Is Stewart Regan, Chief Executive Officer of the Scottish Football Association a DIDDY?
Disingenuous: Incompetent: Dishonest: Duped? You decide.
Ladies and gentlemen of the Scottish Football Monitor sorority/fraternity jury, who want an honest game, honestly governed, are invited to pass judgement on Stewart Regan, the CEO of the SFA.
The main stream media are finally asking questions of Regan’s performance in that role, but based on a rather shallow (by comparison to what he has presided over) single issue of the recruitment of a national team coach, and not his character.
Maybe we can help the three monkeys media men (you know who they are) push for change at the SFA. How? By highlighting for them the appropriate response to Regan’s performance on the basis of what follows if he really is a DIDDY.
Disingenuous is defined as:
not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.
Evidence of such can be found in the written exchanges with the SFA that Celtic initiated on 27th July, and continued on 18 August, 21 August, 4th September and 7th September 2017; and published on the Celtic web site with SFA agreement at http://cdn.celticfc.net/assets/downloads/SFA_Correspondence.pdf
This from the SFA letter of 18th August 2017:
Comment: the statements are not alleged, they are a matter of court record and if untrue represent perjury.
…. And then this from subsequent SFA letter of 4th September 2017
Both paras give the impression that the SFA were unaware that Rangers had accepted the liability without question before 31st March 2011. Yet the SFA’s attention was drawn to this fact in July 2015 by lawyers acting on behalf of Celtic shareholders as follows:
- Our information in respect of this £2.8M in unpaid tax is that Rangers PLC had been alerted in November 2010 by HMRC that they would be pursuing payment of this exact sum.
- From that date onwards, the Directors of Rangers PLC should have known there was a potential liability to HMRC for back taxes specifically relating to payments made to Tore Andre Flo and Ronald De Boer. These sums became an accepted liability in March 2011.
- Matters had been brought to a head on 23 February 2011 when HMRC presented Rangers with a written case for payment of back tax owed in respect of Flo and De Boer. As your department may well be aware, that case for payment involved hitherto undisclosed side letters which were found to be an adjunct to their declared and disclosed contracts of employment.
- Those contracts of employment were, of course, disclosed to the Scottish Football authorities (including the SFA) as part of the necessary compliance procedures followed by all clubs and demanded by both the SFA and UEFA.
- Additionally when replying to the initial enquiries by HMRC in 2005 regarding these alleged side letters and ancillary agreements, the then Group Tax Manager of Murray International Holdings (MIH) acting for Rangers PLC on tax matters, apparently advised HMRC that no such agreements or side letters existed.
- It ultimately proved that these representations to HMRC were completely untrue and without foundation. The tax Inspectors concerned in turn saw these false misrepresentations as being an attempt to simply hide the true financial position and an attempt to avoid paying the taxes which were lawfully due on the contracts of the players concerned.
- As mentioned earlier, Rangers PLC accepted liability on 21st March 2011 for unpaid tax having taken legal advice on the matter.
- In turn, HMRC then chose to formally pursue payment of the back taxes and penalties in relation to these two players, all in terms of HMRC’s debt recovery procedures under what is known as regulation 80.
- Prior to 31st March 2011, there was clear knowledge within Rangers Football Club of the liability to make payment for these back taxes and, as can be seen from the attached documentation, by 20th May 2011 HMRC had served formal assessments and demands on Rangers PLC for the sums concerned.
The impression given by Regan’s reply to Celtic is that the first time the SFA were aware there might be an issue on granting was in June 2017 as result of testimony at the Craig Whyte trial. This is clearly not the case and the only explanation that would clear Regan of being disingenuous is a that he was incompetent as in not knowing what the SFA already had in their possession, however a bit more on being disingenuous before looking at incompetency.
The above extract of the exchange of 4th September where Regan mentions Celtic being satisfied on the UEFA Licence 2011 issue was challenged by Celtic on 7th September 2017 as follows:
“on the matter of the Licensing Decision in 2011 it is not accurate to describe Celtic as having been “satisfied” at any stage. Like everyone else we were in a position of responding on the basis of information available to us. In correspondence, Celtic raised continuing concerns as did a number of Celtic shareholders.”
In dealing with the Celtic shareholders the SFA and Regan appeared keen to welcome from the early days of correspondence that only the process after granting i.e. the monitoring phase of June and September was being questioned and not the granting itself. That was the case initially but as new information emerged in respect of what UEFA judged to be an overdue payable, upheld by the Court of Arbitration on Sport in 2013, focus swung back in 2016 to the significance of what the SFA had been told by the Res 12 lawyer in July 2015. However the emphasis the SFA put on shareholders accepting the grant was in order was puzzling at the time. The suspicion since is that the SFA did not want the circumstances around the granting investigated and the SFA and Regan were being disingenuous in their attempts to keep that aspect under wraps. especially when their defence of not acting as required in 2011 was based around when the SFA responsibilities on granting ended and UEFA’s on monitoring began. (for more on that read the Incompetence charge)
In response to a separate point in Regan’s letter of 18th August about the QC advice on there not being a rule in place at the time to use to sanction Rangers or the limited sanctions available to a Judicial Panel, Peter Lawwell responded on 21st August to Regan’s disingenuousness as follows:
” In your letter you refer to advice from Senior Counsel that;
‘there was very little chance of the Scottish FA succeeding in relation to any compliant regarding this matter and that, even if successful, any sanctions available to a Judicial Panel would be very limited in their scope.’
As I said in my last letter Celtic considers that this misses the point. The fact that disciplinary sanctions may not be secured is in our view not a reason for Scottish football to ignore the opportunity to review and possibly learn lessons from the events in question.”
Although they didn’t refer to it in that reply of 21st August, Celtic could have pointed out the following catch all rule in existence in 2011 (and presumably earlier) under Article 5 in SFA handbook.
5. Obligations and duties of Members (where all members shall)
5.1 Observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play.
This Article could have been used to demonstrate sporting dishonesty by Rangers FC. However by recognising this Regan would be on a collision course with an issue that he wanted to avoid at all costs;
whom to sanction? Rangers FC? The Rangers FC? Those currently at The Rangers FC who were officials or on the Board of Rangers FC in 2011?
Consequently, the SFA chose to hide behind QC advice – but to protect whom? Not the integrity of the game. Here is a suggestion to restore it:
That the Rangers FC admit that the trophies won in the EBT years were won as a result of clear wrongdoing (the wrongdoing Regan was so desperate to say never occurred – see later), and that The Rangers give them up. Surrendering them is not being defeated, it is simply the right thing to do for the game AND for Rangers to restore some integrity to themselves.
If they want to lay claim to their history, lay claim to all of it, just be honourable and act with dignity and we can all move on.
In summary then, Regan is being disingenuous by pretending to know a lot less than he does – and on that note the case of disingenuousness ends.
