History, Neighbours and Made Up News

Avatar ByFinloch

History, Neighbours and Made Up News

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”.

 

publicLibraryI 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Ali is always value for money though and was amazing, reading from her as yet unpublished “Autumn” book, the first she said of a four-book series.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.

  1. Some people think  “made up news is fine” and feed us all with it all the time.
  2. Don’t expect real discussions or debates about anything in your club. No two way dialogues, except from those about money once a year.
  3. “Made up Truths” become gospel not to be challenged.
  4. The people running the club know they are smarter and more important than any of their minority or remote stakeholders.
  5. 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.

 

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.

About the author

Avatar

Finloch author

Finloch has been a member of SFM since it's inception. A Hearts fan, he also penned the blog, Look Back to Look Forward

1,353 Comments so far

Kentes1

Kentes1Posted on10:39 pm - Sep 3, 2016


CLUSTER ONE BAD CAPT MADMAN
SO BASICALLY what you are saying is that as usual they can do what they want to as long as the relevant bodies say hold on we know they are in the wrong but it doesn’t count because we know about it and can come up with the correct excuses for them.
When will anyone grow a pair to actually stand up against them I don’t mean fans as most of the fans like on here ,jjs site and of course Phil all-new out I meant the authorities speaking out, cats only get 9 lives how many have them puzzles got left!!!!!!!!,!

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on11:52 pm - Sep 3, 2016


Cluster OneSeptember 3, 2016 at 22:16
‘… OSCR identified that issues of conflict of interest inherent in the Charity’s structure had not been appropriately dealt with…….etc etc..’
_________
I have just read  the full OSCR report.

I think it is/was a shocker.

A trustee of a charity , personally connected with a failing business already ‘in Administration’, thought it would be a wizard wheeze, on his own authority without seeking legal advice or even the consent of fellow-trustees, to arrange to use the ‘charity’ to help the ailing business!

And OSCR appreciates this::” We were aware as well that,when tickets for the football match became available for sale, the basis on which the event was going ahead was well publicised. Members of the public may have bought tickets specifically to benefit The Rangers Football Club plc (IA)rather than the charity.”

And what does OSCR say? (Something eerily akin to what the SMSM and the BBC are prone to say in other ‘saga’ contexts):  In effect, ” the charity got some wee lot of money that they would not otherwise have got, let’s move on”.

They really do think that our heids button up the back!
‘Charity do?’ Never in life- a blatant fundraiser for the dying club, with no regard to charities’ law and governance.
And not at all punished, any more than the most blatant act of football sports cheating ever seen in our wee country was faced up to and punished.

(We haven’t heard from DP for some considerable time, or from Essexbc, but, thinking fondly of them both, I say , like Hamlet, ‘there’s something rotten in the state of..’ I hope both are well)

View Comment

Avatar

FisianiPosted on2:10 am - Sep 4, 2016


In 2012 the Scottish media were in agreement. Rangers died. I’ve seen their front page headlines. Now they try to promote the survival myth. This reminds me of an event in Jerusalem nearly 2000 years ago. That was a miracle.
The Scots legal system, UEFA and common sense agree that life after death is impossible.
There has been no miracle in 2012. 
I cannot stop a new club calling itself any name but my intelligence tells me that the new club will soon play their first ever game at Celtic Park. I expect the match programme to reflect this truth.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:21 am - Sep 4, 2016


JOHN CLARKSEPTEMBER 3, 2016 at 23:52
A trustee of a charity , personally connected with a failing business already ‘in Administration’, thought it would be a wizard wheeze, on his own authority without seeking legal advice or even the consent of fellow-trustees, to arrange to use the ‘charity’ to help the ailing business!
And OSCR appreciates this::” We were aware as well that,when tickets for the football match became available for sale, the basis on which the event was going ahead was well publicised. Members of the public may have bought tickets specifically to benefit The Rangers Football Club plc (IA)rather than the charity.”
And what does OSCR say? (Something eerily akin to what the SMSM and the BBC are prone to say in other ‘saga’ contexts):  In effect, ” the charity got some wee lot of money that they would not otherwise have got, let’s move on”.
——————————-
There is indeed a recent case where a charity linked to a football club was criticised by the charity Commission for its dealings with the club. (The Charity Commission does the same job in England that the OSCR does in Scotland, and under very similar rules). The Plymouth Argyle Supporters Training and Development Trust made a loan of £330,000 to Plymouth Argyle FC, which was at the time facing a possible winding up order by its creditors. The loan was criticised as not being in accordance with the charity’s purposes and objectives. The Trustees had fallen victim to the conflict of interest they all had. All ten Trustees were at least season ticket holders at Plymouth Argyle, whilst one was a Director, one a former Director, and six of them shareholders. (Paragraph 12) As the Charity Commission said, “When faced with the possible administration and liquidation of the football club they all supported or had an interest in, the Trustees placed the interests of the charity secondary to those of the football club. (Paragraph 40)” The Trustees however had proper and detailed records of their meetings, and were able to effect a repayment programme with the new company owning Plymouth Argyle, so, despite having made the error at the start (and a substantial error at that) they were praised for their efforts to resolve the issue and protect the charity’s funds. What should the Trustees of the RCF do?

Written by Paul McConville | scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com

http://www.scotzine.com/2012/03/friday-30th-march-promises-to-be-a-gala-night-at-ibrox/
—————–Well we know what they did….the charity got some wee lot of money that they would not otherwise have got, let’s move on

View Comment

Avatar

Billy BoycePosted on10:52 am - Sep 4, 2016


In the lead up to next Sunday’s Glasgow derby, the Sunday Herald interviewed Brendan Rodgers.  The anonymous writer has performed gymnastics in attempting to convey to its readership that the manager regards the match as yet another traditional Parkhead v Ibrox encounter.  He starts off with:
  
“IT’S an Old Firm game. Nobody starts as favourites as the form book goes out the window. There’s no doubt Rangers will be our closest challengers for the title this season but Mark Warburton is one of my closest friends and I look forward to catching up with him afterwards for a pint.” In an engaging and revealing 30-minute address ahead of his first match against Rangers as Celtic manager, Brendan Rodgers notably said none of the above.
  
