Any organisation’s plan for a top-down review of development would ordinarily be welcome news. Self evaluation, or even better independent evaluation is an ongoing process amongst professionals, individually and collectively alike. In the case of the SFA however a healthy scepticism is required. We are after all dealing with people who are the poster boys for self-interest and short-termism.
The SFA had previously commissioned a thorough review of the game (decades ago) by Rinus Michels, the inventor of “Total Football” and his report was largely ignored, partly because it implied criticism of the then current regime, and partly because it would cost money. A “Total Shambles”.
Henry McLeish also famously recommended (again after being commissioned to do so by the SFA) a more balanced approach to governance between the SFA and SPFL. This would have required a blazer or two having less say in the running of the game – and was therefore ignored.
Mark Wotte, the prominent Dutch coach hired as performance director at Hampden also suggested during his tenure that, in order to improve technique, more ball time should be provided for players in games.
He recommended seven a side competitions as the norm for u-15s (less players – more participation).
To accommodate this, club infrastructures would have required expensive upgrading, and coaches in clubs, not responsive to new ideas lobbied hard for the status quo.
The upshot is that we carried on with the same eleven-a-side games where many players hardly got a kick.
And in this classic Einsteinean definition of insanity, no overall improvements were to be found in the national team’s fortunes.
No wonder Wotte fled the scene in 2014 after three years.
Of course the details are debatable and subjective, but experience tells us;
Anything that
a) costs money or
b) upsets old boys’ networks
has a tendency to be hidden out of sight.
The recent “announcement” is merely a reaction to a couple of poor results, caused in part by inaction in the wake of previous reports’ recommendations.
An increasing number of observers of our game refer to an inferior mindset amongst players in Scotland, that we accept losing as the norm.
Hardly surprising that such a mindset is prevalent amongst professionals.
They must despair at the chronic self-interest, ineptitude and fecklessness of the “leaders” of our sport – an organisation that appointed Gordon Smith as CE (think about that for a minute) based on who his pals were, where McGregor and Petrie can become senior officers – “because it’s his turn!” – despite being unqualified squares in a round ball game, and where fairy-tales take precedence over reality.
As long as the blazers have a seat on the SFA bus, nothing will change.
I notice Ross Wilson ,the new Director of football at Ibrox who was contacted 2 years ago claimed it just wasn't the right time to return but now considers the circumstances correct to sign up. Did Ross actually conclude the deal before the announcement of Kings punishment ? Did he fail to read about it ? Does he not realise the implications ? Did he speak to Mark Allen beforehand to test the bathwater before plunging in? I would think most people would think very carefully before joining a company whose CEO has just been publicly blackballed . Strange decision imo.
Bogs Dollox 14th October 2019 at 21:52
Does anyone know how far reaching the could shoulder sanctions are?
==============================
The judgement stated:
In our opinion is Mr King an offender who is not likely to comply with the Code and whose conduct merits cold-shouldering by professional bodies regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority
==============================
The judgement also relates to King individually, unless he acquires a controlling stake in the company.
My reading of the above is that FCA regulated companies will not do business with him as an individual. That may extend to club activities where King is the signatory or nominated person to act on the club's behalf. In those cases it may be as simple as getting someone else to act on behalf of the club.
The net effect on King and the club will be neglibible if anything at all.
So that's the protocol for dealing with racist chanting . Hope SFA and SPFL rule makers were watching . Call it out .
EJ
I think the phrase "fly wi' the craws , get shot wi' the craws" would come into the thinking of companies before they decide to do business with any company that DCK has the slightest connection with . It would be different if there was a large wad to be had , but with King , I don't see that happening .
Timtim 14th October 2019 at 22:03
I notice Ross Wilson ,the new Director of football at Ibrox who was contacted 2 years ago claimed it just wasn't the right time to return but now considers the circumstances correct to sign up.
================
I am sure even Wilson himself will be surprised at how big a name in football he now is, and how brilliant his track record is being portrayed by people who probably haven't even looked at it. His real surprise over the next few months though will be to find out he is actually a superior person to others in Scotland now. He is now socially and morally superior to anyone not fortunate enough to be part of Rangers.
Bogs Dollox, I suppose time will tell just how far reaching the Cold Shoulder effects will be in practice.
But the salient point, IMO, is that every FCA regulated organisation has to recognise the decision on King's trustworthiness – and WRT to any potential, new dealings with King, they would have to take into consideration the TOP decision.
I jetted in this morning from Newark Airport, after a couple of interesting and enjoyable weeks in Pennsylvania, and it's good to be back in the same time zone.
Section A3 of the Take-over Code [ the full text of the code is at this link http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/code.pdf?v=1Apr2019%5D describes the companies, the transactions and persons who are covered by the Code.
My reading of that section is that the cold-shouldering of a director or a company is only in relation to those transactions that are in connection with a take-over bid by one company of another, or by the directors of a company trying to get an increased control of the company by the issue of shares.
That's disappointing, because I would wish that anyone 'cold-shouldered' should be seen as being an utter pariah, completely excluded from using any financial services in connection with his business or operating in any commercial business whether as owner or director.
Reading the Code is not easy for people like me who knows hardly anything about Companies and shares and the 'market' , so I may be wrong in my reading of the Introduction, Section A3.
But I think that whatever we think, the people who move in that world of business and shares and take-overs crap themselves at the prospect of being 'cold-shouldered'- so it must have some significance as a penalty, branding the person as an untrustworthy person in whose good faith one would be a mug to rely on in any business connection.
Further, it seems clear to me that even to sit round the same Boardroom table with a person ordered by the FCA to be 'cold shouldered' would suggest that one is of the same low-life stamp of lying, untrustworthy business man.
Perhaps the RIFC plc Board members have thicker skins than I?
If you are officially barred from "involvement in transactions that are in connection with a take-over bid by one company of another, or by the directors of a company trying to get an increased control of the company by the issue of shares" because you are likely to ignore the rules that govern same then you are being publicly labelled as untrustworthy. While the restriction may seem to be limited to those issues it will have a far reaching affect.