Incompetence: is defined as;
lack of ability to do something successfully or as it should be done:
Whilst a CEO would not be expected to know the minutiae of any process, he would be expected to seek such information before going public to defend the SFA’s position.
On 23 October 2013, Stewart Regan had an interview with Richard Gordon on BBC Sportsound. Excerpts from it can be heard at http://www.bbc.com/sport/scotland/24685973 . Interestingly or strangely, the following excerpt regarding the lines of responsibility between the SFA and UEFA fell on the BBC cutting room floor.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9YktGc0kwWjJCY1E/view?usp=sharing
In it Regan is saying that the 31st March is a key date and AFTER that date, the SFA having granted the licence on evidence provided to the SFA (now under Compliance Officer investigation) have no more responsibility in the matter. Richard Gordon asks Regan to confirm that after 31st March there is no other course of action the SFA could have taken. To which Regan answers “Correct”.
This understanding however does not stand up when compared to the information supplied to the Res 12 Lawyer on 8th June 2016 by Andrea Traverso, Head of UEFA Club Licensing and so ultimate authority on the matter.
That letter (more famous for its new club/company designation of the current incumbents at Ibrox), confirmed that the UEFA Licence was not granted until the 19th April 2011, so Regan was wrong on his dates, but even more significantly UEFA stated that the list of clubs granted a licence was not submitted to them until 26th May 2011.
This raises the obvious question (though not so obviously to Regan);
” how can UEFA start monitoring until they know who to monitor?”
More significantly, and one for the SFA Compliance chap to consider, should the licence have been granted, irrespective of what “evidence” the SFA Licensing Committee acted on in March 2011 , when it was obvious from a HMRC Letter of 20th May 2011 to Rangers, that HMRC were pursuing payment of a tax liability which could no longer by dint of being pursued, be described as “potential” which was the justification for granting at 31st March/19th April?
Here ends the case of incompetence.
Dishonesty;
lack of honesty or integrity: defined as disposition to defraud or deceive.
The line between incompetence and dishonesty is a thin one and so difficult to judge, however some discernment is possible from observation over time.
On 29 March 2012 Stewart Regan was interviewed by Alex Thomson of Channel Four news, a transcript of which with comments can be found on a previous SFM blog of 8th March 2015 at
https://www.sfm.scot/did-stewart-regan-ken-then-wit-we-ken-noo/
It is a long article, but two points emerge from it.
Stewart Regan bases his defence of SFA inaction on the fact that at the time of the interview no wrongdoing had occurred . Regan emphasises this rather a lot. Had he been an honest man, he would have confessed that this defence fell when the Supreme Court ruled that wrong doing in respect of Rangers’ use of EBTs had occurred.
This extract from Regan’s letter of 4th September 2017 beggars belief in light of his position on wrongdoing during interview with Alex Thomson.
” The reality is that the final decision in “The Big Tax Case” signalled closure for many involved in the game. It is hard to believe that a “wide review” no matter how well intentioned and how wide ranging could ever bring closure in the minds of every Scottish football fan and stakeholder.”
How on earth did the Supreme Court decision signal closure to Regan given his emphasis on no wrong doing?
Had Regan (in response to Celtic in August and September 2017) acknowledged that wrongdoing had taken place, then that at least would have been honest, but the defence of not acting was on the grounds that admitting dishonesty would be raking over old coals. An honest man would have accepted that the situation had changed, and some form of enquiry was necessary, but instead Regan fell back on unpublished advice from a QC.
The second point is a new one. Regan was asked by Alex Thomson in March 2012
AT: But did anybody at any stage at the SFA say to you I have a concern that we need an independent body, that the SPL can’t and shouldn’t handle this?
SR: Well under the governance of football the SPL run the competition
AT: I’m not asking, I’m saying did anybody come to you at any stage and say that to you. Anybody?
SR: No they didn’t as far as the SPL’s processes is concerned. The SPL ,
AT: Never?
At time of interview in March 2012 this was true but 2 months later on 25th May 2012 the issue of a Judicial review WAS raised by Celtic
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/celtic-still-pressing-sfa-for-inquiry-8p25q8wbb
for the same reasons that Regan had ignored in 2011 as the LNS Commissioning proceeded apace and Regan continued to ignore in the 2017 correspondence. An honest man would have recognised that his truth to Thomson in March was no longer true in May 2012 and acted. He didn’t.
These do not appear to be acts of an honest man, rather they appear to represent the behaviour of a man who is being dishonest with himself; although perhaps Regan was simply duped?
Duped is defined as;
“ If a person dupes you, they trick you into doing something or into believing something which is not true.”
In his e mail of 7th December to Ali Russell, then Rangers CEO , after a discussion on the 6th December 2011 with Andrew Dickson, Rangers Football Administrator and SFA License Committee member in 2011, Regan set out the basis on which the SFA granted a UEFA License in 2011.
This was a letter from Ranger’s auditors Grant Thornton describing the wee tax liability of £2.8m as a potential one with the implication that it was subject to dispute, an implication carried into the Interim Accounts of 1st April 2011 signed by Rangers FC Chairman Alistair Johnson.
The true status of the liability and the veracity of statements made that justified the UEFA License being granted are under investigation by the SFA Compliance Officer.
However Regan’s belief that the liability was disputed and therefore hadn’t crystalized, is supported more or less by his Tweets at
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9NG5CNXcwLW9RZjQ/view?usp=sharing
The case that Regan was duped is a plausible one, at least up to 2015, but I would contend that the SFA responses to Res 12 lawyers after July 2015 suggest that whilst the SFA may have been duped initially, they subsequently appeared more concerned with keeping events beyond public scrutiny (like the effect on the licence issue of HMRC sending in Sheriff’s Officers to collect a £2.8m tax liability in August 2011).
At this point, based on the foregoing –
You the SFM jury are asked to decide: Is Stewart Regan a DIDDY?
Copy paste this link for GUILTY: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejizOV-IQEM
And this for NOT GUILTY: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwXGdgFZmNk
The Sin of Omission by Margaret Sangster ends:
And it’s not the things you do, dear,
It’s the things you leave undone,
Which gives you a bit of heartache
At the setting of the sun.
‘Thumbsdowners’
Really!!! Why 6 TDs for DBDs post about Michael Stewart? It was perfectly harmless and bang on!
You keep your TDs for me. Right?
Jimbo, I think that’s a fair point. To be honest it wouldn’t actually change anything for me if the SFA and the MSM came out and said it was categorically a new team. I would still go to Ibrox and cheer on a team in blue and to me they would always still be Rangers. You would get the hardcore element who would fight it to the death, but I think the majority would probably just shrug and say “okay. Who are we playing this weekend?” I don’t see what change or difference it would make to anyone’s weekend and often wonder would it just be easier to say so and be done with it. Declare it a new club legally but on the proviso the fans are free to make their own decision on what a ‘club means’. draw a line in the sand and move on. Everyone who thinks it is a new club would continue to, everyone who thinks it’s the same club would also continue to. The SFA if they still want to silently believe it could do, and likewise the media if they chose. If by stating it a new club would put to bed this nonsense once and for all then I’d be happy with that. When we win a next trophy it could be declared as the first trophy of the new entity and 55th overall from a team at Ibrox.