How is that for a piece of journalistic excellence in getting the crucial two words out in the very first sentence, continuing in the old pals vein and ending with an admission that it was all made up?  Surely this is a new low in SMSM diarrhoea?  No doubt we will be bombarded with this type of ‘Old Firm’ guff in the comings days.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on11:32 am - Sep 4, 2016


Billy BoyceSeptember 4, 2016 at 10:52
‘.. “IT’S an Old Firm game. Nobody starts as favourites as the form book goes out the window. ‘
____
We ought not to be surprised.
The best liars and deceivers are far from stupid, because  the  rotten pathological personality flaw that makes them want/need  to lie somehow generates a creative ingenuity in getting their lying messages across.
Many such examples can be cited of people whose ‘gift’ for  lying was related to a form of actual lunacy. Think of many of the tyrants of the world, and think of Goebbels and company.

View Comment

valentinesclown

valentinesclownPosted on11:37 am - Sep 4, 2016


When and why did the term “financial traumas” replace the word liquidation when the smsm mention the Rangers from 2012.
The old rangers died in 2012 and the new rangers (via Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland) now play at Ibrox and all this occurred because of major financial irregularities from SDM. Not hard to say or write.

View Comment

Avatar

comeongetaffPosted on11:54 am - Sep 4, 2016


Excellent article by BRTH over on CQN,entitled David Murray’s Tenure.Sorry,cant do the Link thing.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on12:52 pm - Sep 4, 2016


VALENTINESCLOWNSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 11:37  
When and why did the term “financial traumas” replace the word liquidation when the smsm mention the Rangers from 2012.The old rangers died in 2012 and the new rangers (via Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland) now play at Ibrox and all this occurred because of major financial irregularities from SDM. Not hard to say or write.

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

A more commonly used term is ‘financial meltdown’ leaving some blurred view of an organisation which hit hard times and had to cut its cloth to suit. Nothing of course could be further from the truth.  I think it was perfectly summed up in ‘Scotland’s game’ on Thursday night when it was stated that various authorities simply couldn’t envisage a future without Rangers.  In my view every other club in Scotland would simply have disappeared were they in Rangers situation. The people who burst a gut to get Hearts and Dunfermline out of Adminstration did it for a very good reason.  Rangers fans said ‘no to liquidation’ for a very good reason.  It is quite incredible how two football authorities and the media have colluded to create one of the greatest lies ever in history.  It never needed to be that way. The new Rangers could have been voted into the league as just that.  

View Comment

Avatar

tamjartmarquezPosted on12:54 pm - Sep 4, 2016


http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/david-murrays-tenure/

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on12:55 pm - Sep 4, 2016


comeongetaffSeptember 4, 2016 at 11:54   
Excellent article by BRTH over on CQN,entitled David Murray’s Tenure.Sorry,cant do the Link thing.
=======================
It sure is.

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/david-murrays-tenure/

View Comment

Avatar

HighlanderPosted on1:03 pm - Sep 4, 2016


I posted the following this morning on the comments page at the foot of an ‘Old Firm’ piece in the Scotsman where the author of the article rightly pointed out the liquidation of the club, but then went on to undo all his good work by justifying the awarding of pre-liquidation titles to post-liquidation Rangers and others.

The acid test on whether the Rangers that is currently operating in the SPFL Premiership is the same club as the Rangers Football Club which went into administration and subsequent liquidation in 2012 lies in how supporters of the club from Ibrox would honestly and genuinely treat Celtic, if PRECISELY THE SAME SET OF EVENTS had befallen Celtic as happened to Rangers. That is to say that what had solely been a club from birth in 1872 incorporated as a company in 1899. Incorporation meant that the club BECAME a company. The club wasn’t henceforth operated by a holding company, nor was it taken over by, subsumed by, or replaced by a company. The club WAS a company from that date forward until 113 years later when it entered liquidation. No matter how often anyone who doesn’t like those uncomfortable, incontrovertible facts tries to introduce semantics and alternative contexts, that is the fundamental truth of what happened to the club that was Rangers. Now, if those identical circumstances had happened to Celtic, show me just one Rangers fan who truly believes the club that was Celtic survived and I’ll show you a liar!

View Comment

Avatar

ChristyboyPosted on1:23 pm - Sep 4, 2016


I see that a Douglas Alexander writing in The Sunday Times Irish edition that TRFC exited liquidation via a “protracted recovery”. Is anyone keeping a list on the ways you can survive after death? 

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on2:19 pm - Sep 4, 2016


HIGHLANDERSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 13:03

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

The authorities and the media do not fear Celtic or their fans. They don’t fear any club or its fans except Rangers. Moreover however Rangers is their club, and was never going to be allowed to die. The fix is in place and the history in their eyes is intact. Liquidation and company law means nothing when they can simply make up a rule of their own to ensure the end result they want.  Celtic can never be allowed to be more successful than Rangers. That is the nub of the matter and it is in my view why rules were made on the hoof to award Rangers all the previous titles.  Think about it. A club founded by immigrants is going to be allowed to be more successful than the one which is loyal to all the traditional orders. It just aint gonna happen – not then, not now, not ever. 

View Comment

Avatar

tamjartmarquezPosted on2:45 pm - Sep 4, 2016


UPTHEHOOPSSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 14:19
…but Celtic were/ are more successful, Lisbon ensured that. #going for 55, did we hear #going for 52, or 53? Likewise when the new club celebrated 140 years, do you recall them celebrating130? its called defiance, but death did happen. The bravado provides some succour, but if success isn’t there the superiority complex will be very misplaced. 

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on3:28 pm - Sep 4, 2016


ChristyboySeptember 4, 2016 at 13:23
‘..I see that a Douglas Alexander writing in The Sunday Times Irish edition that TRFC exited liquidation via a “protracted recovery”.
_____
That’s the sports hack Alexander, I take it, not Wendy’s wee/big brother wot humiliatingly lost his seat last year?

Well, as I was saying yesterday, there is nothing that says a certain type cannot be clever!

“Protracted Recovery ” , indeed! Let him tell that to the Liquidators of BHS, which was also stiffed by a greedy hog, and see what he gets told  about the facts of business life.

