who prompted it?
Who benefits from the 20th June STV article and omission of key information?
BIG PINKAUGUST 23, 2016 at 16:56
I think we knew that there was a long standing directive from police about incidences of fan/player interaction, but I have asked him to clarify whether the inference that people are drawing from that (about Police demanding bookings) is correct.
I expect – though neither DB nor the fishul SFA Twitter has replied – that the booking directive comes from the refs committee as their response to the Police advice.
===============================================
Yeah…I see where you are coming from now. I doubt you will get an answer from them though, especially given the inequality in how yellows are issued for this ‘offence’.
Auldheid
Thank you very much for taking the time to respond.
Very much clearer now.
Excellent work as usual.
BIG PINK
AUGUST 23, 2016 at 18:07 The police are involved in H&S JJ. They (and Sheriff Bowen in his Cup Final report) have identified players running to the fans as a risk to H&S as fans leave their seats and rush to the perimeter to celebrate. In order to co-operate with the police, the SFA have made it punishable by a booking. It is a bit of a joy-sucker, but I think I agree with the thinking behind it.
—————————————————–
I’m curious as to what goes in the referee’s report if the player hasn’t contravened any of the four specific examples in Law 12 — the ‘unsporting behaviour’ catch-all?
It’s quite handy for the SFA that yellow cards can’t be appealed, when it appears that they can instruct referees to issue them contrary to the laws of the game.
The Uefa letter is a foot in the door, but it is not enough. Does their website still current Rangers with 54 titles? If so, they are hypocrites and liars. Have they told the SFA and SPFL to tidy up their histories of a certain club? No? Then UEFA are what they are. Bigger versions of the corrupt SFA. Lets not talk about their past leaders, just about some of their policies. Macabi refuse to play Palestinians who live in Israel. Just like Rangers refusing to play Catholics! UEFA are dire.
As it’s half-time: where does the SFA get the authority to amend the published laws?
If they can amend the laws, why isn’t their local requirement for a caution to be issued made transparent to all stakeholders (and published on their website) to prevent the need for debate?
oh oh
Just noticed that our game v Ross Cty has been brought forward to the Friday night at 19.45. On December 23rd . In Dingwall . Who said that the SPFL have no consideration for the fans ?
lucky
Hello ………….. Celtic fans ………….. if you are reading this you can come out from behind the couch now
One thing that Rodgers can take from tonights game is that he now knows what he needs to spend the champions league cash on. A right back, 2 more good centre backs and a midfielder that can put his foot on the ball and slow things down.
EASYJAMBOAUGUST 23, 2016 at 21:49
Hello ………….. Celtic fans ………….. if you are reading this you can come out from behind the couch now
==========================
It was painful EJ, very painful. Now it’s joyous.
BP
“As I say – a pity he can’t speak similar truths in the Herald.”
——————————————————————–
Can someone on Twitter ask this Phil Gordon guy why he writes in non-Scottish publications about Rangers’ liquidation but can’t up here?