It Takes Two to Tangle


It Takes Two to Tangle

 Guest Blog by Auldheid

When helping write up the previous blog on the matter of the (mis) commissioning by Harper Macleod, lawyers to the then SPL and current SPFL, of the Lord Nimmo Smith’s investigation into side letters arising from EBTs issued by Rangers FC from July 1999 ( ) .

I had it in mind that only the SFA had something to hide as a result of their President Campbell Ogilvie being fully aware of the history and distinction between the two illegal Rangers Employee Benefit Trust (REBT ) ebts of wee tax case fame not declared to Harper Macleod and the more widely known Murray Group Management Remuneration Trust (MGMRT) Big Tax Case ebts which were declared and on which LNS focussed after (wrongly)treating both types as regular.

The idea that I think most bought into in terms of the registration matters LNS investigated was that no one in football except players with side letters had participated in those schemes and that football authority, both SFA and SPL were unaware of them until their existence became public in Feb 2012. This is when the Sun first published a side letter and the possibility of mis-registration was raised, notably on Celtic Quick News then more widely particularly following an interview between Alex Thomson of Ch4 News and Hugh Adam an ex Rangers Director.

However when you think of the world of Scottish football where players socialise with each other and with journalists, then it does seem stretching it a bit to think that no one in football authority ever heard any gossip or had any enquiry and decided not to investigate the matter before 2012.

Well Rangers Administrators Duff and Phelps thought so and their lawyers Biggart Bailie asked Harper Mcleod in March 2012 why the SPL had not investigated a lot earlier on the basis that

  1. There had been entries every year since 2000 in Rangers Annual Accounts of sums of money being placed in employee benefit trusts
  2. HMRC had written to the SPL at some unknown point in the past to ask about the existence of side letters in players’ contracts.

The first argument on annual accounts was one made once public awareness of ebts widened but it was dismissed on the grounds that no one knew much about ebts in those early years and in any case properly administered ones, which they would have been presumed to have been, did not have side letters.

However it does seem likely that having written to MIH/Rangers in 2005 to enquire about the existence of side letters to De Boer and Flo (which MIH/Rangers denied holding even though they did) HMRC would have written to the SFA or SPL sometime after 2005 whenever they first became aware of side letters in players contracts with regards to the MGRT ebts of Big Tax Case fame..

That the SPL had been contacted two or three years previous to 2012 by HMRC was confirmed at a SPL Board meeting in March 2012 as a result of a question being asked by Celtic, who were unaware in 2012 that such an HMRC enquiry had been made in 2009 or 2010.  It is possible of course that the connection to misregistration was not made then by the SPL executive asked, but had it been history could have been so different.

How that HMRC enquiry and what it contained was handled by the SPL executive perhaps explains not only why the SPL were so keen to take the lead on the investigation but why they were unaware of the different types of ebts at play, the enquiry in 2009/2010 presumably relating only to the MGMRT type.

The motivation of the SPL executive can be read into their advice to the SPL Board on 23rd February 2012 to instruct an immediate inspection and investigation of the financial records of Rangers with respect to the ebt payments under SPL Rule F1 and under Section G of the Rules on the basis that such an inspection and investigation might reveal prima facie evidence of a breach of SPL Rules independently of any Administrator decision or the outcome of the FTT.

The SPL Board were further advised that taking the lead on such grounds would also go some way to forestalling any attempt by the SFA to include any dependency on the outcome of either Rangers Administration (which they entered on 14th February) or the result of the FTT, (which came in November 2012.)

The desire and benefits of delinking what was at heart a registration enquiry   from the much more serious use of tax evasion methods to pay players was obviously not lost on those giving the advice.

In fact in directing LNS in the way the SPL did (possibly unaware that tax evasion had already occurred with Flo and De Boer) it avoided focus on the real and still unresolved issue, were players paid by unfair means from 1999 from which sporting advantage would naturally accrue with no need for proof that it had. You cannot say this had not been thought through in the advice given.

It was also the SPL’ stance that matters concerning player payments had traditionally been considered to be for leagues.

The narrative emerging here is one of the two football authorities keeping from public gaze what individuals in both, if not the whole organisations corporately, knew about the history of ebts; the SFA knowing the history of both types from 1999/2000 onwards and the SPL possibly only knowing something of the MGMRT ebts and side letters from 2009/10 as a result of HMRC asking them questions.

Thus it suited the SFA that the SPL take the lead as much as it suited the SPL to do so but for different reasons. The SFA to keep the existence of the wee tax case ebts hidden from public view and LNS scrutiny and the SPL to avoid answering any “when did they know and why did they not act” questions.

Also if the SPL were indeed unaware of the two distinct types of ebts at play (and they may indeed have been), it explains why they never picked up that the earlier illegal ebts were missed/concealed from them by Rangers Administrators.