The man is a fool, and pernicious with it, to write such crap.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on4:19 pm - Sep 4, 2016


UPTHEHOOPSSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 14:19
Celtic can never be allowed to be more successful than Rangers.
—————————-
That depends on how you view success.
Celtic not going into Liquidation rates them in my view more sucessful than rangers, no matter what anyone say’s

View Comment

Avatar

ChristyboyPosted on5:35 pm - Sep 4, 2016


JOHN CLARKSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 15:28

John, there was no picture so don’t know for sure. I can’t provide a link but I’m just amazed and how many ways and indeed the lengths people go to avoid saying liquidation. I am of the opinion they are all completely nuts . 

View Comment

paddy malarkey

paddy malarkeyPosted on5:58 pm - Sep 4, 2016


The corpse of RFC(IL) lies on the slab awaiting interment or cremation . Certain organs have been removed and are living in a different body after transplant .Is that surviving death ?

View Comment

Avatar

bad capt madmanPosted on6:14 pm - Sep 4, 2016


Paddy Malarkey – only when Froderick Fronkensteen gets at it with some swirly sparks for the five way agreement machines. Yes, I did watch Young Frankenstein again last night, sorry.

View Comment

Avatar

bad capt madmanPosted on6:20 pm - Sep 4, 2016


Young Frankenstein’s not a bad film as a suitable remake for the RFC / TRFC reanimation actually
C Green as Frankenstein
C White as – you guessed it –  Igor
Doncaster as the policeman
Regan as Frau Blucher

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on6:20 pm - Sep 4, 2016


CLUSTER ONESEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 16:19
UPTHEHOOPSSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 14:19Celtic can never be allowed to be more successful than Rangers.—————————-That depends on how you view success.Celtic not going into Liquidation rates them in my view more sucessful than rangers, no matter what anyone say’s

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

I’m sure you know the point I’m making though. The natural order in Scotland is that Rangers win trophies most of the time. Celtic can win some of the time, as long as they don’t win more than Rangers. The rest can get a crumb off the table every now and again. Every media reference I’ve read for next week which isn’t ‘O*d F*rm’ is Rangers and Celtic. Despite the game being at Celtic Park, Rangers must always be mentioned before Celtic. The advert I’ve just watched on Sky is the latest. 

Going back to the point you make, I think every club who did not stuff the taxpayer and many others is entitled to feel they have virtues that Rangers, both old and new, most certainly don’t.  

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on6:31 pm - Sep 4, 2016


UPTHEHOOPSSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 18:20
I’m sure you know the point I’m making though.Yes i did and am sorry if my post seemed a bit forward.
So A wee clicked star to you from me.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on6:48 pm - Sep 4, 2016


UPTHEHOOPSSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 18:20
To late to edit so last post from me.

I’m sure you know the point I’m making though. The natural order in Scotland is that Rangers win trophies most of the time. Celtic can win some of the time, as long as they don’t win more than Rangers.
——————-
And that is why they fight so hard to hold on to titles won by cheating, rule breaking and tax theft,so they can say rangers won more titles than celtic.
I would rather as a fan, know my club won titles fair and square

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on7:09 pm - Sep 4, 2016


CLUSTER ONESEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 18:48  I would rather as a fan, know my club won titles fair and square

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

Absolutely. I read widespread derision elsewhere on the web from Rangers fans towards Stuart Cosgrove. His ‘crime’ was to opine that the last four years have actually been a good period for Scottish football.  His team, St Johnstone, won the Scottish Cup during that period.  St Johnstone are a model of how a smaller club should be managed and their Scottish Cup success was a real reward for that policy.  Would it have been better if they had racked up bank debt they couldn’t afford and then implemented dodgy tax avoidance schemes to pay players?!!!

View Comment

Avatar

Jingso.JimsiePosted on7:30 pm - Sep 4, 2016


BAD CAPT MADMAN

SEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 18:20

        
Young Frankenstein’s not a bad film as a suitable remake for the RFC / TRFC reanimation actually…
—————————–

You missed Campbell Ogilvie Sandy Bryson as the blind hermit.

View Comment

Avatar

bad capt madmanPosted on9:21 pm - Sep 4, 2016


Jingso Jimsie – 
and featuring Ra Peepel as angry villagers with pitchforks?
Unfortunately no love interest, but then who could rival Madeline Kahn?

View Comment

Avatar

bfbpuzzledPosted on9:48 pm - Sep 4, 2016


There shall be cutting and pasting of the Herald’s imagined report about Brendan Rogers omitting the line that it was all made up. Over time this version shall become history for certain blue pound bearers.
This kind of rewriting of history was what Winston Smith did in 1984. The Herald has merely cut out the middle man.
TRFC has at least one possible world record more – longest time to refugee to pay a fine levied on a Club which claims unbroken history Is it their claim that the offence second only to match fixing was perpetrated by a bad knight of the realm who did it and ran away?
It really is nauseating hypocrisy wrapped around lies covering a death by self extinction after a life of delusion and hubristic cheating crossed with sectarian nonsense.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on10:04 pm - Sep 4, 2016


UPTHEHOOPS
SEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 19:09
Absolutely. I read widespread derision elsewhere on the web from Rangers fans towards Stuart Cosgrove. His ‘crime’ was to opine that the last four years have actually been a good period for Scottish football.  His team, St Johnstone, won the Scottish Cup during that period.  St Johnstone are a model of how a smaller club should be managed and their Scottish Cup success was a real reward for that policy.  Would it have been better if they had racked up bank debt they couldn’t afford and then implemented dodgy tax avoidance schemes to pay players?!!!
======================================

That can’t be right.

View Comment

Avatar

goosygoosyPosted on11:07 pm - Sep 4, 2016


CLUSTER ONESEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 18:48   UPTHEHOOPSSEPTEMBER 4, 2016 at 18:20
I’m sure you know the point I’m making though. The natural order in Scotland is that Rangers win trophies most of the time. Celtic can win some of the time, as long as they don’t win more than Rangers
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
BUT
A very big BUT.
Despite all the lies of the MSM,the continued corruption of the SFA and the wishful thinking of deluded Bears
This TRFC Company 
strapped of cash
in a decrepit stadium
with an angry support 
stuck in a sectarian time warp
 churning out mince on the park
Will never generate the sort of profit needed to fund the acquisition of trophies  at the rate achieved by its predecessor 
Their future is  written in the  world of business
Failed business models  lead to failed businesses
 This TRFC Company is  dying on its feet 

Its only a matter of time before economics catch up with them

The real issue for Scottish football is whether a league dominated by Celtic for the foreseeable future is a price worth paying for letting TRFC die when the time comes
Or
Whether the rest of Scottish Football including Celtic are willing to fix the game on and off the park to ensure the TV money keeps rolling in with successive reincarnations of TRFC

View Comment

Tartanwulver

TartanwulverPosted on10:09 am - Sep 5, 2016


Shouldn’t everyone just accept that the lesser-thinking occupants of the media world are bound to want a collective name to describe all things relating to Celtic v The Rangers, given the size of the relative supports?