If for example you are barred from selling 2nd hand cars because you sell cut and shunts with clocked mileages and fake MOTs would people suggest it is ok to buy a 2nd hand motorcycle from the same individual? If that individual starts work in a different garage for someone else but restricts themselves to working in the background rather than the forecourt how would you see the owner who employs him? The ruling also states people should avoid dealing with King "or his principals" on these matters , does that not tar them with the same brush through association? I don't believe this is a non issue with little consequence , anyone linked with King through business should distance themselves quickly before they are seen as just as untrustworthy as he is.
StevieBC15th October 2019
Bogs Dollox, I suppose time will tell just how far reaching the Cold Shoulder effects will be in practice.
But the salient point, IMO, is that every FCA regulated organisation has to recognise the decision on King's trustworthiness – and WRT to any potential, new dealings with King, they would have to take into consideration the TOP decision.
===================
Yes time will tell what the impact will be.
However, the FCA regulated institutions such as the banks are some of the biggest fraudsters alive with their miselling scams, fixing currency markets, internal corruption, tax evasion and their continuing money laundering for criminals, tax dodgers and kleptocrats.
So probably best not to rely on them to do the right thing. There's always a choice for them of obeying the law or breaking it and history tells us that if breaking the law delivers profit, then that's what they do.
It is for TOP regulated activity that they will be forced not to deal with him. As EJ says above the impact on King will be minimal.
Mind you taking sanctions against King would make the banks look like the good guys and they might contemplate action for PR purposes!
@BD 15.43
Of course financial institutions are crooked and happy to accommodate crooks UNTIL they are exposed as crooked publicly , King has been hung out to dry ,he is the Patsy , if he were Morgan Stanley or Deutschebank then things may be different but he's not ,he's a small time con man of little importance or influence . Like the titles he inherited he is tainted .
Timtim 15th October 2019 at 16:44
=======================================
To be fair the club is already struggling to get proper financial institutions to deal with them anyway.
Metro Bank*, on a cash only basis, no line of credit.
Loans (overdrafts my arris) from Close Brothers, regularly required, presumably because of cash flow issues.
The only "external finance" coming from directors, shareholders and their associates, later swapped for pretty much worthless equity.
It's difficult to see how even King can make things worse.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/metro-fears-big-bill-for-accounts-scandal-x2m5vq5nq#
*September 19 2019
Metro Bank has warned it could face a “significant” bill after regulators widened their investigations into a £900 million accounting scandal.
King certainly can make things worse
If Metro withdraw their banking facilities it makes operating a company like RIFC almost impossible , in fact I would say totally impossible. If Close call in their loan (due to Kings' situation it makes a fundamental change to the circumstances) and it would be justifiable then they have a major cash flow problem. If other creditors worry that Close will eat all the pie and just leave crumbs then they will want settled before it's too late. It's like any financial system ,it's based on faith and trust in those operating it,once that faith and trust goes then it inevitably collapses. Will anything be left for Ashley? maybe he should ring fence a set amount . What affect will that have ?Major cash flow problem perhaps. It's the domino theory in action ,it's contagion, it's musical chairs . I don't know about others but if RIFC/TRFC owed me any money I would want it paid asap. If you know any face painters out there ……….
Homunculus 15th October 2019 at 20:46
*September 19 2019
Metro Bank has warned it could face a “significant” bill after regulators widened their investigations into a £900 million accounting scandal.
————————————————————–
I wonder if Sevco are in for a percentage of the £900 mill H.
Homunculus 15th October 2019 at 20:46
'..
*September 19 2019
Metro Bank has warned it could face a “significant” bill after regulators widened their investigations into a £900 million accounting scandal'
Metro announced in January that they had "adjusted the risk weighting of certain commercial loans secured on commercial property and certain specialist buy-to-let loans that had the combined effect of increasing our Risk-weighted assets"
As I understand it, the amount of capital and cash reserves a Bank is required to keep on hand is closely related to the risks that are attached to their varied types of assets. And, it seems, it's the bank itself that decides what level of risk there may be!
So, an official in my bank might decide that the risk of lending me £100M to allow me to buy Big Pink's Lanarkshire mansion to support my plans for making money by renting it out to fabulously wealthy football players is no risk at all: because the money will come in, I shall pay off the loan and interest thereon no bother.
So the amount that my bank has to keep in cash to cover the risk of me defaulting in my repayments of the loan is nowhere near enough to cover its ass if I do default, and if an unrealistic valuation of BP's mansion had been decided on( deliberately or not) to allow the bank to lend me the £100M.
I assume therefore that the FCA investigation is into the question of whether there were very naughty deeds of minimising 'risk',thus leaving oodles of cash free for other purposes [not necessarily for illicit purposes (such as lining the pockets of individuals in making sweet deals for clients and themselves)], but consequently exposing the bank to the danger of not being able to meet its own liabilities if the estimates of risk were badly unrealistic.
I attended a trial once, a number of years ago, where a guy who hadnae two pennies to rub together and had had to 'borrow' money from a guy who had been accused of fraud, testified that he , a finacial consultant,had writtten a 'letter of comfort' as to the accused's financial standing and probity, to those who were thinking of lending the accused a substantial sum of money!
That episode (on top of the RBS Goodwin ,the knight stripped of his knighthood while other knights seem to be exempt from public censure and keep their 'honour' in spite of spitting in the eye of the Monarch by practicing deceit upon Her tax assessors and gatherers) causes me to laugh at the sub-species of human being such people are, hold them in absolute contempt, and wish them every failure financially-and gaol if appropriate.
Naturally, I pass no comment on the situation at Metro Bank, who swear to cooperate fully with any investigation into the £900M blackhole.
And, of course, I fully accept that I am not anything other than a questioner
as well as being someone whose own experience tells him that bodies such as the SFA and the FCA appear not to like questions being asked of them!
I am beginning now to think that I have grounds for asking my MP for some help in getting the FCA to reply to my query about their authorisation of the IPO Prospectus.
But that is for another day.
John C
Sadly the BP residence is leasehold ?
Big Pink 15th October 2019 at 23:35
' John C
Sadly the BP residence is leasehold '
______________________
Jings, crivvens and michty me!
John C
Sadly the BP residence is leasehold ?