Perhaps the SPL and SFA were aware of the benefits to them of focusing only on the registration aspect. This could be presented as an administrative error (which LNS basically decided) rather than the possible illegal nature of the big tax case ebts after the FTT (and which might still arise from the UTT) which would present both with much more difficult and unwelcome consequences to manage and certainly would have changed the nature of the investigation from the outset had the full evidence been provided.

However unless the questions put to the SPFL in the previous blog are answered, we will never know who did what and why, but we at least will know that the LNS Investigation and its findings were a sham from the outset and should be set aside.


Perhaps BDO who are investigating the role and behaviour of Duff and Phelps according to the latest report on their work should be asking Duff and Phelps about the circumstances surrounding the concealment of vital evidence from the LNS Commission?

Och why not?

To the BDO partner investigating. Dated 9th June by web site e mail

“ I see that BDO are carrying out a probe into the conduct of administrators Duff & Phelps. Does that cover the failure to supply SPL with full documentation requested to investigate side letters in 2012?

See for background. Missing evidence is available. ”

PS: I did try to ascertain if HMRC did indeed write to the SPL and when, but they were unable to confirm or deny that they had. The enquiry and response follow. The question on who is responsible for HMRC policy in respect of collection of tax from football clubs was not given but probably due more to an oversight than any attempt to stop the question being answered.








About the author

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

1,247 Comments so far

billyj1Posted on9:15 pm - Jun 23, 2014

Re Sponsorship and money lost to the game.
Whatever happened to Parks Sponsorship of TRIFC? They used to provide the Team buses and were well into corporate sponsorship. Now zilch.
Tens of thousands of pounds I understand. All gone.
More questions that dare not be asked.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on9:35 pm - Jun 23, 2014

A wee tweet from Keith Jackson.
Make of it what you will:

@tedermeatballs: OK, this morning I interviewed the man who claims to control Blue Pitch Holdings. And yes, he had some interesting things to say.

View Comment

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on9:37 pm - Jun 23, 2014

Not sure if this has been posted before, so will post just in case it has not.

@tedermeatballs print this, u need anymore info im happy to help

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on9:50 pm - Jun 23, 2014

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:

June 23, 2014 at 9:35 pm

A wee tweet from Keith Jackson.
Make of it what you will:

@tedermeatballs: OK, this morning I interviewed the man who claims to control Blue Pitch Holdings. And yes, he had some interesting things to say.

Go Keith. I would like to think there would be some searching questions asked. I think i smell more moonbeams.

View Comment

tomtomPosted on9:50 pm - Jun 23, 2014

billyj1 says:

June 23, 2014 at 9:15 pm



Rate This

Re Sponsorship and money lost to the game.
Whatever happened to Parks Sponsorship of TRIFC? They used to provide the Team buses and were well into the corporate sponsorship. Now zilch.
Tens of thousands of pounds I understand. All gone.
More questions that dare not be asked.
Parks got stiffed for a few grand by oldco. However what is interesting is that the company that took over the team bus, Bruces, had the replacement bus fully painted up in the team colours in Nov/Dec 2011, two months before the admin date. John Bruce is well known at Ibrox for his love of all things Rangers but he couldn’t possibly have been tipped the wink by Craigie boy, or could he?

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on10:03 pm - Jun 23, 2014

Here is the Keith Jackson story, Lebanese “money man” wants to take control at Ibrox. make of it what you will

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on10:03 pm - Jun 23, 2014

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
June 23, 2014 at 9:35 pm

A wee tweet from Keith Jackson.
Make of it what you will:

@tedermeatballs: OK, this morning I interviewed the man who claims to control Blue Pitch Holdings. And yes, he had some interesting things to say.
If I had a Twitter account I could counter the “Scottish Press Awards Sports Writer of The Year”, 3IAR with ;

@StevieBC_ : OK, this morning I interviewed the man who claims to be Lord Lucan. And yes, he had some interesting things to say.

Keef still writing mince… 😕

[Edit: to be fair, it appears that he hadn’t just dreamt this up – but did in fact speak to someone. But still expect it to be mince / PR misdirection ?]

View Comment

justshateredPosted on10:15 pm - Jun 23, 2014

PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
June 23, 2014 at 4:31 pm

So prosecutorial reasons?
Who put the block on the stories; Crown Prosecution Service / Procurator Fiscal’s Office?

I would not think it would be BDO as I do not think they have the power to do that.

As for the other two surely they cannot indefinitely block publication of a story which is clearly in the public interest. It is almost like a ‘D’ Notice of yesteryear where the Government blocked a story for national security reasons!

Are these two bodies continually having to return to court to have the injunctions extended?
If they have, how many times have they done so?
Are the proceedings themselves also subject to reporting restrictions?

Have any of the journalists / media outlets gone to the High Court to have the injunctions overturned.
Have you yourself be served with such an injunction?
Has this issue been dealt with solely by the Scottish Courts?

Sorry to try to pin you down and, heaven forbid, gain an insight into how this scandal is being deliberately kept from the public but I feel that if this issue has been dealt with by Scottish courts then you will never be allowed to print it however how does that effect you?
You are not under their jurisdiction unless this has gone beyond our shores.
Has it gone to England and further to Europe which includes Ireland?