I clicked on the Google Drive link in the piece above today and really wish for the sake of my blood pressure I had not.In the 90 second segment,(which astoundingly though not surprisingly the BBC cut)Stewart Regan was asked by Richard Gordon to set out the processes which led to the awarding of the UEFA 2011 licence for Rangers. In his reply Regan said this:
“at the 31st of March 2011 Rangers had given sufficient evidence and assurance to both the SFA and UEFA that they were complaint with UEFA club licensing requirements”
To his eternal discredit as a journalist Richard Gordon did not ask the killer question “what evidence?”
I recommend listening to the link to anyone who hasn’t, only then will you hear Regan’s annoyance that he’s still being asked about something that happened 2 YEARS AGO!
Haha Jimbo I did wonder that myself? Surely there aren’t 6 folk on here who hate Michael Stewart? I know a lot of Rangers fans don’t like him (we’re an incredibly fickle bunch
) but I thought the majority on here liked him?
That’s kind of the point. When Celtic win a trophy I don’t have a calculator going off in my head thinking this is our xth trophy. I live in the day.
However!! If and when we win ten in a row. The calculator will be on full power mode.
Sadly for me I don’t think you have too long to wait there Jimbo
HOMUNCULUSFEBRUARY 18, 2018 at 11:59
11
1 Rate This
BIG PINKFEBRUARY 18, 2018 at 11:33==============================
One is forced to wonder if getting 55 domestic titles will be the be all and end all of everything when Celtic get to title number 54.
—————
I have often wondered on this 55 thing. Is it the last straw of the ibrox fans to cling on to,As celtic have just a few more years to reach and overtake that.
All they have left is an old club record to hold onto just now, and they still have a couple of years joy from it to go,hence the stripping of titles is a definite no no for them.For there they would have nothing left and no way of stopping celtic even in their eyes being the most successful and biggest club in scotland.
For a culture of fans brought up on superiority when the 55 thing has gone there is nothing left.
Hence i also felt when everything was a new world record for them was just a makeover for the ibrox fans to feel they have something anything to cling onto to believe they are something that they want to believe they are,
From my post above and the striping of titles
Was this headline 6 years ago today the first the ibrox fans heard or read of it?
———-
just noticed we are on the 18 page of the 18th day 2018
..spooky
DarkbeforedawnFebruary 18, 2018 at 12:58
‘..by stating it a new club would put to bed this nonsense once and for all then I’d be happy with that. When we win a next trophy it could be declared as the first trophy of the new entity and 55th overall from a team at Ibrox.’
_______________
And you were doing so well, Dbd!
But you must really realise that the official record books could not be allowed to have a daft fudge like that!
What individuals choose to believe (in any sphere) is up to them.
But no sport could long continue to indulge the fantasies of individuals about which athlete, club, or other sporting entity actually won medals, trophies, honours.
That way lies the ruination of competitive sport as an ideal, and the corruption of professional sport as being some kind of rigged game in which where there is no objective assessment of merit and achievement.
I’m fairly certain Michael Stewart is a Hearts fan.
CAUSALUDENDIFEBRUARY 18, 2018 at 13:23 0 0 Rate This
I’m fairly certain Michael Stewart is a Hearts fan.
——————————-
You may be correct. I just remembered a lot of talk when he came on trial with us that he was a Celtic fan and was sure I read that at the time.
I’m going back down to the pub. God help me. This will be twice this month.
This is for BP, Lenny told me this is one of your favourite tracks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tYd2CbltzM
BTW, I notice you are playing in my local in March. I will definitely be there this time. So bring plenty money and organise a lift. It’s getting embarrassing going up to the bar and asking for three soft drinks for the band! Call yourself a musician ?
Well, the reality is that Celtic have currently won some 57 titles with Rangers on 47, but the record books don’t show it yet. Celtic fans should shout the truth from the rooftops until this is officially recognised. Celtic fans should actually be MORE focused on this issue. It is an absolute disgrace and travesty that makes a mockery of our emotions. You cannot remove the heartache of those defeats that were inflicted by a club that was cheating, but by God, you can’t allow the cheats to win; the record to stand.
Rangers supporters have got away with murder at this point. The record books haven’t been rectified yet, so of course they want to “move on”.
causaludendiFebruary 18, 2018 at 13:23
I’m fairly certain Michael Stewart is a Hearts fan.
_____________________
Correct, but one who absolutely hates Craig Levein.
When he first came on loan from Manchester Utd it was a case of ‘returning home’, unfortunately he appeared to think himself above every other player at the club and spent most of his time with hands on hips moaning whenever his pass wasn’t gathered, or he failed to get on the end of someone else’s. (It might well have been the case that he was so much better than everyone else, but he chose not to use his talents to help others, rather to dwell on what might have been!) It was always someone else’s fault with Mikey Stewart. It was a surprise to everyone when he went to Hibs, where he wasn’t exactly popular, I believe, and his return to Hearts wasn’t greeted with much joy either.
Something happened between him and Levein while Levein was his manager at Hearts, and Stewart has never forgotten it, and takes every opportunity to slag Levein in his media role. I don’t think Levein is too keen on him either.
He is quite politically motivated (SNP) and though probably the best of the Scottish pundits, being prepared to call a spade a spade quite often, I imagine his political ambitions will prevent him from ever saying too much on certain subjects, not to mention his need to have a regular payday.
jimboFebruary 18, 2018 at 13:46
I’m going back down to the pub. God help me. This will be twice this month.This is for BP, Lenny told me this is one of your favourite tracks.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tYd2CbltzMBTW, I notice you are playing in my local in March. I will definitely be there this time. So bring plenty money and organise a lift. It’s getting embarrassing going up to the bar and asking for three soft drinks for the band! Call yourself a musician ?
___________________
Thanks for that, Jimbo, now I know why he calls himself ‘Big Pink’. He doesn’t half have a high voice for a bloke, though
REALSHOCKS
FEBRUARY 18, 2018 at 13:56
=========================================
I hope you aren’t counting the ones where the new club was working up through the divisions, those are “tainted” apparently.
No “strong Rangers” no title awarded that year it seems.
2-2 In the game of the day.
2-3 nice third so 5 in 27 mins.
last one 2-4
HOMUNCULUS I think only the most deluded of fans would try that one. I’ve certainly not met someone who thinks they don’t count. You can only beat the teams you play.
I think windass must be closing in on the £30 million mark plus the more-or-les millions soon have enough to clear all their tick.