BP; I gathered from your little bio at the top of the forum that you were based in the West of Scotland. Obviously you have now moved to some secret location (just like JJ)
in England or Wales. I hope your innocent reply to JC hasn't put your life in danger from marauding Huns.
I see a lot of chat with regard to what effect the TOP ruling will have on King and T'Rangers.
My view is not a lot really.
As discussed a long time back it didn't seem to do the last South African who was cold shouldered any particular harm.
The main point is that T'Rangers and many of their fans seem quite happy to have someone like Dave King at the helm.
For a club who keeps droning on about dignity they seem to be content to be run by a set of shysters from Murray, Whyte, Green and now King.
Hearts fans lapped up some of the Vlad years but quickly realized it was no way to go on.
Others clubs have had similar experiences with other shysters but, like Hearts, have tried very hard to steer an honest ship since those times.
One wonders when T'Rangers will join the rest of us in trying to run our clubs and the game with a modicum of honesty, decency and respect.
An untrustworthy Chairman running an untrustworthy club?
The SMSM has been reporting that Hearts' young left back Aaron Hickey is a TRFC target;
No quotes in the article, and presumably it's PR p!sh from Traynor.
Today this story was laughed off by Levein – and joked he might buy Morelos instead.
But this little nugget highlights a few things, IMO;
1) TRFC is desperate.
Coincidentally, TRFC plays Hearts – away – this weekend.
The only really good news story which TRFC still controls is to remain top of the league. That can be exploited to distract from most of the negative stories swirling around Ibrox.
And, the Hickey 'interest' is the oldest mind game there is: leak a story that you're interested in one of your opponent's best players just before the tie is played. It's typically reserved for big games, and usually European ties.
This tactic is intended to unsettle – or just irritate – the targeted player, his teammates and their manager.
But, for a routine SPL tie…in October?!
2) TRFC has no respect for its member clubs – or their players.
TRFC has no qualms about using the SMSM to try and unsettle an opponent in Scotland.
Everybody and their dug knows TRFC has minimal cash, so an 'imminent £2M purchase' seems rather unlikely.
But, perhaps most pertinently: Hickey is a young player who has attracted widespread attention this year.
If a seasoned pro was targeted via the SMSM in this way, he could easily shrug it off with experience, and won't be unsettled.
But, in this case, TRFC has quite deliberately decided to target – and try to unsettle – an inexperienced, 17 year old kid.
That's just plain wrong, IMO.
I notice that the BBC are reporting that Bury FC are on the brink of liquidation and that a committee will determine in "which league any new club shall be placed and will set out requirements to be met by the new club."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50069246
I wonder how long it will take for the BBC to rectify its blatant error, perform a u-turn and report that, on reflection, only an expendable company is being liquidated.
Metro bank has slumped a massive 96% since March 2018 from £40 to £1,68 , a small recovery to £2.04 in the past month does little to persuade investors that its problems are over in fact the phrase' dead cat bounce and pump and dump maybe of more relevance. The City dumping Metro may be as likely as Metro dumping Rangers*, rocks and hard places comes to mind. A small note re Aaron Hickey , if he does sign for the Ibrox club* then 30% of that transfer fee will go to Celtic . That's a very large IF.
Timtim, yes it looks ominous for Metro Bank.
IIRC, the founder is a U.S. chap who opened/expanded Metro in the UK post the financial crisis to specifically take business away from the disgraced high street banks: i.e. Metro probably won't have many friends in the industry, or at the FCA either.
[And I see that the colourful founder – and his ever present wee dug – got punted from Metro recently.]
From an RIFC perspective: they can't simply wait to see if Metro Bank gets shut down, they have to be proactive and manage this risk.
As in, the MD Stewart Robertson should already be approaching other banks – to make at least tentative enquiries at this stage – about taking on the RIFC/TRFC business.
I wonder how well that is going…?
I'll be very surprised, indeed, if RIFC/TRFC are unable to find a bank prepared to furnish them with banking facilities, though I'm certain it would be on a strict no overdraft basis only.
I suspect the only business problem King's cold shouder will cause the club might revolve around how Close Bros view it and if they see some financial advantage in using it to give them justification under the terms of the facility to call in the loan, leading, perhaps, to them taking over the assets under security. This, in turn, might prompt SDI to act to protect their position and apply for an arrestment on TRFC's assets. I really don't think, though, that either of these actions is going to take place at the moment, and not, if either event does happen, prompted by the cold shoulder.
There will, almost certainly, be reputational damage to the club amongst the financial community, but, in time, should they survive long enough, that will be forgotten about and the club will be able to enjoy the banking facilities most businesses of their size and turnover have available.
Banks have never been particularly interested in what type of person they accept money from (until the EU introduced money laundering regulations, with which the banks were very reluctant to comply – hence a number of hefty fines within the banking community), and only concerned with a customer's reputation when it came to lending.
I'd be surprised if the club was still using the Close facility. Last year they took it out in February and had paid it back before the end of the financial year, so there was nothing about it the annual accounts.
I'd expect the same situation this year with the facility paid off by early ST receipts. The fact that the club also took out around £7m in new loans (now converted to equity) from various shareholders is evidence that Close wasn't used, or at least didn't extend their facility.
StevieBC 16th October 2019 at 13:29
If a seasoned pro was targeted via the SMSM in this way, he could easily shrug it off with experience, and won’t be unsettled.
But, in this case, TRFC has quite deliberately decided to target – and try to unsettle – an inexperienced, 17 year old kid.
That’s just plain wrong, IMO.
………………
They tried that with
DONS GAFFER WANTED Rangers make Aberdeen boss Derek McInnes top target after sacking Pedro Caixinha
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/4779245/rangers-next-manager-derek-mcinnes-aberdeen-pedro-caixinha/
But with no quotes, no problem with the club tapping. Just let the SMSM do your work for you.
'easyJambo 16th October 2019 at 17:11
I'd be surprised if the club was still using the Close facility. Last year they took it out in February and had paid it back before the end of the financial year, so there was nothing about it the annual accounts.'
#####################################
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC425159/charges
There seems to be three outstanding Close Bros. items listed: two from this year & one from 2018. For the non-business head, what does that indicate?
Jingso.Jimsie 16th October 2019 at 19:25
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC425159/charges
There seems to be three outstanding Close Bros. items listed: two from this year & one from 2018. For the non-business head, what does that indicate?