Any information you supply will of course go no further!!!!!!!

View Comment

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on10:16 pm - Jun 23, 2014

StevieBC says:
June 23, 2014 at 10:03 pm
0 0 Rate This

Apparently he just happened to find his number and called it. 🙄

View Comment

TartanwulverPosted on10:19 pm - Jun 23, 2014

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
June 23, 2014 at 9:35 pm

A wee tweet from Keith Jackson

@tedermeatballs: OK, this morning I interviewed the man who claims to control Blue Pitch Holdings. And yes, he had some interesting things to say.
Journalist interviews the man in the moon. At least, he claimed to be the man in the moon. Well, what he actually said was ‘if you’re a journalist, then I’m…’

View Comment

twopandaPosted on10:20 pm - Jun 23, 2014

Ok – it`s becoming crystal clear MSM can’t be trusted – at all. We can add all PR involved as organised deception – nothing more. Further, if the media are under `constraints` – it seem obvious that everything be vetted, adjusted and then cleared by PR before – being allowed – publication – but only if it suited their purposes of public manipulation.

Looking back, all of the grandstanding statements that filled headlines were carefully stage-managed to either deceive or flog tickets – or both.

Bring that up to date the BBC published a story on CG garnering funds to get control possibly with new shares. We can now read that as planted testing the water as CG can do as he pleases – now adjudging it might not be acceptable in public. And, – the BBC accepts planted `news`.

I had thought the idea of that CG comeback story was nuts – now not so sure.
So we can expect a new `frontman`
– and guess what – right on cue MSM 😉

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on10:22 pm - Jun 23, 2014

justshatered says:
June 23, 2014 at 10:15 pm
1 0 Rate This

No such thing as an injunction in Scottish law, there are interdicts though. However reason for restrictions is usually an “active police investigation” which severely limits what you can publish about an issue until there are either arrests and charges, which you can report, or when the Crown Office/Police Scotland tells you the investigation is over and no further action is planned.

There are further rules when a trial is on but you can then report the evidence being introduced, without comment of course.

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on10:35 pm - Jun 23, 2014

justpedylan says:
June 23, 2014 at 1:04 pm
49 0 Rate This

This from today’s Guardian

Justpedylan…whilst agreeing with your sentiments, and that of “The Grauniad” 1 million per cent (sic), the chances of any action against Deloittes, whether criminal or civil, are as likely as the current SFA President repaying the £95,000 he (reputedly) received as an EBT from RFC (IL).

View Comment

iamacantPosted on10:47 pm - Jun 23, 2014

nowoldandgrumpy says:
June 23, 2014 at 10:16 pm
2 0 Rate This

StevieBC says:
June 23, 2014 at 10:03 pm
0 0 Rate This

Apparently he just happened to find his number and called it. 🙄

Email with his Lebanese mobile number and his UAE mobile number is dated 15th May 2013 and is available on internet. I think it was published around 4-5 weeks ago

Can TSFM call it for a future podcast?

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on11:10 pm - Jun 23, 2014

Phil tweeting:

Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain · 32m
Blue Pitch Holdings & Margarita Holdings never intended to be in RIFC at this stage.The venture was highly profitable to them until recently

Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain · 34m
For the avoidance of doubt: the chances that Blue Pitch Holdings would actually want to INCREASE their stake in RIFC is simply Off The Radar

Retweeted by Phil MacGiollaBhain
Cheeky Haggerty @AngelaHaggerty · 50m
Wahey, Keith Jackson has another rich guy desperate to get hands on Ibrox on the DR back page. He has to be right one of these times surely.


Could it be a case of Blue Pitch fiddling with Jacko’s Meatballs?
I am being taunted by visions of spivs in smoke filled rooms rolling around the floor, slapping their thighs and paying out to each other on bets as to who can get Keef to unquestioningly print the biggest steamiest load!?

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on11:29 pm - Jun 23, 2014

WRT Phils tweets,
If Blue Pitch, Marguarita etc don’t want to be there,then why would they buy any more shares?.
Beggars the question;
If there is a doubt with regard to the current shareholders taking up the 43m shares on offer,then how will TRFC raise the funds to compete next season and consequently,without binding guarantees,how can Deloittes sign off the accounts.

View Comment

justshateredPosted on11:31 pm - Jun 23, 2014

James Doleman says:
June 23, 2014 at 10:22 pm

Interdicts in Scotland or injunctions in England will stop a journalist or a paper however Phil is not under their jurisdiction. There is clearly a huge story here and what is more there are people who know the story outwith the UK but will not publish it.

Does that help us or hinder us in restoring integrity to our sport?
Does it allow us to clean house and get rid of the people corrupting our sport at the very top?
Does it help ‘The Rangers’ from being hollowed out and striped bare leaving nothing for anyone who does want to run a commercially break even club?