DARKBEFOREDAWN
FEBRUARY 18, 2018 at 14:51
==================================
Going by what you post here you clearly don’t meet the same Rangers supporters that I do.
In your World every Rangers supporter seems to be a reasonable and right thinking individual. Most I know are as well, however there are exceptions.
Tell me do you know any who sing songs about fenian blood.
Sadly I do HOMUNCULUS. But I have noticed a bit of a change in recent years in the amount of fans that get on their back and criticise it, often starting posts on fan forums calling the fans to stop it – for the sake of our club if not for anyone else. Unfortunately there are still far too many to resort to the ‘I’ll sing what I like’ mindset.
Jimbo/Allyjambo
Lenny told him nothing of the kind ?
HOMUNCULUSFEBRUARY 18, 2018 at 11:32
Michael Stewart is certainly one of the best of the current pundits. If not the best.
===========================
Like the rest on BBC he didn’t go after the SFA when they refused to ‘rake over the coals’. Surely that was the time to demand root and branch reform, not when a manager appointment is botched.
I maintain the SFA are always on safe ground with the media as long as they are being accused of favouring Rangers, or being biased against Celtic. I think history backs my view.
Cluster OneFebruary 18, 2018 at 13:10.”…hence the stripping of titles is a definite no no for them.For there they would have nothing left and no way of stopping celtic even in their eyes being the most successful and biggest club in scotland.”
They the SFA will never, if they can avoid it, strip the titles however like the statement Greens lawyer made regards the club been the same only in their minds, and the statement not been challenged in the court when made, confirmed what we know, the truth that there is no continuation and whilst this can be proven, the SFA will have to continue to be in denial, the day will come when it has to confronted, but there will never be a 55 in my lifetime and anyone born today will be 56 years old years old, if Sevco achieve this, as this title is almost in the bag
We don’t have many non gambling sponsors left in Scottish football.
Just watched the Irn Bru semi in a wet and miserable Inverness on bbc Alba
Seemed to to be more people on the pitch than in the stands
Not surprising given the £20 entry the free to view on Alba and the 5.15 pm Sunday night winter fare
I was up in the highland capital last week and spoke with a Caley director
He told me they were expecting the poorest crowd if the season and that they would frustratingly derive no income from the live televising.
Our administrators are clueless and inept.
If I was AGBarr I’d be asking questions.
Good luck to Caley in the final.
I bet it will be on a Tuesday morning at seven thirty am.
FinlochFebruary 18, 2018 at 19:19
We don’t have many non gambling sponsors left in Scottish football.Just watched the Irn Bru semi in a wet and miserable Inverness on bbc Alba Seemed to to be more people on the pitch than in the stands Not surprising given the £20 entry the free to view on Alba and the 5.15 pm Sunday night winter fareI was up in the highland capital last week and spoke with a Caley directorHe told me they were expecting the poorest crowd if the season and that they would frustratingly derive no income from the live televising. Our administrators are clueless and inept.If I was AGBarr I’d be asking questions.Good luck to Caley in the final.I bet it will be on a Tuesday morning at seven thirty am.
———————————————————————
I was at Easter Rd yesterday. Great atmosphere, 19,500 there, not on tv, 3.00pm ko. how it should be!! or am jist being auld fashioned? By the way the best team ON THE DAY won (could have been 4/5 – 0).
Anent my earlier post meant to say great away support (as usual) and good to hear the Hibs announcer appreciate that! A few £KK for them.
bordersdon February 18, 2018 at 20:20
I was at Easter Rd yesterday. Great atmosphere, 19,500 there, not on tv, 3.00pm ko. how it should be!! or am jist being auld fashioned? By the way the best team ON THE DAY won (could have been 4/5 – 0).
===========================
I was at New Dundas Park yesterday for the Bonnyrigg v Beith Junior cup tie, £3 to get in (I sneaked in as an OAP), 3 goals, 2 penalties, both sides hitting the woodwork, a stoppage time winner, 5 (five) red cards – all against Bonnyrigg (two in the last 10 minutes and three after the final whistle).
Just a normal day at the Juniors.
EJ,
AJ
BP
Had a great afternoon in the pub. Loads of stories. Some good some bad. Think I’ll go back down. I love Celtic.
It’s the friendliest pub in the world.
Wish you would all come to BPs night in the local. I’ve saved up £18.93 !
EASYJAMBOFEBRUARY 17, 2018 at 23:12
37
0 Rate This
Auldheid February 17, 2018 at 22:47=====================Johnston’s quote is still available in a Telegraph article by Roddy Forsyth dated 9 August 2011
—————-
Edit: also found the DR artice from 2 April 2011
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/alastair-johnston-were-less-sceptical-1099159
EASYJAMBOFEBRUARY 17, 2018 at 23:12 also found the article from the DR, But before i seen EJ post
I asked @mintys_lamb if he could find the DR article in question, before i knew AJ had found it.
And @mintys_lamb found it.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/chairman-alastair-johnston-says-rangers-1099161
so a thankyou to him for looking for me
Goodnight Jimbo!
HOMUNCULUSFEBRUARY 18, 2018 at 11:32
‘…Michael Stewart is certainly one of the best of the current pundits. If not the best.’
___________________
Ah, but pretty boy Thomson ( says Mrs C) is up there, too!
Seriously, though, I am generally impressed when the ex-professional-footballers-turned-pundits speak about the football in the games they are watching or have watched.
It’s when the ‘conversation’ turns to off-field business that their readiness to support the Big Lie calls into question
-their commitment to fair play,
-the extent to which they desire transparency in Football governance,
-the extent to which they desire that cheats and cheating should not be encouraged,
-their apparent acceptance that trophies and honours dishonourably won by deceitful practices should be retained by the club that ‘won’ them
-and their acceptance that a ‘cuckoo in the nest’ has a claim even to the ‘honourably won’ titles and honours of a quite different, now defunct, club.
I accept, of course, that on air they are controlled by the editorial policy of a compromised BBC, which has signed up heart in hand to the Big Lie, big-time.
It’s sad to reflect that the BBC was prepared to resist, and did resist, the push by the war-time Government to tell actual lies in its news reporting of events in the second world war, while today’s BBC will propagandise on behalf of the pushers and supporters of the most monstrous sports governance lie that has ever been told!
Most of us would probably think that in a war to the death against the evil of Nazism the BBC might justifiably have said, aye, okay, we’ll tell total untruths over the airwaves.
But in the matter of the liquidation of a football club in provincial Glasgow? who would , or should, even contemplate the telling of lies, or the propagation of lies, to support the rotten lying and deceit of same?
Sadly, we know who: the unworthily privileged users of BBC Scotland radio microphones, and the editors in charge.
And that annoys me.
Why? Because I’ve got to pay the licence fee.