Apologies if someone has already suggested this, but may I suggest that the term ‘The The Old Firm’ would seem appropriate and meet everyone’s needs?

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on12:52 pm - Sep 5, 2016


Ah, but what if they win…..

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on2:30 pm - Sep 5, 2016


SMUGAS
SEPTEMBER 5, 2016 at 12:52

Indeed, a draw away from home is probably going to be viewed on as a decent job.

While I don’t think it will make a difference to the league come the end of the season, for various other reasons Celtic on the other hand must win.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on2:31 pm - Sep 5, 2016


SmugasSeptember 5, 2016 at 12:52
‘…Ah, but what if they win….’
__
In these suspicious times, there’s more likely to be a wee visit by the plod to the dressing rooms to ensure a ‘sporting’ draw!

CFC have trotted out player after player to sing about how much the OF means, and how nice it is to ‘have it back’, that they may  be ready , if by any chance they happen to be looking likely to win comfortably, to avoid damaging the ‘Firm’s’ mutual cash prospects.

I have just come back from a (Christian) funeral service, and having reflected on death it is a grief to me that I should have been made so suspicious and distrustful of ANYTHING that anyone in the football establishment says or does in relation to the ‘saga’, and the ‘OF’.

But we have been fed such a tissue of untruths and fabrications , and have watched as the whole meaning of Sport and fair competition is being destroyed before our eyes; not by cheating players, nor by cheating referees,  nor yet  by cheating clubs, but by the concerted efforts of the very Governance of the Sport, and the miserable purveyors and supporters of the BIG LIE.

Let us simply have the Truth recognised and acted upon: let RFC(IL) die in its ignominy; let the new club begin to act as an honourable club, not claiming falsely what is not theirs to claim; and let there be a sea-change in the personnel involved in the creation of the Big Lie and of its maintenance.

Then let us , in the favourite phrase of people averse to truth, ‘move on’.

View Comment

valentinesclown

valentinesclownPosted on5:44 pm - Sep 5, 2016


A brief history of the Ibrox club/clubs from 2012 written by a St Johnstone fan.

https://t.co/6POU1Z1vuv

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on7:37 pm - Sep 5, 2016


I miss reivvwer   Come back mate. My soe===

View Comment

Avatar

Ex LudoPosted on8:13 pm - Sep 5, 2016


Always good to get wee summaries of what happened in 2012. A veritable cast of thousands (or so it seems) all “hoist with their own petard”. 

View Comment

Avatar

Grout64Posted on10:13 pm - Sep 5, 2016


Just reading some of the comments about the natural order of football in Scotland demonstrates the insidious and pervasive power of widespread propaganda.

While there may indeed be a desire for a rangers to dominate and win more trophies than Celtic this is not reality at least in the fifty or so years since big Jock walked backed through the doors of Celtic park

it is quite staggering to recognise that most followers of the game in Scotland think the team from Ibrox have been the most successful team in this period, Celtic fans included.

Yet since Celtic have won more leagues and more Scottish cups
League titles

Celtic 27 Rangers (IL) 20

Scottish Cup

Celtic 19 Rangers (IL) 15

When you add to that the European Champions Cup it s clear the idea of the natural order is another big lie which needs to be debunked.  Although it may once have been true RFC have had fifty years of eroding power which coupled with the psychic catastrophe of Lisbon led to all we have seen since 2012.

View Comment

Bill1903

Bill1903Posted on8:03 am - Sep 6, 2016


^
Its all about Celtic and Rangers (yawn)

View Comment

Avatar

theredpillPosted on9:06 am - Sep 6, 2016


Bill1903BILL1903SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 08:03 9 Votes
^Its all about Celtic and Rangers (yawn)
Don’t you know Bill it’s the greatest game in the universe ? the second one Is Dumbarton v Hibernian.

View Comment

Avatar

joburgt1mPosted on10:12 am - Sep 6, 2016


BILL1903SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 08:03       18 Votes 
^Its all about Celtic and Rangers (yawn)

———————

Even though I’m a Celtic fan, I feel your pain.

View Comment

tayred

tayredPosted on10:16 am - Sep 6, 2016


“When you add to that the European Champions Cup it s clear the idea of the natural order is another big lie which needs to be debunked. ”

You do realise that to many the “natural order” as you put it, with all its negative connotations, is Celtic and Rangers dominate. Put it like that and the statistics will show just how appalling the duopoly is for Scottish football. Many don’t like the collective terms used – Old Firm, two cheeks etc etc – but how can you avoid the idea of 2 versus the rest when you look at the raw numbers?

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on11:44 am - Sep 6, 2016


TAYRED
SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 10:16

Unfortunately the same situation exists in other leagues of the smaller nations.

In Portugal its Porto and Benfica. Holland – Ajax and PSV. Belgium  – Andelecht and Brugge.

Clearly when you have a limited number of large cities and the associated base of supporters only one or two clubs benefit form the financial situation that brings.

Even when you are dealing with a larger country there can still be dominance by a select few.
People often forget that the EPL has been dominated by Man Utd with 13 titles in the 24 years.
The remainder being Chelsea 4, Arsenal 3, Man City 2 and Blackburn and Leicester one a piece.

The splashing of the TV cash may help some be more competitive but already three of those mentioned above are sitting nicely at the top and that is where the winner will most likely come from this year. Leicester were a one off last season and the natural order will be resumed PDQ with the likes of Arsenal probably pushing up into the top four.

The EPL may seem more exciting given all the hype but for a 20 team league it is generally no more ‘competitive’ than the SPFL.

The offer of CL spots is what often adds to the excitement at the end of a season as opposed to a title race.

Same with Spain and Italy.
Germany is slightly more diverse but with Bayren obviously being the dominant force.
Of the larger nations France is probably the most diverse in terms of spreading league titles around but the money being pumped into PSV has seen then dominate in recent years.