==============================
Your guess is as good as mine.
Of the two created this year, one is a standard security over specific assets and the other is a floating charge.
The one outstanding from last year is also a floating charge. I've no idea why it's still there..
When last year's standard security was "satisfied", everyone thought that was the loan just having been paid off. However, there was no mention of the loan in last year's accounts suggesting that it had been paid off before the financial year end (30 June). It was similar to the Ticketus short term funding arrangement that the Oldco had used before the Whyte takeover, i.e. no-one had a scooby that any borrowing had taken place.
Jingso.Jimsie 16th October 2019 at 19:25
'.. There seems to be three outstanding Close Bros. items listed ….what does that indicate?'
_________________________
Possibly it just indicates that the facility to borrow is there when TRFC Ltd need to use it, without going through hoops (Oops!).
Incidentally, there is a wee drafting curiosity in the Companies House copy of Charge Code SC4251590015
delivered on 01 March 2019:
" Para 6.5 Restrictions on dealing with Leases
In relation to the Leases, the Borrower will
a)..
b)…….
i) not irritate [yes, irritate!] nor exercise any right to terminate the leases without obtaining consent "
Obviously, m'Lords, the word the drafter wrote would have been 'initiate' and some copyist misread it. More importantly, no one on either legal side seems to have checked the final draft for misprints or typos!
EJ
I pretty much see Close in a similar way to you. It is analogous to the arrangement with Ticket, in purpose if not in operation.
Both were to deal with a cash flow issue, with the former being by pre-sale of tickets and the latter being loans.
Given that the business runs at a loss, operates on a cash only basis and has no overdraft facility with the bank short term financing to cover cash flow shortages is inevitable.
The problem is that in either scenario you are spending next season's money to get you through this one.
The problem is that if either Metro or Close become unavailable then where do you go next. The field is rapidly narrowing and may soon be limited to existing investors only.
This link to Companies House talks about 'charges' , if anybody wants to expand their knowledge. (I just discovered it myself 5 minutes ago!)
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/registering-a-charge-mortgage-for-a-company
(I think any lender would want to make damned sure that the right form was sent at the right time to Companies House. If CH don't have it within 21 days after the borrower/lender sign their agreement, the lender would need a Court order to get it recorded. And if a standard security is not recorded, any debt just joins the queue of creditors if the Company goes bust)
Homunculus 16th October 2019 at 22:49
'.The problem is that in either scenario you are spending next season's money to get you through this one.'
Now that I come to think of it, there was not lot of comment about the fact, when it became known, that the Knighted majority shareholder of the original Rangers had used Ticketus routinely ( as well as the EBT tax dodge)while boasting about what he was going to do spending-wise.
How exactly did the small-time CW dream up the Ticketus arrangement? From his own small-time, petty level 'expertise' as a would-be asset-stripper?
or did he have a much more 'daddy'-type millionnaire giving him pointers about how to obtain funds?
For some reason, as I write, the phrase'I was duped' comes into mind. I'm sure I've heard it before.
And now we have this
"Top Scots referees to be snubbed from major UEFA tournaments like Euro 2020 as no VAR in Scotland"
https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/17973352.top-scots-referees-snubbed-major-uefa-tournaments-like-euro-2020-no-var-scotland/
Honest toGod, what is the SFA like!
Super protective of referees and their '' honest' mistakes' I hear you cry?
Or just penny-pinching troglodytes?
Let's hear it from Maxwell: why do we not have VAR ? Lack of money, or fear of lack of control over the result of important games when referee decisions are clearly seen to have been utterly unfounded and in favour of a particular team?
John Clark 16th October 2019 at 23:18
How exactly did the small-time CW dream up the Ticketus arrangement? From his own small-time, petty level ‘expertise’ as a would-be asset-stripper?
or did he have a much more ‘daddy’-type millionnaire giving him pointers about how to obtain funds?
……………….
If i remember correctly and always happy to be corrected.
It was mentioned in the Craig Whyte court case.
“There is this company called Ticketus, we use them all the time”
Or something along them lines. It may have been when Gary Withey (RIP) was questioned.
………………..
Withey gave evidence during Whyte’s 2017 fraud trial.
He told the court how previous Rangers’ owner Sir David Murray’s firm “didn’t seem to care” where Whyte was sourcing funds to take over the team.
Withey said he was told by Whyte not to share information that the source of the cash to pay off Rangers’ huge debt was ticketing firm Ticketus.
Withey also said he issued a warning to Whyte telling him he should “walk away” from the deal for the club
A very interesting article in The Sun;
"NO GOAL Collum and Madden set to be snubbed for major games due to lack of VAR in Scotland
By Lindsay Herron 17 Oct 2019, 7:40
SCOTLAND’S top refs are set to be snubbed for major European and international games because we don’t have VAR.
It has been revealed that leading officials Willie Collum and Bobby Madden will be excluded from major Champions League and Europa League matches.
They are also set to be blanked from next year’s Euro 2020 finals.
SPFL chief Neil Doncaster has claimed Scotland will struggle to adopt VAR because of the cost involved and the lack of officials.
…
But former Fifa referee Charlie Richmond fears Scotland is becoming a backwater and must catch up with the rest of Europe.
The top flights in England, France, Germany, Italy and Spain are all using VAR this season.
There are also versions being used in Belgium, Holland, Portugal, Turkey, Greece, Switzerland, Poland and the Czech Republic…"
==========
Some follow up questions a proper journalist could put to the SFA and SPFL;
1) If Doncaster is pushing back on the cost of VAR, then how can leagues such as Switzerland and Portugal make progress?
2) Following numerous clubs’ complaints last season about refs' performance, there was a 'Referees Summit' held in Perth last February. The outcome was that the use of VAR "would be looked at". So, exactly where are the SFA/SPFL today WRT implementing VAR?
3) Has anybody from Hampden visited e.g. the Switzerland or Portugal leagues to study how they managed to introduce their version of VAR?
4) What is the official position of the Scottish Referees' Association: are the SPL refs wholly supportive for the introduction of VAR into the SPL – and at the earliest opportunity?