I think we all know the answers to those questions.

I really just want to know that when I pay money to watch a game of football that it is honestly and impartially refereed and that the people running the sport are fit for office. The longer this shambles is allowed to drift the less I believe that is the case.
The corruption at the heart of our sport now seems to pervade every aspect of it and no one, from club owners or chairmen to the media, seems to give a monkeys and yet they seriously expect fans to pitch up every week and pay to watch a freak show.

View Comment

Lord WobblyPosted on11:46 pm - Jun 23, 2014

June 23, 2014 at 9:35 pm
1 0 Rate This
A wee tweet from Keith Jackson.
Make of it what you will:
@tedermeatballs: OK, this morning I interviewed the man who
claims to control Blue Pitch Holdings. And yes, he had some
interesting things to say.
I suppose it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that Keith is trying to actually EARN a ‘Sportswriter of the Year’ award for once, but I will remind you that young master Jackson is the guy who thought Craig Whyte was a billionaire. I suspect his middle name is ‘Gullible’.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:49 pm - Jun 23, 2014

Resin_lab_dog says:
June 23, 2014 at 11:10 pm

You’ve just put a word picture of Keef’s cheeky wee face into my head, all smiles as he hands his ‘exclusive’ interview to his editor, who pats him on the head and says, ‘well done Jim, err, Keith, that’ll be the full back page spread tomorrow’. Unaware that his editor is just as incompetent as he is, he goes on twitter to show off how clever he’s been. Always seems to work well for him that… Why take up a whole page of a newspaper to show how stupid you are, when, on twitter, you can do it in less than 140 characters? 😆

Still, just as another spiv prepares to come onto the Ibrox scene, Keith just happens to decide to do a bit of investigative journalism (phones somebody)…Aye right.

If he did phone him, somebody gave him a nudge in his direction…at the request of the Lebanese lawyer.

View Comment

nickmcguinnessPosted on12:20 am - Jun 24, 2014

Mazen Houssami is not a “Lebanese moneyman” – he’s the lawyer for Albertino Abela, a “moneyman” originally from Lebanon, now based in Monaco and London (as I’ve said many times in this forum).
I’m out of the loop as far as threats from PR spin doctors (Jack and his pals) and lawyers (almost certainly Carter Ruck) are concerned but the aim is clearly to intimidate Scottish newspapers into not mentioning the name of Mr Abela.
And so far they haven’t.
Because they are sh***bags.
Mr Abela has a fraud conviction in Italy. That’s why he wants his name kept out of the Scottish papers.
The heat is being turned up on him (very belatedly) so he wants out of RIFC.
There is part of me that feels a seething anger at the craven complicity and cowardice of the Scottish media in this Rangers story.
But, much more subjectively, there is a glow of schadenfreude about the unwitting role they have played in allowing rogues and criminals to destroy what was once undoubtedly Scotland’s largest, and at the same time most shameful, sporting institution.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on6:44 am - Jun 24, 2014

Could Keef Jackson be the print media equivalent of Neil Patey?

Whatever Keef ‘writes’ then take the opposite as being the truth?

Haven’t seen the reported article yet with the ‘Lebanese moneyman’ – but I will take a wild guess that the Internet Bampots will debunk his p*sh in a predictably prompt manner.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:02 am - Jun 24, 2014

Re all the tweets from Keith Jackson, including one about King now coming round to the idea of buying out the present Ibrox incumbents. Is there anyone, anywhere who the media would actually say is unsuitable for Rangers, as long as they have money? It seems to me they would take anyone as long as there’s enough money to beat Celtic. Of course, the alternative headline could be pointing out the number of Scottish clubs who successfully live within their means now, and advocating that Rangers do the same. Honestly, what would be so wrong with that?

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:30 am - Jun 24, 2014

James Doleman says:
June 23, 2014 at 10:03 pm
3 0 Rate This

Here is the Keith Jackson story, Lebanese “money man” wants to take control at Ibrox. make of it what you will

If nothing else that DR front page should shift an extra x-thousand copies of the tabloid.

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on8:42 am - Jun 24, 2014

Oh goody. Another rich saviour for Keith to get all slabbery over. Way behind the bampots, especially Nick McGuiness in his revelations. Even then he gets it all wrong. As has been pointed out already PR nonsense fed to a reliable lackie.

View Comment

RobbypPosted on9:05 am - Jun 24, 2014

This is serious trouble for Sevco. Living in the UAE, I have it on good authority that this bloke is indeed a front for some real shady characters, some of whom are based in Lebanon, some in Dubai and some of whom are based wherever the long arm of the law cannot reach them. Why would a Lebanese lawyer or his backers have any interest in a failing Scottish football club? I don’t think it’s difficult to work out. Firstly they deal with the…ahem…’laundry’ then the assets, then it’s Ma’ Alsalam Sevco.