View Comment

Avatar

HighlanderPosted on12:13 pm - Sep 6, 2016


WOTTPI
SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 11:44

You are of course right to point out that other countries have their own duopolies.

However, there is only one corrupt little nation that hands a unique set of rules to one favoured club alone, and the rules include the certainty of death and taxes for everyone – except the immortal club of course. 

View Comment

tayred

tayredPosted on12:44 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Hi Wottpi,
I don’t deny that. But what irks is we had a golden opportunity thrust upon us as a country whereby we could have done something far reaching and exciting. We didn’t, we made some noises then just waited for a new “golden (well more orangey than golden) ticket” to makes its way up to the top league. We could have done something to make the league genuinely exciting, genuinely novel and who knows, maybe made a blueprint whereby football could have been snatched from the hands of the rich feckers that are ruining it for everyone!

The debate between Celtic and Rangers fans as to who has been the most dominant continues to ignore the problem by pretending that the Scottish football competitions aren’t dominated by just one club! No, there are two! Thrilling stuff…. Thats what the SMSM want, back to just the two teams, being patronising whilst paying lip service to how great it has been for some of those other clubs to win something for a change.

View Comment

Avatar

PortbhoyPosted on1:10 pm - Sep 6, 2016


How come it’s only the rfc (IL) who are immune from both of life’s certainties, …
… death and taxes !!   14

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on2:12 pm - Sep 6, 2016


tayredSeptember 6, 2016 at 12:44
‘..We could have done something to make the league genuinely exciting, genuinely novel and who knows, maybe made a blueprint whereby football could have been snatched from the hands of the rich feckers that are ruining it for everyone!’
_______
There are of course two types of ‘rich [or pretendy rich]feckers: those who break no football rules as such, and those, like SDM, who do.
Neither type is particularly good for Football as a whole as-sporting-competition , in that even legitimate money distorts the supposedly ‘competitive’ market.
But the ‘SDM-break-the-rules-type’ , when it subverts the very Governance of football, is destructive of even the simulation of Sport.
We looked  for some exercise of proper Governance from our Authorities in the matter of the disgusting cheating of SDM.
We looked in vain.
And, I’m afraid, we would look in vain for any kind of blueprint for a more financially controlled  and sportingly balanced football structure from the the same governing authorities, for as long as they maintain the fiction that the club that was killed by the greed of its owner is somehow still alive.

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on2:32 pm - Sep 6, 2016


PORTBHOYSEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 13:10
How come it’s only the rfc (IL) who are immune from both of life’s certainties, …… death and taxes !!  
    ————————————————————————————————
   They’re not immune Port, but some dafties don’t understand the old adage, “Debt dies with you”. 
That doesn’t mean before you, or instead of. ……….It means WITH !!!

View Comment

Avatar

PortbhoyPosted on2:55 pm - Sep 6, 2016


C.O. @ 1432,
Thanks, I’ll keep that for future reference.

View Comment

Avatar

fan of footballPosted on5:29 pm - Sep 6, 2016


CORRUPT OFFICIALSEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 14:32
that would make a great banner 
YOUR DEBT DIES WITH YOU 
276 CREDITORS NEVER GOT PAID 

View Comment

Sergio Biscuits

Sergio BiscuitsPosted on5:51 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Does anyone else find it mildly amusing that after all the trouble Regan and Doncaster went to to keep alive their beloved ‘Old Firm’ brand, Sky have put it on at the same time as the Manchester derby?!
After all the hype, hardly any neutrals will bother watching it!

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on7:03 pm - Sep 6, 2016


We’re a wee bit thin on the ground wrt news, but it is noticeable that many SMSM outlets are now referring to the ‘Glasgow Derby’, [whilst conveniently ignoring the existence of a Maryhill senior team! ].

So, does anyone know if those cheeky chaps in the Celtic support are planning any ‘displays’ at this weekend’s match ?

I vividly remember the ‘4 Horsemen of The Apocalypse’ banners of Lennon, Whyte, Death…and Hector from HMRC !
Putting aside – briefly – all that had gone on before wrt RFC/TRFC, that was worldclass footy banter for most Scottish football fans to enjoy !

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on7:18 pm - Sep 6, 2016


SERGIO BISCUITS
SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 17:51  
Does anyone else find it mildly amusing that after all the trouble Regan and Doncaster went to to keep alive their beloved ‘Old Firm’ brand, Sky have put it on at the same time as the Manchester derby?!After all the hype, hardly any neutrals will bother watching it!
===========================
Exactly !

We know that the TV companies have the power to change kick off times/days to suit their TV schedules – but I would have expected that in any TV contract agreement the SPFL would have some recourse if they were not happy with the requested change ?
I can’t believe a contract would be wholly one sided – re: deciding on fixture changes.

The scheduling of the SPFL’s main money draw, [in their eyes anyway],  is arguably underselling ‘the product’.

So did the SPFL have the ability to reject the kick-off time/day…and/or did Doncaster just keep his head down ?

View Comment

Kentes1

Kentes1Posted on7:33 pm - Sep 6, 2016


BILL1903, TAYRED.
I could be wrong here but didn’t the other club’s have a chance to stop it all being about Celtic and to a lesser extent which ever version of the blue team you want (as again I could be wrong but I think they were gone by then).
I thought teams like Aberdeen and the rest of them passed up the chance to change the voting system so if that is true then surely no one can complain that it is all about Celtic and them.
If I am wrong then I apologise as I said I could be wrong I am always having old timer moments

View Comment

Avatar

gerrybhoy67Posted on7:49 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Talksport are seemingly not afraid to speak THE TRUTH!!!
http://talksport.com/football/manchester-united-v-manchester-city-celtic-v-rangers-and-biggest-local-football-derbies?p=10
Scroll through to number 8 where the knockout line is:-
“Celtic fans may not recognise this rangers team as their traditional rivals,but they still seem to reserve a special dislike for a team that are technically just a few years old.”
Alan Brazil may need his tin hat for the rest of this week.