Re VAR in Scotland. The SFA could not even implement something as simple as the Referee spray to mark out free kicks at the same time as the modern world did. For some reason they chose to wait. I simply don't buy that they can't afford VAR given some of the other nations who have a version of it. It either suits them not to have it, or the Grade 1 Refs they have who are selected on a very exclusive basis are so honest there is simply no need for it.
Refusal/delay of VAR has absolutely nothing to do with money. All they need todo is amend the broadcasters contact to include the facility. In fact they currently provide limited VAR now which we could do straight away – just put a TV monitor in front if the 4th official. It becoming a farce where commentators and indeed fans at home can see immediately what’s happened but the ref cant. As stated VAR delay is simply to avoid proper officiating, I am appalled that the clubs are not demanding it be installed immediately
I suspect that the SFA's Head of Referee Development would require to be moved on (along with several of his favourites) before the SFA could implement any sort of meaningful (as in 'fair & reasonable in application') VAR.
Celtic should introduce VAR to Celtic TV, which is shown abroad during matchday, however with everyone at the game having a mobile,Celtic could bring out their own VAR app which only shows the var moments, penalties and offsides, to all subscribers of the app, this would as it is a VAR moment be behind real time in live broadcasting and would not infringe TV rights as the clips will be Celtic TV property rights and are not live clips.
Let the refs know what the stadium are witnessing when the make the honest mistake and let them know why the booing and shouting is directed at them solely.,
From an email received today from the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) I learn that there was a Global Investigative Journalism Conference last month in Germany . [1700 journalists attended. Were there any from the SMSM, d'ye think?]
I hope they don't mind me giving a couple of excerpts from the email
"Ramón Fonseca and Jürgen Mossack, the founders of the law firm at the heart of our Panama Papers investigation, are the targets of a federal investigation in the United States, according to new court documents. The new documents are part of the founders’ attempt to stop Netflix streaming The Laundromat, which is set to hit screens this Friday. The Panama Papers-inspired film is based on a book by reporter Jake Bernstein. "
"The Cayman Islands plans to make a corporate registry public… by 2023 "
"Our reporters Scilla Alecci and Will Fitzgibbon have got you covered with their hot tips from the conference (even if you’re not a reporter): understand the science, value face-to-face meetings, and always check every detail.
Investigate the enablers
When covering financial misconduct, don’t forget about the lawyers[ed: do we know any?], accountants, bankers and other professionals who often make money laundering, tax evasion and other illicit activities possible. DCReport’s editor David Cay Johnston suggested digging for records in company accounts and speaking to retired regulators to build your story and identify laws or rules that may have been broken.
Look for language patterns
Be alert to language that might signal cover-ups in financial statements, audits and company accounts. In his comprehensive presentation, called “Following the Money,” Nick Mathiason from Finance Uncovered gave examples from his own reporting, including our favorite, the phrase “in the absence of proper accounting records.” (From an actual audit of a company called FastJet, that operates low-cost aircraft in Africa). "
And there is a detailed presentation by one of the journalists of the basic structure of company accounts and how to read and interpret them.
I look forward to trying to learn something!
Jingso.Jimsie 17th October 2019 at 16:23
I suspect that the SFA's Head of Referee Development would require to be moved on (along with several of his favourites) before the SFA could implement any sort of meaningful (as in 'fair & reasonable in application') VAR.
======================
Only about three months ago or so an ex-Grade 1 Referee said on BBC Sportsound in response to a question from the presenter that most of the Grade 1 Referees are Rangers fans. A few support other teams and none of the current ones support Celtic. This does not mean of course that there is any deliberate policy to discriminate against or favour any particular team as they go about their duty. What it does mean in my view is that the policy of how they are recruited and appointed stinks, and a complete overhaul of that policy is needed. Perception of bias is not good at all. Would the English media sit in silence if most Referees supported Man Utd? – I doubt it. Would the Scottish media sit in silence if most Referees supported Celtic? – I doubt it.
I don't care whether Referees from England, Germany, France or anywhere have stinkers as well. Until there is a recruitment policy in place in Scotland which complies with the same diversity and inclusion laws as every other employer has to, then in my view it should be Referees from other nations who take charge of Scottish games.
John Clark 16th October 2019 at 22:21
"Irritate" is not a typo or misprint.
Of all the many things you can do to a Lease in Scotland irritate is one.
Whom are youse calling a pedant?
LUGOSI 17th October 2019 at 18:54
'.."Irritate" is not a typo or misprint.'
+++++++++++++++
Well, you know, I did think that there might be 'legal language' use of the word, and googled into some dictionaries to try to check, but found nothing relevant. I'd be intrigued to learn that there is one. Is there?
https://www.morton-fraser.com/knowledge-hub/interest-irritation-forfeiture-scottish-lease
John Clark
If that's the sort of thing that intrigues you prepare to be perplexed.
Google Scottish Leases and look for "ish" (definitely no typo/misprint).
Jingso.Jimsie 17th October 2019 at 19:06
Well, I'll be damned!
I am grateful to you, Jingo.Jimsie, for adding to my knowledge of the language. I have looked up my Latin dictionary [Dr Smith's Smaller Latin-English Dictionary, 1904 edition, priced at the time at seven and a tanner]
The verb 'irritare' is given these meanings: to provoke,enrage, stimulate,incite, excite,exasperate, infuriate and figurative meanings such as to arouse(suspicions) to excite(passion) to feed (flames), to encourage, embolden.
None of those meanings bears on anything like 'terminating'.
Its use in Scots law must have its origins in medieval times.
One lives and learns.
Having just announced ticket prices, the SFA is hoping that footy fans will contribute to the upkeep of the blazers' lifestyle by turning up to support the national team next month;
What are they smoking at Hampden?!
LUGOSI 17th October 2019 at 19:21
'..ish'
++++++++++
To my shame, I am profoundly ignorant of Scots. I had difficulties with Rabbie, and with MacDiarmid's ' A drunk man looks at the thistle'. But it is fascinating, indeed. Thank you.
Sic a parcel o rogues in a nation(al) football association. With apologies to the Bard.
Ex Ludo 17th October 2019 at 22:49
'..Sic a parcel o rogues in a nation(al) football association..'