View Comment

wildwoodPosted on9:10 am - Jun 24, 2014

The main thing is he appears to be a real ‘Rangers’ man

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on9:20 am - Jun 24, 2014

DR piece by KJ. IMO the average reading age of the Dandy (sorry DR) is about 9, which means the average writing age of the articles is about 14. Normally I just laugh at the paper and it’s articles but on a serious note, on the basis of this reporting some fans are buying ST to watch the Govan club which is misleading them to part with their cash. Shameful is the word I would use to describe the (I find it difficult to say) sports journalist at this paper. Interview would IMO mean questions being asked, as I am sure there is some questions to be asked of any investors of this club. Within the article the key ingredients are there, money man, buying the club is to have all the history and the background that the team has, get the team back to the top. Keith should have finished the article with the 9 times table as this is of more relevance to his audience than the happy ever after ending that he is trying to achieve. The ending of the Govan club scenario IMO Keith my friend is like the fairy tales, Grimm.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:09 am - Jun 24, 2014

Something that confuses me about the Jackson piece today is the statement attributed to Houssami (who is no more the beneficial owner of Blue Pitch than I am, by the way) to the effect that Blue Pitch have lost a lot of money on their shareholding.

He said: “We haven’t received any interesting offers from anyone to buy our shares. Obviously the price we paid for these shares was much higher than the price today, so I don’t think anyone will come and buy our shares at this point.

Maybe I’ve got this wrong, but Blue Pitch were in right at the start, financing the purchase from D&P, and were rewarded for their trouble with 4 million shares at a penny each. I don’t believe that they have bought any shares since then. So where’s the loss? At the current price of 28p per share, that’s a million profit

I’m surprised that Jackson didn’t raise the point with Houssami. After all, I’m sure that the interview was preceded by his usual meticulous research. 🙄 🙄 .

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on10:17 am - Jun 24, 2014

The following is copied from a post I’ve just made on jamboskickback. It is a re-hash of something I posted here on 17 June but I think I have introduced something that makes it not only desirable (for those who seek justice) to reconvene the LNS enquiry, or to set up another, it shows that it is possible despite the assertion by the football authorities that the LNS decision was final. I hope I’m not wasting the blog’s time on this and would welcome any critique of the points I make.

“The following was posted on TSFM by Easyjambo. It is the announcement of the SPL investigation into RFC’s EBT case. Please note that it doesn’t mention mis-registration, nor even registration, but, in fact, deals with ‘prohibited payments’.…ent-2012-03-05/

“The SPL Board has instructed an investigation into the alleged non-disclosure to the SPL of payments made by or on behalf of Rangers FC to players since 1 July 1998.
SPL rules F1, G1.1 and G1.5 give the SPL Board wide powers of investigation into potential breaches of the SPL rules.
SPL rules D9.3 and D1.13 impose a prohibition on players receiving payments for playing football or participating in an activity connected with football except where such payments are made in accordance with a form of contract approved by the SPL and require that all such contracts are submitted to the SPL within 14 days of being entered into.”

It seems to me that there is a very important factor here that LNS didn’t cover, probably as a result of being misdirected by the very people who put together the above quoted statement, as the on-going nature of these ‘prohibited’ payments was totally ignored. Regardless of the ludicrous Bryson interpretation of how the SFA view deliberate mis-registration in the event it is not noticed at the time of registration (as if it could be if it was a deliberate deception), every time a payment was made by EBT, the rules were being broken. Now, because the FTT(T) found, largely, in RFC’s favour (now under appeal) LNS ruled that no sporting advantage was gained, as the scheme (EBTs) was open to all clubs to use (despite the very obvious fact they would have had to have mis-registered players to do so). This lack of a sporting advantage seemed to be the lynchpin to no stripping of titles. But prohibited payments are not open to all clubs to use, they were not, officially, open even to Rangers! So, regardless of the FTT(T) findings, regardless of the fact the tribunal ignored the admitted to (by Rangers) tax evasion (illegal) DOS payments of the earlier scheme, Rangers made ‘prohibited’ payments to their players that, by Lord Nimmo Smith’s own assertion, would have produced an unfair sporting advantage.

So, the inquiry was set up to investigate ‘prohibited’ payments, but the tribunal only dealt with mis-registration. Not only was the less easily fudged defence (because there are rules covering it) of prohibited payments ignored, it must still be open for investigation and examination by another tribunal. All that would be necessary for that to happen would be a desire, by the football authorities, for fair play and the will to maintain sporting integrity. Of course, with the complicity of the Scottish media, this will never happen, as the people running Scottish football will never discover the desire for fair play, nor the will for sporting integrity, by their own volition.”

With the exception of the quote from the SPL announcement, provided by Easyjambo, everything else I’ve written is from my unreliable memory, so it may well be that some, or all, of my points have been tackled, and rejected, previously. I think, though, that if there is acceptance of what I’ve said then it should be looked at in conjunction with the other changes (time sphere taking out the DOS scheme, for example) to the original parameters of the investigation.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on10:23 am - Jun 24, 2014

So the Jackson and the DR has another Mr Moneybags to the rescue story.