View Comment

Avatar

coineanachantaighePosted on7:55 pm - Sep 6, 2016


wottpiSeptember 6, 2016 at 11:44
^^
Up to a point your argument is correct.  But remember that Edinburgh historically has had a big population and 2 biggish clubs.  Of course Glasgow 70+ years ago had a population greater than Edinburgh but it was never anything like double the population and Glasgow then had 6 senior clubs.  So the fact that Celtic and Rangers at different times totally dominated Scottish football is down to something more than city populations. 
We know what made the difference: the initial success of the then Old Firm combined with the widespread sectarianism of the time led to a division throughout all of Scottish football so that Rangers and Celtic got a very big suppport far beyond the boundaries of the cities and this has continued so that even though Glasgow and Edinburgh now have pretty similar population the support of the Edinburgh clubs is way below what the big two Glasgow clubs can muster.

View Comment

Avatar

ChristyboyPosted on8:03 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Greetings from a wild and windswept Connemara, where there is absolutely no news. Nothing at all. Although there was rumour of a sighting of an older looking gentleman with a wavy-haired man-servant off the coast diving for sunken Spanish galleons In the hope of finding a £30 million war-chest !!!!! If they find anything, I’ll let you know ???.

View Comment

Avatar

coineanachantaighePosted on8:04 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Meant to have said (before editing option ran out) that Edinburgh had a population though less than that of Glasgow still substantially bigger than any other city yet despite from a brief period of success in the late 1940s, 1950s they have never come close to the number of league wins of either of the big Glasgow clubs. 

View Comment

shug

shugPosted on8:08 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Scroll through to number 8 where the knockout line is:-“Celtic fans may not recognise this rangers team as their traditional rivals,but they still seem to reserve a special dislike for a team that are technically just a few years old.”Alan Brazil may need his tin hat for the rest of this week.

Maybe not they still went with until they won promotion back to the top flight after they were forced to play in scottish footballs fourth tier in 2012. Ha can nobody just tell the truth what are they afraid off for heavens sake.

View Comment

Avatar

YellohoosePosted on8:13 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Some straw clutching perhaps? The actual source for this is a Daily Record article from 24th May 2015!! 
  http://rfcsince1872.co.uk/fifa-insist-rangers-are-the-same-football-club-despite-liquidation-woes?fb_ref=Default

View Comment

shug

shugPosted on8:19 pm - Sep 6, 2016


So do fifa really think they were relegated lol clowns the lot of them.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on8:39 pm - Sep 6, 2016


I managed to get past the “Doncaster said” foothills but came unstuck at the incontrovertiable “LNS clearly stated” precipice that lay beyond it.  

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on9:30 pm - Sep 6, 2016


COINEANACHANTAIGHE
SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 19:55

Agreed re the point of the sectarian issue. However things like winning European Trophies did no harm either.

Many folk pump cash into Man Utd on the basis that they are winners, without having any particular connection to the club or the city. Kids can often be drawn away from their home town teams by the attraction of silverware.

Not that is should be relevant in the 21 century but I have two pals brought up in the protestant tradition with no connection to Glasgow or Ireland, privately educated in two of  Edinburgh’s finest schools and they are Celtic fans. One,  who has moved down south has got his boy supporting them too now! It can only be the attraction to the silverware and the ethos of the club trying to play a decent style of football. 

I posted a while back (mainly related to where did all the cash go when stadiums were full of bunnet wearing fans) with regards to how Hearts had nearly as big a crowd as Rangers and Celtic in the past but how a series of factors meant that the fortunes of both Hibs and Hearts declined on and off the pitch.

In Hearts case a decline on the pitch from the mid 60’s onwards and the lack of opportunity (space) and cash to redevelop Tynecastle certainly put them on the course to loosing fans and not being able to ‘grow’ the club.

From the pure business point of view Fergus McCann, in his recent  BBC interview, and Wallace Mercer were right. A combined Edinburgh team in a 40k stadium makes sense in terms of trying to put up decent competition. However the traditions are never going to see that happen and even if it did it would takes decades to try and build up the support to a half decent level.

Therefore we are where we are. Can’t change history.

For Hearts I believe the club is on the right path and with a bit of effort and marketing we should be able to do the redeveloped stadium justice in terms of numbers.

There is clearly an appetite down Gorgie way at the moment and the current board/supporters reps need to catch lighting in a bottle or another opportunity will be missed.

View Comment

Avatar

HighlanderPosted on9:39 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Some intrepid journalist might want to ask Neil Doncaster why his interpretation of his organisation’s regulations, not to mention the blatant ignoring of insolvency law, encourages Scottish football clubs under his stewardship to run up unsustainable multi-million pound debts, dump those debts as belonging to a mere expendable company, allowing the football club to carry on virtually unscathed and encouraging the potential for the whole process to be repeated over and over again.

Even the dimmest of the dim has got to be able to see the long term consequences of the type of dubious financial governance we have witnessed by the body charged with carrying out that function in an even-handed way. Surely it is incumbent upon Doncaster and his comedy sidekick, Regan, to discourage football clubs from the self-inflicted consequences of overspending – not reward them – as they appear to have done after Rangers died.

Some questions an intrepid journalist might want to ask include:

In what circumstances, if any, does a football club cease to exist? Are Third Lanark, for example, the club – not the company – still out there in the ether?

What deterrent is in place to discourage other clubs, and indeed Rangers* themselves, from ‘doing a Rangers’ in the future?

Wasn’t the intention of the pre-existing football regulations and insolvency laws to make it impossible to ‘do a Rangers’?

Would Hearts and/or Dunfermline have been treated identically to Rangers if they’d failed to agree a deal with their creditors?

If Rangers* are so important to the financial wellbeing of Scottish football, wasn’t the beneficial, and some would argue biased way they were treated tantamount to fixing?

What next? A ‘no relegation for Rangers*’ clause  for the purposes of financial expediency? Isn’t that also fixing?

If we are to accept that the action taken by the football authorities over Rangers demise was purely done for the financial wellbeing of all 42 clubs, how can you possibly justify awarding titles and trophies of a dead club to a newly formed one, something that had absolutely no bearing on finances?

There are many other questions. Feel free to add your own. 

View Comment

cowanpete

cowanpetePosted on11:26 pm - Sep 6, 2016


Are there any fans of other “diddy” clubs who typically would watch a C v R match on TV? I am almost 60 but have no recollection of EVER watching one. Would be interested to hear the viewpoint of others.