I don’t have to buy any newspaper. But if I want to listen to BBC radio/tv I’ve got to pay.
And if I’ve got to pay , I don’t want to be paying for propaganda on behalf of cheating in football governance or on behalf of cheating by a football club.
JOHN CLARKFEBRUARY 19, 2018 at 00:15
As a fellow licence payer , I once ventured into a written conversation with the BBC Trust before all was filtered down to BBC Scotland You could sense the palpitations of them having to reply to a mere mortal , but were steadfast in their defiance of the truth . Give it a go – the English seem to be lovable and cuddly and disbelieving , but leave it to the perpetrators to reply . They are not interested .
Was a second too late to insert a full stop after “Scotland” . Up aw night noo !
johnjamessite.com
A Slow Boat From China
“For the president to come out and introduce the new manager as a mate for years, and having been the chairman of his testimonial committee, is just staggering. The lack of awareness in that organisation is beyond belief and I’ve never been so angry, and it’s not Alex McLeish because I hope that he goes on and does a good job. Where is the strategic planning? They’ve now effectively said that the chief executive role is almost immaterial because they’ve made the big call without them. Let’s be honest, we all hear the chat, we’re all in the industry. And the talk is that we know there’s a split board at the SFA. The chat is that Rod Petrie and Alan McRae have got their man, and in return the other faction are going to be allowed to get the chief executive. That’s not for the betterment of Scottish football. That is politicking. And it is unacceptable as far as I’m concerned.” Michael Stewart on Sportsound.
McRae and Petrie – The Little and Large of the SFA – fought tooth and nail to retain Regan as they knew he had their backs. If Michael Stewart is to be believed, and I see no reason to doubt him, they will have a say but not the final say in the appointment of a Chief Executive. Moribund McRae is a small man with a small mind from a small club. The most apposite epithet for McRae is that he is a homunculus. As we saw from the fiasco of last season’s Scottish Cup draw McRae could not organise a piss-up in Stewart Regan’s brewery (Coors). I do not anticipate that any new chief executive would agitate for his removal. It would not take much to provide him with the occasional bowl as one might do with a stray cat that has formed an attachment to your doorstep.
However the new SFA ‘dynamo‘ may have a difficult call to make on Petrie. Petrie chaired three meetings of the licence committee which gave Rangers a green light to participate in UEFA football whilst ignoring the elephant in the room of a £2.8m overdue payable. Alastair Johnston in an interview published in The Daily Record on 1st April admitted the existence of this liability and expressed concern about how it would be paid. Surely this should have raised a red flag at the SFA who made the final submission to UEFA fifteen days later? It did not. Did the licence committee hide behind the 31st March cut-off and ignore Johnston’s revelations.
Was Petrie kissing Ogilvie’s arse to ascend the greasy pole? It is my firm conviction that Petrie was cozying up to Ogilvie and Dickson and conveniently looked the other way when Rangers pulled a fast one.
When Regan rocked up at the SFA almost eight years ago he took on one of the most vile bigots to ever wear black and had the cojones to eschew his offer to call off a strike by Scottish if he were to be reinstated. Will the new SFA chief executive have the cojones to take Petrie to task?
Petrie needs a RRM at the helm of the SFA more than most. One can but hope that Michael Stewart is correct in his analysis. As for Alex McLeish EBT I just don’t rate him. There is a reason his last position came to an end in sixty-five days and that he has been out of the game since May 2016. He is just not good enough. As we saw with Scotland and Birmingham/Aston Villa, he has no loyalty whatsoever. His only concern seems to be his next pay-day and how much he can evade in tax. He was not even good enough to make a return to Ibrox, so why on god’s green earth is this unemployable coach in charge of the Scottish team? If he panders to Ibrox and attempts to cap their players to boost their resale value he will fall on his arse. One can but hope that he does and burns McRae and Petrie in the process.
Someone who is pleased with the McLeish EBT appointment had the following to offer on Ibrox Noise:
“If the stories over the past two or three weeks have highlighted any one thing, it is genuine fear from the rest of Scottish football that Rangers are slowly creaking back towards the summit of our game. For one, we now have a good bluenose as Scotland manager again, and believe you me, 99% of Scottish football is not happy at all about it. Mostly, the ‘he left us in the lurch’ nonsense is used as their case against him, despite the fact he is technically the most successful Scotland manager in history with incredible wins over the best team in the world and an all time high ranking with FIFA. Trust us, if he was a Celtic man, the game north of the border would be absolutely happy with him regardless of any ‘history’. That he is likely to Make Scotland Great Again has absolutely no relevance to these people.
But that is only part of the story; Scottish football is absolutely falling all over itself to claim the Alfredo Morelos saga is absolute fiction, that Rangers have made up a bidding war for reasons unknown to themselves, and that there is simply no way a free-scoring 21-year old Colombian who is top scorer here could possibly be worth £11M even though transfer fees have absolutely catapulted since the days when Celtic’s 23-year old free scoring Gary Hooper moved south for around £6M.
Even some of our own fans believe the story to be hogwash, as if the board is pulling the wool over our eyes. And guess what – all the doubters may be correct. But is it not funny that this story must be fiction but every other player who moved to China for £stupid is perfectly above board? Is it not odd that immediately so many think it is all fabricated but did not have the same instant dubiety at the £9M for Craig Gordon, the £6M for Hooper, the £13M for van Dijk and the same for Wanyama?
No, because it is Rangers Scottish football immediately calls foul, lies, misdemeanours et al simply because they are genuinely concerned beneath the faux mockery that Rangers are actually starting to get somewhere and lo and behold we have a few assets on our hands?
This entry is not saying ‘we are back’ – we have a long way to go and we well know this. But it is comical watching our enemies fall over themselves to cry foul at the first step on our road to recovery because they do not want us anywhere near the second one.
My simple point to them is this;
In response to their issue of claiming Morelos cannot possibly be worth £11M and the story is fantasy, I suggest this;
How can, in this day and age of transfer fees going into the hundreds of millions, a free-scoring Colombian 21-year old NOT be worth £11M?
If Rangers sold the kid for £5M rival supporters would be laughing at woeful mismanagement and mocking the fact we sold our best asset for peanuts, kind of like they did with Barrie McKay.
We learned. And Scottish football will just have to deal with that.”
The latest to jump on the Morelos bandwagon is The Scotsman, which is hardly surprising given that even a dead cat bounce would be welcome at this failing title. In Q3 & Q4 of 2017 its average daily sales declined to 17,700. How it’s beleaguered owners Johnston Press can maintain this title must be an affair of the heart and not the head. In the second decade of its existence it had revelations apropos Burke & Hare to tittilate its readers. Now the best it can do is rehash Yuanker Traynor’s latest wet dream.
The Morelos Squirrel is important to the rogue board who have pawned the car park and Edmiston House. It is a fiction that was created to deflect attention from the insolvency at Ibrox.