++++++++++
I do understand that, Ex Ludo.
What the SFA did was, if not on the same scale, as wicked and evil and as rottenly motivated a deed as was committed by that greedy, grasping, unprincipled handful of self-seeking bast.rds who sold their souls and Scotland for a handful of silver.
Although, I have to say, I don't believe that any member of the SFA Board actually got any kind of personal monetary kickback from CG or anything of that sort.
But, of course, the possibility exists that the old Rangers FC were helped to a couple of million quid (with the chance of more) by the award of a UEFA licence to which they may not have been entitled.
The reluctance, nay, the downright refusal, by the SFA to have that question openly and independently examined scarcely suggests that there is nothing to examine.
In my opinion.
Carlos Cuellar got an EBT of £ £448,255 .He is now riding off into the sunset.
I wonder whether he has, [as our Chick tried to persuade us (on our BBC licence money) that Mr King had done with the SARS ] 'settled' with HMRC on tax due?
Indeed I wonder whether HMRC is bothering to chase up the EBT recipients.
Because as sure as hell, they would chase up you and me!
If ish can find its way on here I can see no reason why one of my favourite words cannot do the same.
Death, Will, No Will, Executor/Executrix, Estate, Confirmation…
If an item of property comes to light or is only realised after a certain stage it has to be added to the estate. Different jurisdictions have varying names for the document which does this.
Scots Law does it by an eik.
Pronounced eek.
A favourite word but hellish to crowbar into daily conversation.
StevieBC 17th October 2019 at 19:45
Having just announced ticket prices, the SFA is hoping that footy fans will contribute to the upkeep of the blazers' lifestyle by turning up to support the national team next month;
========================
I do not go to Hampden to watch my club, or my country. I will not ever knowingly put one single penny near the SFA ever again, because they do not treat my club, or indeed any club, equal to the way they treat *Rangers. They regard *Rangers as more important than any other club in the country, even to the point they could not care less that *Rangers cheated the public purse out of tens of millions in order to better themselves on the park. The SFA continue to celebrate every one of the trophies won during that period.
I do not believe in any other civilised nation the national Football Association would get away with such blatant bias towards one single club.
upthehoops @ 07.27
——————————————————————————————–
The clubs (including yours and mine) are the SFA! The blue pound talks unfortunately.
Bordersdon
There is an element of “Yes Minister” within the bureaucrats at the SFA, but your point is correct.
If there was a will, there would be a way to root out corruption.
However we are talking about a trade cartel, an old boys’ club for the blazers.
bordersdon 18th October 2019 at 14:36
'.. The blue pound talks unfortunately. '
+++++++++++
But, of course, each member of the SFA Board, and each Boardroom of every football club in Scotland knows that Truth always has the last word!
In so far as none of them ( with the honourable exception of the late Turnbull Hutton, man of immense courage and integrity) publicly objected to the Big Lie (that somehow a brand new club was a hundred and 40 years old and was indeed the Rangers of the four young men on Glasgow Green in 1872 )they are all guilty as hell of betraying the very thing that their businesses are built on- fair sporting competition, with no rigging of games, no false claiming of or false awarding of sporting achievements, no question of sliding money to distressed clubs …
Their guilt is all the greater because at first the SPL and the SFA dealt with the Administration correctly.
And followed up correctly when RFC of 1872 did not come out of Administration but entered Liquidation.
And they acted within their legitimate powers ( given that no other aspiring club pushed seriously for admission) when they admitted SevcoScotland into the lowest tier of the SFL.
And it was then that the corruption set in, and the Lie was created.
And that lie sits on the consciences of our clubs' board members, and of the members of the Boards of the SFA and SPFL., because they are not (with one possible exception) sociopaths, but 'respectable' men and women of business, who have children and grandchildren who think the world of them and whom they have brought up to be honest and truthful.
The Lie was wrapped up in the secret , mouth-taping, 5-Way Agreement/(blood oath equivalent)
And there we are, with a Sports Governance body knowingly rotten at the core, and sports clubs very much party to that rottenness.
Where do we go from here?
Except to demand a restoration of sporting truth as of fundamental importance for people in the business of making money from sport.
TRFC is NOT and never has been the Rangers of 1872. It is not, cannot possibly be, entitled to the sporting honours and achievements of Rangers of 1872.
That is a simple truth.
Let the SFA and the SPFL and the SMSM and the record books acknowledge that truth- and we can all be as relaxed as were the (surprising number) of arthritic old geezers [could they be posters on this blog?
] I saw while watching Bonnyrigg Rose v Buckie Thistle tonight.
Big Pink 18th October 2019 at 14:46
Bordersdon
There is an element of “Yes Minister” within the bureaucrats at the SFA, but your point is correct.
If there was a will, there would be a way to root out corruption.
However we are talking about a trade cartel, an old boys’ club for the blazers.
===============
It is what that 'trade cartel' actually is that worries me. I might never know though, as I am sure it is a secret!
bordersdon 18th October 2019 at 14:36
The clubs (including yours and mine) are the SFA! The blue pound talks unfortunately.
=====================
In my opinion it goes way beyond the blue pound, although that will be a factor. Let's consider some of the past events.
1) In 1994, the same bank that financed Rangers way beyond what there was a business justification for tried to put Celtic out of business altogether for a fraction of the debt. No-one in the media, government, or the football authorities gave a toss. Was it all part of a grander plan? In my view it was, and the aim was to put Celtic out of business forever. Thank heavens for Fergus McCann.
2) Contrast 1994 to 2012. Celtic in 1994 simply had an incompetent board of directors unwilling to give up power, In 2012 Rangers since 2001 under two different owners had illegally evaded paying tens of millions in tax. Despite that the media, government and the football authorities tried to move heaven and earth to allow the unpaid tax to be overlooked. To this day they still treat David Murray like an honourable statesman, despite him instigating tax cheating on a huge scale. What other 'qualities' does David Murray have for this to happen? Perhaps the same ones that another grand tax cheat, Dave King has? Why did the Scottish Police go after Charles Green and Craig Whyte, while Murray was left alone?