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on1:38 am - Sep 7, 2016


coineanachantaighe
September 6, 2016 at 19:55

Nail on head I think. I think that being in turn of the century Glasgow with its massive (then even more massive than now) population , and having claim to around half of it on a cultural/racial/religious basis, Celtic became wealthy and pre-eminent.

Celtic’s reach however became longer when Rangers embraced the Harland and Wolfe immigrant workers (1915+) and the proscriptive signing policy, the latter a populist move designed to bolster their own fan base.

No good pointing historical fingers at it though, but the Old Firm symbiosis was (is) firmly embedded in the notion that sectarianism was a sellable commodity. It brought increasing polarisation to the game as people rallied to defend their ’cause’.

Twentieth century Scotland, up to the 80s, was a much smaller world than the post IT one we now inhabit. In that context the exodus of busloads of green and blue bedecked coaches from towns and cities all over the country heading for Parkhead and Ibrox would have been intensely and sickeningly infuriating for fans of local teams.

Successful polarisation inevitably led to a binary view of the game in Scotland, and that view was mirrored in the press as hunger for Old Firm news was as insatiable in the capital and the provinces as it was in Glasgow. That binary view still exists, because sectarianism doesn’t just sell – it flies off the shelves like hotcakes.

For those of us introduced to football as kids in matches at Parkhead or Ibrox, it is an uncomfortable truth that the massive following our clubs have enjoyed are in major part due to non-football factors. Wouldn’t it be good if we could all acknowledge that and perhaps even allow some embarrassment to emerge as a consequence?

It is understandable (given the acquisitive and avaricious nature of the individuals who have played musical chairs at Ibrox over the past five years) that the new Rangers are banging a sectarian drum in an effort to get to where they want to be a little quicker, but what’s the story with rest of our clubs?

A huge opportunity was lost in 2012. Celtic, arguably the biggest victims of RFC cheating, have done everything in their power, even at the expense of misleading their own fans, to hasten the new club in to the top league, to strangle sporting integrity, and to go along with the continuity myth. Other clubs have suffered semi-permanent insignificance and a perennial lack of success due to that monstrous duopoly. Still, though with a few honourable exceptions including Aberdeen’s Stewart Milne;

Rangers newco should apply to the SFA for admission and apply direct to the SFL in the same way that any other new club would do.
Stewart Milne

the rest have said nothing which is commensurate with truth, have eschewed the opportunity to legislate an end to the (10-2) voting duopoly, and to force through the strict liability that would most probably lead to a lessening of sectarian tension at Rangers and Celtic matches, in turn leading eventually to a depolarisation – not just in football, but in society itself.

So why didn’t football embrace that opportunity? Who knows, but it does seem clear that turkeys DO vote for Christmas – if the turkeys are in Scotland and Christmas is celebrated on the banks of the River Boyne. No good for the turkeys, but what of the turkey farmers?

Perhaps a few of those at some of the smaller farms each receive Green Christmas Corn stuffed in brown paper stockings?

Football has been good in Scotland these past five years – not because of Rangers absence for the sake of it – but because sporting integrity DID break out, and the duopoly was broken. Trophies were shared out more evenly, and so were column inches. Financial basket cases one after another were issued with Sanity Certificates, and families returned to the sport – not to mention the attendant dip in demand at police stations and A&E departments all over the country.

What could possibly cause those in SPFL boardrooms the length and breadth of Scotland that a return to the pre-2012 entente is good for anyone except (in the short term only) Celtic and Rangers?

I think I have my answer. Up to you to decide for yourselves.

View Comment

Bill1903

Bill1903Posted on8:06 am - Sep 7, 2016


I’m meeting up with a large group of friends on Saturday.
We are watching the Manchester derby in the clubhouse of an English non league team before watching their game.
There will only me who will check on my phone to see how the Glasgow derby is doing(purely for fixed odds purposes you understand).

View Comment

tayred

tayredPosted on8:34 am - Sep 7, 2016


KENTES1SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 19:33 BILL1903, TAYRED.I could be wrong here but didn’t the other club’s have a chance to stop it all being about Celtic and to a lesser extent which ever version of the blue team you want (as again I could be wrong but I think they were gone by then).I thought teams like Aberdeen and the rest of them passed up the chance to change the voting system so if that is true then surely no one can complain that it is all about Celtic and them.If I am wrong then I apologise as I said I could be wrong I am always having old timer moments
===========================
Absolutely. Each and every club is guilty. Aberdeen certainly have one or two questions to answer – not that they ever will of course. Maybe they tried of course, maybe they didn’t. Maybe they too were given the run around like the Resolution 12 guys?
Who knows, we are just the paying customers, the mugs who turn up week in week out and hand over far too much money to watch a supposed sporting occasion.  In my case I decided I had paid enough, I won’t go back unless something significant changes.

View Comment

tayred

tayredPosted on8:56 am - Sep 7, 2016


COWANPETE
Are there any fans of other “diddy” clubs who typically would watch a C v R match on TV? I am almost 60 but have no recollection of EVER watching one. Would be interested to hear the viewpoint of others.
==============================================
I have to admit to watching the cup semi or whatever it was a couple of years back. The one where Celtic stopped playing after about 30 minutes and the fans were fleeced once again as it turned into a dull exhibition match. Apart from that, no I haven’t watched many. I used to subscribe to Sky, gave that up years ago, so thankfully I will have no way of watching the upcoming hatefest. I may keep half an ear open to it on radio, but its a bit like watching F1, its 99% dull but there is always a chance of a horrendous crash!

Its a curious thing, as a game it became irrelevant to all outside the fans of that two clubs. The league was a stitch up between the two of them, so the result was entirely unimportant to the rest of us. Consequently nobody was interested. Sure the SMSM will work themselves up into a lather to proclaim how lucky we are to have “the biggest derby match in the world”. To me, and most people I know, its just an embarrassment upon our nation. Anyone who recalls Gary Lineker presenting the “Old Firm” match from Ibrox god knows how many years ago and telling us all how wonderful the atmosphere was, surely couldn’t help but cringe in complete horror. BP wrote earlier

For those of us introduced to football as kids in matches at Parkhead or Ibrox, it is an uncomfortable truth that the massive following our clubs have enjoyed are in major part due to non-football factors. Wouldn’t it be good if we could all acknowledge that and perhaps even allow some embarrassment to emerge as a consequence?