If the Ibrox Noise correspondent put down his Union Jack tinted spectacles for a moment the reality might just hit home. Close Asset Financing is a lender of last resort.
Rangers Lite is in a death spiral. There is no upside. It’s all downhill from here. When King eventually departs and is on the lam south of the Limpopo the Sevco project will collapse. The prospective share issue, which would have provided temporary relief, will be stillborn. However even if it went ahead Club 1872 would be more than a dollar light and a day late.
Scoring against the worst defence in Scottish football viz Hamilton Academicals does not add zeros to Morelos’ fee. As we witnessed with Barrie McKay the rogue board are adept at inflating the anticipated fee, only to be brought down to earth with a realistic £500,000 bang. Morelos is a greenhorn who should command no more than £1.5m in the close season.
There will be no Chinese New Year purchase of Morelos. He won’t be an offering in a Red 32 envelope. The slow boat from China will be scuttled at sea.
Sannoff, I always thought you were a good poster for interesting links. Then you come away with a post like that! A great read. Keep it up mate.
Went back down to the pub last night, my heart bursting with joy. Within a couple of moments I was told a friend of mine who was sitting in the pub had lost his son earlier on. About 20 yo. He was blocking it. I sat with him for about half an hour, softly trying to talk about it. It’s going to be so difficult for him. Please pray for him.
Sorry to hear that Jimbo
. It’s at times like that you realise the truly important things in life 
. My thoughts are with you, your friend and his family.
For JC & Homunculus:
“A mans a moose an awe that”
Who said that?
I cant remember.
A wee question for EJ and JC, or anyone else who might have the answer.
I’m sure that by one day last week, the 14th?, King had to present the details of his appeal to the CoS before they could allow his appeal to go ahead. Am I correct in this, and if so, does anyone know if he did present the required details to the court?
I realise this won’t be a procedure likely to reported on by the media (whether TRFC connected or not), but I’ve not read anything about it, anywhere, not even from JJ with information that he’s picked up from his connections inside the Scottish legal system.
It may well be the case that we won’t know the answer to this one until the 28th, when the appeal goes ahead, or not!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3Br9-0iWgU
After the faux outrage displayed towards Craig Levein for having the audacity to comment on Scott Brown recently, I’m just waiting patiently for a tsunami of complaints about Celtic’s manager commenting on the entire St Johnstone team in less than glowing terms after yesterday’s match.
Double standards and all that.
I’ll just entertain myself watching some passing tumbleweed while I wait for the appropriate condemnation to be aimed at Mr Rodgers.
I see another delusional JJ ‘exclusive’ today on how Dunfermline deliberately threw the 6-1 game in 2003 and even their early goal for a pre arranged fix! His so called evidence is a chairman who supposedly offered Whyte (that man of integrity and honesty) to throw a game. Now bearing in mind Whyte came to Scottish football 8 years after this game I can’t quite follow the logic there.
There’s no doubt that there is a lot of shady dealings go on in Scottish football that we need to get to the bottom off, but this latest moon howling only gives ammunition to the authorities to blame it all on ‘conspiracy theorists’. If the SFA are called to task on why they let King and those before him drag my team to ruin when they were warned all along, JJs site gives them the out of ‘well when you look at all the flat earthers wild theories, we just thought the King rumours were the same”.
Highlander
February 19, 2018 at 12:08
============================
What did he say, I haven’t read anything or heard him being interviewed.
I’m more than happy to take him to task if I think he was out of order.
Darkbeforedawn
February 19, 2018 at 12:13
============================
If I remember correctly he recently spoke about a corrupt draw to give Rangers a competitive advantage in the Scottish Cup. Or a lucrative home tie, I can’t remember which.
The draw was made by Allan Stubbs and Rod Stewart, I would be surprised if either were in on such a thing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43107597
“I think there are questions there for Tommy’s players,” said Rodgers.
“How can you win a game 3-1 at Ibrox on 16 December, not win a game right the way through [since], apart from the Albion game, then your next big result is away at Celtic?
“So I think the question goes with the St Johnstone players.
“Today you’ve seen them organised, committed, fighting, running – doing all of that.
“If they do that in every game they would probably win a lot more games.”
sannoffymesssoitizzFebruary 19, 2018 at 06:38
‘..The latest to jump on the Morelos bandwagon is The Scotsman,.’
_______________
Yes, and the useless,deceitful toss-pot of a ‘journalist’ who wrote, in today’s issue, “…..and Rangers have already turned down bids reported to be worth up to £11 million” is a disgrace to himself and his profession: and he knows it, too, because he hasn’t put his name to it.
He clearly does not know for a fact that Rangers have turned down any bids. He is merely reporting what a source less than trustworthy in the Truth department has told him!
And if he does not know for fact, why does he not simply say “I have been told by the Fat Controller that bids have been turned down, and, by the way, he also said that the bids were worth up to £11 Million”?
I could kick his arras for his presentation of untruths disguised as factual journalism.
And I could kick it again for not having even the savvy to imply that he had, like a proper journalist, at least asked questions , like, “who made the bids?”
May he be one of the first to go, when the ‘Scotsman’ goes the way of RFC 1872, in about 18 months time, with my curse on its head!
Highlander
February 19, 2018 at 12:26
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43107597
“I think there are questions there for Tommy’s players,” said Rodgers.“How can you win a game 3-1 at Ibrox on 16 December, not win a game right the way through [since], apart from the Albion game, then your next big result is away at Celtic?“So I think the question goes with the St Johnstone players.“Today you’ve seen them organised, committed, fighting, running – doing all of that.“If they do that in every game they would probably win a lot more games.”
================================================
What do you think is offensive in that.
Obviously I don’t know what question he was asked to provide that as an answer, but whatever it was I really don’t see why anyone could have an issue with it.
If you play like you did today you would win more games. Seriously, you object to that.
Highlander 12.26
I’ll bite if you first say what you think the motivations of Levein and Rogers were in both cases.
We will never know a person’s motivations for sure, but it will be the guess at what they were that will be the basis of the question being asked and the answers given.
So what was the purpose of both in your opinion?
AllyjamboFebruary 19, 2018 at 11:05
‘…I’m sure that by one day last week, the 14th?, King had to present the details of his appeal to the CoS before they could allow his appeal to go ahead. .’
________________
Not quite, Aj: parties were to submit their notes of argument and the authorities they intend to cite in support of their arguments by 15th February. This is just a matter of timetabling , so that the Court(the Judge) has sufficient time to brief himself on the legal issues that each party will raise.
The submission of their arguments isn’t a public thing to do with allowing the appeal to go ahead. The appeal will be heard, unless of course King himself withdraws.
Allyjambo February 19, 2018 at 11:05
A wee question for EJ and JC, or anyone else who might have the answer.