Perhaps a wee time to look at the scores on the doors re some of the shareholdings if Blue Pitch are to become the largest shareholder.

Blue Pitch are reported as having 6.14%
Sandy Easdale has 4.61% personally
(but controls a further 22.1% including Blue Pitch which equals 26.71%)
Margarita have 3.99%

Institutional investors are listed as follows:-

Laxey Partners (UK) Ltd. 12.74%
Hargreave Hale Ltd. 7.72%
River & Mercantile Asset Management LLP 7.37%
Artemis Investment Management LLP 6.58%
Seneca Investment Managers Ltd. 4.83%
Legal & General Investment Management Ltd.3.07%
Miton Asset Management Ltd. 2.64%
Insight Investment Management (Global) Ltd. 1.92%
JPMorgan Asset Management (UK) Ltd. 1.11%
Newton Investment Management Ltd. 1.00%

To overtake Laxey Blue Pitch need 12.74 – 6.14 = 4.60%
Easdale’s 4.61% would do the trick!!!
Time for the brothers to sell up then call in the loan or take their share of the secured assets???

The whole story is another ‘if buts and maybes’.

Houssami said: “I am happy for Blue Pitch to invest more money in Rangers because I believe in the club. I am hoping TODAY to buy more shares and to become the biggest majority or to get a more substantial minority to be able to control or to influence the decisions a bit more.”

Lets see what the shares sites do today to see how that one pans out as there has been no sign of anyone major trying to get in or out for sometime now.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on10:37 am - Jun 24, 2014

essexbeancounter says:
June 23, 2014 at 12:37 pm
‘ JC…. I can assure you that, nothwithstanding my numerous reservations re Deloittes, they are NOT a franchise nor do they operate anything approaching such.!’
EB,I defer of course to your professional knowledge of the quids and quiddities of these matters ( had to get Wullie in there, somehow 😀 ).
I plead in mitigation a) that I don’t really know what a ‘franchise’ is
and b) this little piece by Deloitte describing themselves strikes me as being kind of descriptive of a what I thought was the same kind of thingy as a KFC or Big Mac operation: you get to use the big name and are ‘answerable’ in a sort of way to the big name, but the big name will walk away from any liabilities you incur!
“About Deloitte

“Deloitte” is the brand under which tens of thousands of dedicated professionals in independent firms throughout the world collaborate to provide audit, consulting, financial advisory, risk management, tax, and related services to select clients. These firms are members of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee (“DTTL”).

Each DTTL member firm provides services in particular geographic areas and is subject to the laws and professional regulations of the particular country or countries in which it operates. Each DTTL member firm is structured in accordance with national laws, regulations, customary practice, and other factors, and may secure the provision of professional services in its territory through subsidiaries, affiliates, and other related entities. Not every DTTL member firm provides all services, and certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting.

DTTL and each DTTL member firm are legally separate and independent entities, which cannot obligate each other. DTTL and each DTTL member firm are liable only for their own acts and omissions, and not those of each other. DTTL (also referred to as “Deloitte Global”) does not provide services to clients.

Deloitte LLP is the United Kingdom member firm of DTTL.”
I go to the bottom of the class, happy to avoid 6- of- the- best from your Lochgelly special.( And what a strange company that must have been, manufacturing leather belts with which to hit weans! Who said the “Scottish Enlightenment”?)

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:04 am - Jun 24, 2014

nickmcguinness says:
June 24, 2014 at 12:20 am
‘..There is part of me that feels a seething anger at the craven complicity and cowardice of the Scottish media in this Rangers story.’
Yes, it is quite extraordinary how ‘professionally unbalanced’ and/or ignorant our sports hacks (in the main) have been allowed to be. There are some good stories of wider public interest that one would have thought would be meat and drink to anyone with journalistic pretensions.
But then, if you have been fed enough :slamb: you might have no stomach for the good healthy food of Truth.
Then again, you might be too feart of the criminal element in the gangster/money-making world. There are those who can rouse rabbles- there will also be those, perhaps, who can less openly silence inquisitive ‘trouble-makers’, perhaps even permanently if the stakes were high enough.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:34 am - Jun 24, 2014

wottpi says:
June 24, 2014 at 10:23 am

I’ve always thought I’d enjoy stringing along one, or more, of those very annoying cold callers, just to p*** them off. I wonder if that’s what Mr Houssami did with Keithy boy. I wonder just how many Lebanese ‘money men’ tell some foreign stranger, who just happens to claim to be a journalist, his plans, of a kind best kept secret, for an assault on the board of a plc? And at the very moment those plans are about to be actioned!!!

I wonder if this award winning journalist has been paying attention to the type of people currently, and recently, involved with the club he calls ‘Rangers’; has he not realised that they tell lies? Does he not realise that he, and other members of the Scottish media, have repeatedly been used by unscrupulous men to peddle their PR; PR that’s intended outcome is not in the best interests of those who loved one, or both, of the Ibrox clubs? Will he ever be anything more than the conduit for unscrupulous people’s PR?