3) Several other football clubs such as Dundee, Motherwell, Dunfermline, Hearts and Gretna have had various degrees of financial problems. No-one in the media, government, or the football authorities gave a toss
It's far more than the blue pound that matters. It's not just the SFA we are up against, it is the entire establishment. That is not easy to overcome. Rangers* are their club, and always will be. Even over 80% of Grade 1 Referees agree!
upthehoops 19th October 2019 at 09:32
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9086664/Rangers-must-continue-for-the-future-of-Scottish-football-and-for-the-fabric-of-the-country-says-Alex-Salmond.html
Salmond told Sir David Frost, in an interview to be broadcast on Frost over the World on Al Jazeera English: "Obviously HMRC have got to pursue, in the public interest, taxation.
"Equally, they've got to have cognisance of the fact that we're talking about a huge institution, part of the fabric of the Scottish nation, as well as Scottish football, and everybody realises that.
"We've certainly been arguing to HMRC on one hand, and indeed to Rangers, to for goodness sake get a settlement, get a settlement and a structure over time whereby Rangers can continue because Rangers must continue for the future of Scottish football and for the fabric of the country."
Speaking about Rangers during a visit to Scotland, Prime Minister David Cameron told the BBC: "I want that club to survive and to thrive.
"It has an extraordinary history. It has a very special place in many people's hearts in Scotland and no-one wants to see that club disappear.
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1185505097855520772/photo/1
Alex Salmon gres need to survive for sake of scottish football Feb 16, 2012
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1185505858693816325/photo/1
Alex salmond 17 feb 2012
upthehoops, good post.
I think many Internet Bampots would also agree that if/when RIFC/TRFC hits the buffers, the SFA & SPFL will adopt exactly the same approach as in 2012: to accommodate an Ibrox club in any way possible – and with scant regard to any rules or precedent.
This time though the blazers might put a bit of effort into managing the PR from Hampden… or alternatively, be even more secretive around their Ibrox dealings than they were back in 2012!
And this time around it would/should put much more pressure on all the other 41 member clubs to speak up.
And any Hampden efforts to bend over over for an Ibrox club – again – would, IMO, 'crystallize' the pressure on CFC to publicly state the club's official position to both the Res.12 proposers and the fan base in general.
StevieBC 19th October 2019 at 13:12
How much would have got out the last time without the RTC blogger.
There would have been some bits, absolutely, but nowhere near as much I would guess. Not only directly, but pointing people in the right direction with regards where they might want to look.
Folks
Big Pink will not be on the blog for a few days following a family bereavement . Our condolences to him and his family.
I've not posted for a while, being occupied with Res12 business.
A resolution to reinstate Res12 to this years AGM obtained sufficient support to enable it to be lodged with Celtic in September with more documents arriving since.
Past practice has been for Celtic to publish the resolution in full in the papers announcing the AGM along with the club's response.
That is awaited but with past AGM's being in mid November the papers should be out soon.
Early indications are that a push might have to become a shove with Celtic becoming the focus rather than the SFA.
Auldheid 19th October 2019 at 19:45
……………
Thanks for update.
Auldheid 19th October 2019 at 19:45
'..Early indications are that a push might have to become a shove with Celtic becoming the focus rather than the SFA.'
+++++++++++++++
It would be very unwise of Celtic plc to plead that it is in the best interests of the company and shareholders if the Resolution were to be withdrawn without presentation and discussion of the evidence that the Requisitioners possess;
Or to try to assert (without being able to provide proof of the truth of the assertion) that the hands both of the SFA's Licensing Board and the Board of the now in -Liquidation Rangers are clean and that there was no chicanery and no illicit sliding of monies in order to aid an ailing club
Only cast iron evidence that Rangers had satisfied in every respect the Rules governing the award of a UEFA Competition licence will remove any doubts about the possibiltythat a fraud was perpetrated.
If that evidence was already available in 2013, why was the Resolution 12 not simply not shot down at the AGM at which it was first tabled?
If the evidence had become available in any period of time since then, why was it not made available,and the matter brought to a conclusion?
But how could such evidence ever become available if there has not been an independent investigation?
'Res 12' essentially was about getting such independent investigation.
The Celtic Board have not secured such investigation.
It had better have some good answers to provide at the AGM, that don't have 'think of your club' as their basis.
Shareholders are not to be, and cannot be, treated contemptuously as mere 'fans' or 'supporters' to be told to sit down and shut up. They have some money at stake, whether they be supporters or not.
Any one shareholder is free to go to the Police with his suspicions that there may be a crime in the background, involving quite a lot of money and possible abuse of office.
The Celtic Board needs to keep that in mind, or be forever lumped into the same category as the deceitful, tax-dodging RFC of SDM.
Homunculus 19th October 2019 at 16:54
'..How much would have got out the last time without the RTC blogger.'
++++++++++++++++++
I'm ashamed to admit that I was the kind of newspaper reader who swallowed hook line and sinker the early reporting of the little difficulties SDM had ( for what, four, or was it 6, years ) trying to offload RFC, looking for the right kind of buyer etc..
And I'll never forgive that wretch ( what's his name again?Keef? Keexh? )for the absolute nonsense of the MBMB.
It's with a shock that I realised when I first read the RTC early blogs how ready I had been to believe what the papers said, in the matter of Football, when I was always sceptical of what they say in political or other matters!
RTC was an absolute eye-opener.
I may have met him ( I wish I knew for sure!) during the FTTT stuff in Edinburgh.
And I thank him.
After the international break sitting top of the league, I guess Gerrard and his team will now start feeling the pressure.
But it's quite simple really: if TRFC wins all its remaining SPL ties, it will win the league.
Easier said than done of course.
And whilst Hearts are not currently on form, one would expect the Ibrox club to secure an away win.
But, as we all know, football is a funny old game, so anything is possible.
And following the uproar last season about the refs' poor performances, it would be perfectly reasonable for match officials to come under intense scrutiny as this season progresses.
… especially if TRFC is awarded another World Record 4 [four] penalties in one game!
IMO, the debate around VAR could become a White Hot Topic across Scottish football this season – for all the clubs who feel they have been denied league points and/or a Cup win against TRFC.
…and the Blue Room desperately needs Gerrard to keep TRFC top of the league, to distract from the rapidly accumulating off field problems down Govan way.