I’m sure that by one day last week, the 14th?, King had to present the details of his appeal to the CoS before they could allow his appeal to go ahead. Am I correct in this, and if so, does anyone know if he did present the required details to the court?
I realise this won’t be a procedure likely to reported on by the media (whether TRFC connected or not), but I’ve not read anything about it, anywhere, not even from JJ with information that he’s picked up from his connections inside the Scottish legal system.
It may well be the case that we won’t know the answer to this one until the 28th, when the appeal goes ahead, or not!
======================
It is standard procedure for the judge to set intermediate dates before the next formal hearing for documents to be produced/disclosed, notes of argument, lists of authorisations/precedents etc. I’d imagine that sort of thing would apply to King’s legal team, to outline what it is they intend to base their appeal upon.
It enables all parties to be prepared with their arguments and counter arguments, and actually saves the court time. Otherwise, if one party presented something out of left field without it being disclosed beforehand, then the other party might ask the judge for time to consider the new material which could extend to weeks or months.
It was commented on by a judge at recent hearing when he said that we didn’t want to go back to the “old days” when you didn’t have a clue what was going to be presented beforehand (I think it was in one of the D&P cases).
With regards to Rodgers comments, I listened to his interview on the radio on the football round up show yesterday and didn’t see anything wrong with it. He was very complimentary to St Johnstone, and I felt his comments of if they could play that same way every week as they do against Rangers and Celtic were completely fair and I’m sure comments that their own management team will be asking!
DarkbeforedawnFebruary 19, 2018 at 12:13
I see another delusional JJ ‘exclusive’ today on how Dunfermline deliberately threw the 6-1 game in 2003 and even their early goal for a pre arranged fix! His so called evidence is a chairman who supposedly offered Whyte (that man of integrity and honesty) to throw a game. Now bearing in mind Whyte came to Scottish football 8 years after this game I can’t quite follow the logic there. There’s no doubt that there is a lot of shady dealings go on in Scottish football that we need to get to the bottom off, but this latest moon howling only gives ammunition to the authorities to blame it all on ‘conspiracy theorists’. If the SFA are called to task on why they let King and those before him drag my team to ruin when they were warned all along, JJs site gives them the out of ‘well when you look at all the flat earthers wild theories, we just thought the King rumours were the same”.
______________________________
Neither Whyte, nor JJ are claiming that the offer was made to Whyte to throw that particular game, or any other. What Whyte claimed, in the draft of his book, is that he was told, after becoming RFC’s chairman, by another, undisclosed, club’s chairman, that his club had made an offer to David Murray to throw an undisclosed match against RFC.
Whether Whyte was telling the truth, we will probably never know, and JJ is just putting two and two together and maybe getting five, but from what we know of Murray, and how he was prepared to cheat to win, and how he, at Calderwood’s admittance, arranged for that manager to take over at Dunfermline, and that Calderwood, apparently, believed it was a stepping stone to the manager’s job at Ibrox, and that the chairman of Dunfermline was Murray’s buddy and line to a fortune in ultimately defaulted loans at Bank of Scotland, then, if Whyte was telling the truth about being told that a club chairman had offered to throw a match, then it probably was that match that was being referred to. It’s certainly small beer in comparison to the ten years of cheating that Murray’s Rangers indulged in.
JJ does, though, write as if it is an indisputable fact that this was the game the undisclosed chairman was referring to when he told Whyte whatever it was he told him, and that Dunfermline did, indeed, throw the game. I’d suggest we are no closer to knowing the truth of what happened that day than ever we were, it’s just that we now know that Murray was far too close to the chairman of the losing club, and the manager of the losing club, who hoped to become Rangers’ next manager, had been delivered to Dunfermline by Murray. We also know that cheating was in Murray’s DNA.
Still, I agree that JJ is maybe stretching things a bit to write as though Whyte’s word is something of value, and it certainly doesn’t prove anything, about any cheating, one way or the other.
JC and Easy,
Thank you both for filling me in on the procedure. I thought maybe, if King discovered his case for appeal was too weak, he might not have produced what was required of him, and so case over.
AllyjamboFebruary 19, 2018 at 14:08
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A while back there was a big stooshie about alleged shenanigans at Dunfermline that broke in the press and was reported to the compliance officer at the SFA. Since then, nothing.
Any one know what it was about?
Statement from Dunfermline at link. An admission that people in glass houses shouldn’t be lobbing bricks at others who’ve had insolvency events, it seems. I’d have copied the statement in full but Dunfermline have protected it for copyright reasons: https://www.dafc.co.ukstory.php?t=Chairman`s_Statement&ID=10114
Link not working in previous post see DAFC club news from 8th August 2017.
blu
Normanbatesmumfc, call me old fashioned but that is not a comment I find befitting of either yourself or this site. Lets leave that sort of talk to other forums where the IQ isn’t quite as high!
EFL: Winding-up petitions & moving on from the financial ‘Wild West’ By Andrew Aloia BBC Sport 16 February 2018
While there has been a reduction in football clubs going into administration, before this season more were facing winding-up petitions.
Is Financial Fair Play helping?
The fall in club administrations coincides with the introduction of Financial Fair Play (FFP) Regulations in 2012, since replaced with Profitability and Sustainability rules.
Wilson says they “are taking hold” and predicts they will result in “a downward trend in winding-up petitions”.
“For the most part the evidence is telling us that clubs are becoming more fiscally responsible based on earned income. There is at least some sort of regulatory system in place,” said Wilson.
“You will always get those who break the rules when they try to get promoted or there is a bit of money to be made.”
Read the full article at http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41083617
“For the most part the evidence is telling us that clubs are becoming more fiscally responsible based on earned income. There is at least some sort of regulatory system in place,” said Wilson.
Clear to see such responsibility at Ibrox. Turning down *cough* 11m for a player then borrowing £3m from a payday loan company the following day to meet payroll
Newcastle United ‘abused tax system’, HMRC alleges
BBC News 4 October 2018
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-41499165
Newcastle United “systematically abused” the tax system to “secretly” make payments to agents and players during transfers, a court has heard.
The allegations emerged after the Tyneside club challenged a raid by HM Revenue and Customs in April.
United argued no reasonable grounds existed for believing it had engaged in tax fraud, but High Court judges ruled the warrants were “lawfully issued”.
The club said it was “disappointed” and “considering its options”.
St James’ Park and West Ham’s London Stadium were raided as part of a £5m fraud investigation.
Business and financial records were seized, along with computers and mobile phones, and Newcastle’s managing director Lee Charnley was among several men arrested and later released without charge.
The club challenged the legality of the search-and-seize orders obtained by HMRC, and a hearing has been held at Leeds Crown Court.
‘Secret’ payments
HMRC argued that reasonable grounds existed for believing Newcastle United was ”knowingly involved” in a multimillion-pound tax fraud, and the club’s application for judicial view was dismissed.