View Comment

mcfcPosted on11:46 am - Jun 24, 2014

Who is more gullible…

… Keef or those he aims to gull ?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:58 am - Jun 24, 2014

Hmm. After recent revelations over Deloittes’ demands on RIFC and threats to ‘walk away’, followed by reports that suggest that TRFC is continuing to carry on with it’s policy of signing players they can’t afford, then the Jackson piece revealing Houssami’s ‘plans’ to take over the boardroom, we have a sudden flurry of TDs (I know, who bothers about TDs), even 4 to John Clark!!!! Now what usually follows a flurry of TDs? A series of posts from the man of many names, perhaps; or a plague of squirrels; or is Phil about to reveal next week’s DR exclusive?

Edit: now 6 TDs for John, now that really must be a first

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:06 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Just noticed, this flurry of TDs is almost entirely reserved for posts critical of KJ and hacks in general! Hope I get a load of TDs just to make my point 😈

View Comment

bardsPosted on12:07 pm - Jun 24, 2014

upthehoops says:
June 24, 2014 at 7:02 am
43 1 Rate This

Perhaps, if it were any team other that Celtic on top then they would be more open to living within their means.

View Comment

BawsmanPosted on12:11 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Allyjambo says:
June 24, 2014 at 12:06 pm
0 1 i
Rate This

Just noticed, this flurry of TDs is almost entirely reserved for posts critical of KJ and hacks in general! Hope I get a load of TDs just to make my point


Och, couldny resist Ally :mrgreen:

View Comment

mcfcPosted on12:16 pm - Jun 24, 2014

If only devious media manipulation could improve the finances of a company, they’d be minted,. And if only spivs and asset strippers could organize and coach a winning football team, they’d be worrying Barca and Bayern. But sadly none of these are of any use to a company running a successful, sustainable football club – which is a near impossible task these days anyway.

Forget all the exclusives and bangs and whistles and radar-dodging billionaires – follow the money out of Govan – and be patient – natural justice will prevail – there is only one direction this is going – and it isn’t world domination – it is back to where they belong.

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on12:30 pm - Jun 24, 2014


I myself have given a couple of TDs to JC on his Deloitte posts as they were inaccurate (as has now been pointed out).

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on12:51 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Ally Jambo

Whilst the point you make is perfectly valid what has to be remembered is that LNS was commissioned to produce the result that it did and trying to dispute the findings would imo be a return to the debates that followed the LNS decision.
These were frustrating in that whilst we could all smell a rat we could not establish where the rat had died and where the stench was coming from. I’m not sure a return to the Commission decision itself will do any more than have us holding our nostrils again.

However what has emerged since is that we have found the dead rat. We know as an indisputable FACT that key evidence was withheld from LNS both in paper form and in testimony. That is the charge put to Harper MacLeod and it is one the SPFL have failed to respond to simply because facts are chiels that wanna ding.

What is mystifying is that so called journos, the likes of Jackson, can track down some character in Lebanon to ask questions, but are unable to track down Campbell Ogilvie and Stewart Regan and ask questions that have been set out on a plate for them. If investigative journos can track down those two, then Doncaster as SPFL spokesman should be easy to find in the same building.

Scottish football can overcome it’s problems if they are admitted . The difficulty we face is that those in the msm on whom who rely to uncover the truth and who should be part of the solution are a major part of the problem.

Perhaps they need to be metaphorically ” doorstepped ” to answer the simple questions

Why they refuse to use provided evidence to establish the truth.

What exactly is it that they fear?

View Comment

SouthernExilePosted on12:55 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Para Handy

Indeed. The recent Deloitte-bashing on the basis of “recent revelations” (aka idle gossip) does nothing for the reputation of the site.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on1:01 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Auldheid says:
June 24, 2014 at 12:51 pm
What exactly is it that they fear?
They fear being outside looking in when the lamb is served and the good times roll again – because they simply can’t grasp the alternative reality of there being no lamb anymore, at all, for anyone.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on1:51 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Auldheid says:
June 24, 2014 at 12:51 pm


Thanks for the response. I totally agree with what you say in regards to LNS, and know that there is very little, to no chance, of justice ever being served. It was just the realisation that there was actually another charge involved, originally, that was clearly covered in the rules (where, apparently, there is none covering deliberate deception in the registering of players) and so would be impossible to defend by any means other than proof that it did not happen. If I am correct in my assertion, then it serves as another example of the dishonest behaviour of our football governors who changed the whole direction of the case, probably upon realising the iron-clad case it produced, to create an alternative that they could, by their combined efforts, create a Brysonism for. I also believe that making ‘prohibited’ payments is far more serious than mis-registering them, and could become ‘illegal’ payments if HMRC win their appeal.