Is it an uncomfortable truth? To you and perhaps many or most CFC/RFC fans here it maybe, but to the majority? I’m not so sure it sits uncomfortably with most in the fan base. Certainly given the songs you now here routinely belted out by the TRFC hoards it a fact that it is being openly celebrated. Funny thing is I’ll bet most of those singing the songs never step foot in a church, and don’t class themselves as in anyway religious. So has it stopped becoming about religion? Is it just an excuse that we paint up as religious sectarianism when actually it really is just idiots being idiots for reasons even they don’t understand?

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on9:34 am - Sep 7, 2016


There’s a lovely wee example of the kind of deceitful misreporting indulged in by our SMSM  hacks.
From  a small , page two, piece in today’s “Scotsman” there is this:
” Footballer jailed after bad challenge”.
It grabs your attention, doesn’t it?
But of course, the sub-editor is looking, by an almost literally fiendish  use of words in which ‘after’ is used as a synonym of ‘because’, to make us think that the football challenge was the ‘crime’, for which the player was jailed.
In fact, the guy was jailed because, in the not surprising punch-up that followed the tackle, he broke the tackled player’s jaw.
It is that kind of readiness to distort and misrepresent the facts that has made our SMSM hacks the enemies of truth and the bolsterers of the biggest lie in Scottish football.
No doubt the sub-editor today would  smile smugly, and be encouraged in his smugness by the circulation manager, like some call-centre nuisance who manages to con an 90-year old into buying something on the strength of a 30 year guarantee!
A plague on their various households.
And if the types of ‘journalists’ jailed by Erdogan in Turkey are as guilty of  misreporting,  false reporting or biased reporting in the field of politics as our hacks are in the field of football, then more power to his elbow.

View Comment

wee_alpha

wee_alphaPosted on9:49 am - Sep 7, 2016


KENTES1SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 at 19:33 
BILL1903, TAYRED.I could be wrong here but didn’t the other club’s have a chance to stop it all being about Celtic and to a lesser extent which ever version of the blue team you want (as again I could be wrong but I think they were gone by then).I thought teams like Aberdeen and the rest of them passed up the chance to change the voting system so if that is true then surely no one can complain that it is all about Celtic and them.If I am wrong then I apologise as I said I could be wrong I am always having old timer moments
——————————————————————
Indeed the clubs did have a vote on changing the 11-1 voting system. It was defeated as 2 clubs voted against it – Celtic and Aberdeen. Draw your own conclusions.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on10:50 am - Sep 7, 2016


 I think I have my answer. Up to you to decide for yourselves.

 

Oh come on!  I appreciate it was the wee small hours but you cannot leave it at that!!! 

For myself, I can only offer the words of personal experience whereby Easter Road in May 81 you could tell by the flapping of Fergie’s jacket as he hugged everyone around how unusual Aberdeen’s league win was.  Roll on, what, 4 years later and on a now well worn road to hampden 84 the AFC fans thoroughly intoxicated on success could see the look in the Celtic supporter’s eyes – that we were there, and we were there to win.  We knew it and crucially so did they.  On that experience a generation of Dons fans were born (although sometimes they had wait a while till the intoxication passed 04)!  Explain to me why all clubs wouldn’t want that sort of experience again?

Its different of course but in a lot of ways similar to the emotion that Mileson, Boyle, Romanov and to an extent SDM wanted.  There is a fine line between wanting true competitveness – particularly in this modern social media fed, instant gratification demanded era – and encouraging questionable practises that supposedly give us it particularly when ‘us’ is suddenly ring fenced.  But we pay people handsomely to control that line for us.

I am at a total loss why, when presented with an opportunity not of their creation to change things, to publicly justify a new direction that has been forced upon them would they meekly seek to recreate what they privately espouse to be so wrong! Utterly defeats me.         

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on11:09 am - Sep 7, 2016


wee_alphaSeptember 7, 2016 at 09:49     Indeed the clubs did have a vote on changing the 11-1 voting system. It was defeated as 2 clubs voted against it – Celtic and Aberdeen. Draw your own conclusions.
=====================
Indeed they did, and Aberdeen did, as you say, vote with Celtic to block the move to a fairer (as I would see it) system. I have thought about this for years now, on and off, but I simply cannot fathom Aberdeen’s motives in this.
Once a “Rangers” was admitted to the league, against all rules and precedent, it was obvious that they would eventually arrive at the top table, and “normal service” would resume. The 2 large Glasgow clubs now retain the power to combine to block any moves by the other clubs which don’t fit in with the Celtic/ “Rangers” agenda.
How can that outcome be in the interests of Aberdeen? I’m genuinely puzzled.

View Comment

Avatar

timabhouyPosted on11:43 am - Sep 7, 2016


http://fansagainstcriminalisation.com/campaign-news/

View Comment

Avatar

bordersdonPosted on2:07 pm - Sep 7, 2016


neepheidSeptember 7, 2016 at 11:09wee_alphaSeptember 7, 2016 at 09:49     Indeed the clubs did have a vote on changing the 11-1 voting system. It was defeated as 2 clubs voted against it – Celtic and Aberdeen. Draw your own conclusions. ===================== Indeed they did, and Aberdeen did, as you say, vote with Celtic to block the move to a fairer (as I would see it) system. I have thought about this for years now, on and off, but I simply cannot fathom Aberdeen’s motives in this. Once a “Rangers” was admitted to the league, against all rules and precedent, it was obvious that they would eventually arrive at the top table, and “normal service” would resume. The 2 large Glasgow clubs now retain the power to combine to block any moves by the other clubs which don’t fit in with the Celtic/ “Rangers” agenda. How can that outcome be in the interests of Aberdeen? I’m genuinely puzzled.
=========================
Was the vote not taken following the failure (by 10-2) of the vote on restructuring under Ralph Toppings chairmanship?
A motion was then put to change the rules to allow a 9-3 majority for change therby allowing the changes to go through.
The thought at the time was that we were in cahoots with Celtic (why would we be?) but the reason could have been that AFC saw themselves as being at least 2nd in the league for the 3 (turned out to be 4) years before NEWCO reached the SPL and that this would deliver more cash than a restructuring that would more equitably distribute cash to all clubs. I am not defending this selfish attitude however. I am also sure that if the vote were to retaken now AFC would support. Again for selfish reasons.

View Comment

Comments are closed.