The full judgement has now been published. (See hyperlink in the article to read this)
It reveals Operation Loom is looking into whether the club knew payments to agents were being “secretly” funnelled to other unlicensed agents and players themselves in a bid to circumvent income tax and National Insurance.
Regarding Demba Ba’s transfer to Newcastle from West Ham, HMRC said: “It appears NUFC paid agent’s fees for services of £1.9m in full knowledge that the majority would be passed on to other agents… and to a company associated with the player.”
There were “further suspicions” arising out of his transfer to Chelsea in January 2013.
HMRC said it believed “NUFC systematically abused the tax system… and all payments to agents made were potentially the subject of criminal proceedings”.
A spokesman for HMRC said: “We are very pleased with the court’s decision which we are studying in detail. We do not comment on individual cases or ongoing investigations.”
Newcastle United said in a statement:
“We are disappointed with this decision given the court’s findings. “We are considering all of our options with our advisers, including whether to pursue an appeal.”
This is worth a read on the Morelos transfer saga- apologies if already posted.
http://twohundredpercent.net/rangers-transfer-window/
Rangers directors enjoy salary hike despite club posting rising losses.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16031184.Rangers_directors_enjoy_salary_hike_despite_club_posting_rising_losses/
———————-
Have we seen this scene before?
RANGERS chief executive Graham Wallace is in line for a bonus worth 100 per cent of his £315,000 pay packet.
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/graham-wallace-s-rangers-bonus-package-revealed-1-3397738
The response to my mention of Brendan Rodgers’ comments on St Johnstone was nothing if not predictable.
I’m sure we’re not going to argue that there is an unwritten rule, possibly even a written one, in football that you do not criticise another manager’s players. This, after all, was the accusation levelled against Craig Levein following his Scott Brown comments, both on here and further afield.
I’m equally sure we’re not going to argue that, on a website which regularly castigates Rangers for having a rulebook all to itself, Celtic are exempt from the aforementioned rule on criticising another manager’s players.
I would contend that Rodgers’ comments (“I think there are questions there for Tommy’s players”, for example) were intended in a disparaging way in order to deflect from the fact that his infinitely more expensively assembled side, even with a raft of changes, was unable to beat an otherwise out of form Saints team. But of course my reading of events isn’t viewed through a pair of green goggles. I’m slightly embarrassed to be in agreement with the unnamed BBC correspondent who concluded “Rodgers suggested Wright’s men are cheating their manager by not showing the same desire against other sides as they do against the Old Firm.”
To answer Auldheid’s point, I’ve just covered what I think was Rodgers’ motivation. I genuinely believe Levein was 100% accurate in his assessment of Scott Brown. I’ve said on here many times, Brown has some positive attributes, but for me they are outweighed by a congenital thuggishness that seems inexplicably invisible to Scottish referees and Celtic fans, yet blatantly obvious to those of us who support clubs who regularly come up against it.
Strangely, the phenomenon of letting Brown off with murder isn’t replicated in European referees, who seem inordinately immune to the practise of allowing five mistimed leg-breakers before a verbal warning before a booking. That description may be slightly exaggerated, but only slightly. Brown’s punishments are as rare as Neil Warnock’s eyebrows, and yes, I’m aware he’s currently suspended (Brown, not Warnock’s missing eyebrows), but he’d be suspended more often and for longer if justice was served.
I guess Levein’s motivation in mentioning Brown is similar to my own. You know you’re right, but you also know that nobody is likely to take a blind bit of notice, but feel compelled to voice your displeasure anyway. I suspect Levein was of the forlorn hope that somebody in the refereeing fraternity might remove the unique protection that Brown seems to have ‘earned’ purely by virtue of being the captain of our biggest supported club.
Clearly it’s only his own players who need protected from Levein … in “friendlies”
Craig Levein v Graeme Hogg (Hearts, 1994)
Levein didn’t take too kindly to Hogg’s criticism of him during pre-season friendly against Raith. Levein broke Hogg’s nose, a brawl ensued and both players were given their marching orders – Hogg while he was on a stretcher. The pair received lengthy bans – 14 games for Levein and ten for Hogg.
DBD, and everyone. I love you all . May the great Archangel St. Michael, my hero, look after you all. No matter which team you support. You are blessed.
HIGHLANDERFEBRUARY 19, 2018 at 18:11
I think they are both wrong in their statements , but there is a difference in criticising a team that maybe upped its game to deny your team two points , and singling out an opponent as being a thug and tacitly criticising match officials as being reluctant to deal with the perceived problem . Brown is what used to be known as an enforcer, same as his namesake at RFC(IL) and Keane at Man U, or even Keith Lasley at Motherwell . I’ve never seen him getting extra latitude against us , but that might be because his special attributes are not required . To me , Levein’s was a personal attack and he should be asked to produce one of his famous dossiers to prove his point . This from a man who was sent off for banjoing a teammate in a friendly . Rogers should be told to keep his comments to his own team . Both brought the game into disrepute, but it pales into insignificance compared to the football authorities’ behaviour .
http://twohundredpercent.net/craig-levein-and-graeme-hogg-a-classic-punch-up/
DarkbeforedawnFebruary 19, 2018 at 16:38
Lets leave that sort of talk to other forums where the IQ isn’t quite as high!
Oh the banter!!
This is for DBD especially. I love you mate but you need to understand where I come from. This is for you appreciate it or not (I think you will)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGr6B6Rp4PU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwp1CH5R-w4
NEEPHEIDFEBRUARY 19, 2018 at 18:08
6
0 Rate This
This is worth a read on the Morelos transfer saga- apologies if already posted.
http://twohundredpercent.net/rangers-transfer-window/
————-
Very clear, for those who have not been paying attention.
Good read.
Jimbo – Beautiful!
DBD, this breaks my heart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyGOQoXyWTA
It looks l Iike the BBC Sportsounds producers agree with Highlander and called out Rodgers re his comments about St Johnstone players while playing earlier clips of him saying that such is just not the done thing and managers should not make critical comment about other teams and players.
Take of the green tinted goggles and apply the standards and forensic skills of this site.
If we are happy to trawl through the archives to highlight hypocrisy in the MSM or down Govan way, then the same can be applied to any other person within the Scottish game.
I have a great deal of respect for BR but like ONeill, Strachan before him and a lot of other football managers they are often not as smart as they think they are.
While I am in full agreement with what he said in this particular matter re StJ BR has been shown to be a hypocrite.
To be honest it will be like water of a ducks back.
As for how these matters come about and the motivation. Like the Levein – Brown issue it comes from having to respond to press questions and the opportunity is taken to deflect away from scrutiny of your own performance.
It isn’t a biggie but let’s just acknowledge that it happens and halos slip now and again.
This for EJ, AJ, Auldehiid Jc,and all the rest of my fav. posters
I don’t care any more, our loving mother loves you all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuY45gEViZ8