StevieBC 19th October 2019 at 23:46
'..if TRFC wins all its remaining SPL ties, it will win the league.'
_________________
The damage that the 5-Way agreement has done to Scottish football is incalculable.
We now cannot , absolutely cannot, trust the governance body or its supervision of the referees. If the very governance body is corrupt, what of its subsidiaries and paid officials?
The SFA sold the conscience and heart of fair play of Scottish football in creating the absurd Big Lie:
Who can now believe that there is any honesty when it comes to helping the new Rangers?
Having bloody-well lied once, they will lie and cheat again. And again, and again!
John Clark 19th October 2019 at 23:04
I’m ashamed to admit that I was the kind of newspaper reader who swallowed hook line and sinker the early reporting of the little difficulties SDM had ( for what, four, or was it 6, years ) trying to offload RFC, looking for the right kind of buyer etc..
And I’ll never forgive that wretch ( what’s his name again?Keef? Keexh? )for the absolute nonsense of the MBMB.
…………………..
Some light reading JC.
https://twitter.com/succulentlambs
………………..
What we had to put up with from the SMSM.
What we know now and looking back….Head shakes.
Before commenting on what are, in relative terms, mundane and trivial matters my condolences to Big Pink and his family. I know that words can sometimes seem hollow but sometimes it's all we have to offer.
As always with the things of interest on this site it's either feast or famine. In the middle of the current feast of Cold Shouldering, Brexit shenanigans, Resolution 12 et cetera I have not noticed much by way of comment on the Note dated 1st October 2019 issued by Sheriff S. Reid following Appeals against decisions of Glasgow City Council. The Note can be found at [2019] SC GLA 80.
The Appeals were taken by (and who knows how ridiculous it reads to outsiders?) The Apprentice Boys Of Derry, Bridgeton together with three other related cases; (again, how inane does it look?) The Apprentice Boys Of Derry Dalmarnock No Surrender Branch Club, Dalmarnock Orange And Purple District 50 and Orange And Purple District 37.
At first glance this was a routine Note following an Appeal Hearing but when you see that it runs to 81 pages it's obvious it's not routine at all. The Note follows a Hearing on 31st May 2019 and you can see why it took four months to produce. The Note is particularly interesting, to me anyway, when after disposing of the arguments put forward by the Appellants the Sheriff proceeds to arguments which were not put forward. This is, to put it mildly, odd. The latter part of the Note is a blend of history, judicial knowledge and, unless I'm misreading it, a demolition of any legitimate purpose or intention advanced for justifying the particular route, timing and conduct sought by the Appelants. By the end of the Note it's hard to see how things could have gone worse for the Appellants and by extension for all parties in the future who want to argue the "traditional right to march where, when and how we like" line.
To add insult to injury paragraph [20] notes that the Council's legal expenses are to be picked up by the Appellants. This looks like a good day in Court for the Council followed by an even better day out of Court and it won't cost the Council Tax payers a penny. Unless The Apprentice Boys/Orange/Purple/Dalmarnock word salad suffer one of those insolvency snags.
It's clear that this Note and the preceding decisions will be trotted out by Glasgow, and every other licensing authority in Scotland, in many, if not most, marches/walks/parades/processions in the future.
It might be worthwhile sending a copy of these proceedings to the SFA and the SPFL asking if they think they have any possible relevance to any of their members. When I think about it I'm sure I saw a banner which suggested that one of the associations with a name similar to the Appellents included the name of a Scottish Referee. That's a Referee who still officiates; not one from the bygone days of yore.
Maybe the authorities are busy dealing with more important matters. Like does Cold Shouldering mean GASH is not, or is no longer, or never was a fit and proper person to be anywhere near a Scottish football club/company?
If history has taught us anything the answer will be no or who cares or it was all a long time ago…
GASH could take a leaf out of The Donald, or The Boris, Book and tell them not to worry about the Cold Shoulder as he got some Ralgex.
LUGOSI 20th October 2019 at 09:08
9 1 Rate This
Before commenting on what are, in relative terms, mundane and trivial matters my condolences to Big Pink and his family. I know that words can sometimes seem hollow but sometimes it’s all we have to offer.
………………
Also sorry for my late condolences to Big pink.
I had a similarly delayed intro to RTC John and I am equally thankful. What also caught my eye at the time however was that as well as his/her technical explanations bit was also his/her unerring ability to say “ok, this what seemed to have happened (and incidentally never once did I feel anything other than evidence led with his stuff and I consider myself pretty critical/cynical) but it was his/her ability to suggest “and this is how it will be reported.” And I don’t think the press ever once let us down in that regard. Almost as though they thought we’d somehow give up on the evidence and go back to reading their blinkered fantasies.
LUGOSI 20th October 2019 at 09:08
As always with the things of interest on this site it’s either feast or famine. In the middle of the current feast of Cold Shouldering, Brexit shenanigans, Resolution 12 et cetera I have not noticed much by way of comment on the Note dated 1st October 2019 issued by Sheriff S. Reid following Appeals against decisions of Glasgow City Council. The Note can be found at [2019] SC GLA 80
…………………….
That reminded me with all the goings on i forgot about.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-49937152
Venue in Rangers fan zone row leased to club’s charity foundation
…………….
Councillors are being asked to approve a 25-year lease of the Ibrox Community Complex for £750 per year.
The site – across the road from Ibrox Stadium – will be leased from Glasgow Life to the charity.
But terms of the deal would prohibit the complex’s use as a fan zone – and block alcohol sales on the site.
…………..
Maybe Glasgow life were happy to get shot of, and save themselves a lot of hassle from the ibrox crowd.
What now for the ibrox fan base and their demand for a fan zone?
CO, yes that story caught my eye as well.
Even with the upfront restrictions, and liabilities to improve the site…
at a paltry £750 a year it's worth a punt!
But, once in a position of leaseholder, TRFC can discreetly exert pressure behind the scenes to change – or relax – the terms of said lease.
I'm guessing that come next pre-season, that area across the road from Ibrox will be the official – and drinks licensed – fans' zone.
It will be successfully argued that to complete the £250K of improvements to the site, the Rangers charity needs to raise the cash first…and in the absence of any other potential developers for the site…