Now, while I agree there is no chance of the incompetents revisiting the case, even under this different charge (unless there was a concerted campaign by the media), I do wonder if eddiegoldtop could use it to encourage other sponsors to see just how much they have been deceived, and perhaps to open the eyes to the club chairmen and directors to just how deep the cover-up went, and how, they too, were deceived, and taken for fools.

This all depends, of course, on the validity of my assertions, which is why I value any input and dissecting of my posts on the matter.

View Comment

Shyster Flywheel ShysterPosted on1:54 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Robbyp says:
June 24, 2014 at 9:05 am

Why would a Lebanese lawyer or his backers have any interest in a failing Scottish football club? I don’t think it’s difficult to work out. Firstly they deal with the…ahem…’laundry’ then the assets, then it’s Ma’ Alsalam Sevco.


Likewise, I have worked out of the UAE for many years and have done business with the Lebanese on numerous occasions. Christian or Moslem it makes no difference – where there is a shady buck to be made you will find them, be it in Asia, Africa or South America.. Now it is in Govan.


View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on2:05 pm - Jun 24, 2014

SouthernExile says:

June 24, 2014 at 12:55 pm

I actually wrote quite a long response to your point but realised after reading it through, that due to the personal nature, it may just appear like the “Deloitte-Bashing” you just mentioned.

So instead, I will just agree with your statement that we have to maintain the reputation of the site but also state that I have no qualms with any specific Deloittes employee but have absolutely no respect for the function this organisation plays in the current governance model.

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on2:13 pm - Jun 24, 2014

James Doleman says:
June 23, 2014 at 10:03 pm
8 0 i
Rate This

Here is the Keith Jackson story, Lebanese “money man” wants to take control at Ibrox. make of it what you will

So what’s stopping him?

Or is this yet another second hand car salesman (King/Green/Whyte/Murray) who’s waiting for someone else to stump up the money to do it?

View Comment

Bam PotterPosted on2:28 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Even more Armageddon:

A new Clyde third kit in conjunction with Think Pink Glasgow, of which £7 from every adult sale (£6 of every kid’s sale) will go to the charity.

Clearly it’s a time of crisis for the game when one of our smaller senior clubs can only afford to give 20% of the sales of what’s likely to be a popular shirt (for example my football agnostic wife’s said even she would wear one of these) directly to charity.


View Comment

mcfcPosted on2:31 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Opportunities Open Up for Coulsen at SFA (allegedly)

Cameron: Look Andy, I need someone to tell porkies to the press about Economy, NHS, Iraq, Europe etc.
Coulson: I can do that.
Cameron: Do you have experience?
Coulson: I was editor of The Sun
Cameron: But they fired you?
Coulson: Yes, for telling the truth
Cameron: Can I trust you?
Coulson: Yes, of course.
Cameron: Welcome on board.

View Comment

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on2:33 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Perhaps the question that should be asked is how this group/individual. knew the Easdales well enough to give them the proxy for their shares?

View Comment

mcfcPosted on2:37 pm - Jun 24, 2014

nowoldandgrumpy says:
June 24, 2014 at 2:33 pm
s the question that should be asked is how this group/individual. knew the Easdales well enough to give them the proxy for their shares?
I vaguely remember that the Big Es bought, or rather rented, the proxy prior to the AGM.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on2:48 pm - Jun 24, 2014

John Clark says: June 24, 2014 at 10:37 am
I go to the bottom of the class, happy to avoid 6- of- the- best from your Lochgelly special.( And what a strange company that must have been, manufacturing leather belts with which to hit weans! Who said the “Scottish Enlightenment”?)
Off topic warning – Being originally from the Lochgelly area myself, I was well aware of the GW Dick leather goods company and its best know product, with which I was well acquainted during both my primary and secondary school years.

You can still purchase replicas from the same Dick family business today.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on2:52 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Easdales Acquire proxies

nowoldandgrumpy – I little bit of investigative journalism later (yo keefie !!!) and I found Paul McConville’s contemporaneous notes here –

And the statutory notices here:

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on3:22 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Madbhoy24941 says:
June 24, 2014 at 2:05 pm
[reference your reply to SouthernExile says:
June 24, 2014 at 12:55 pm]
‘—we have to maintain the reputation of the site but also state that I have no qualms with any specific Deloittes employee but have absolutely no respect for the function this organisation plays in the current governance model.’
And I agree. The solid reputation of this site must be maintained. But not at the expense of our critical faculties, which this blog has helped us to develop. We have had our eyes opened to the lying machinations of business and press, to the point where we take nothing of what they say at face value.
We have here a firm of Auditors ( global? franchise? who knows?) of some supposedly international standing, ‘auditing’ the accounts of a newish football club that is so strapped for cash to meet its ( ludicrously high) running costs that it has to solicit personal loans from one of its directors to tide it over on the promise of pay-back when the ship comes in; a club run by Directors who appear to have no budgeting skills or sense, who keep talking big about plans which they do not appear to have the money to turn into reality,who seem incapable of effecting any kind of sensible cost-cutting but are aye ready to increase the payroll commitment….
In my view, such a firm of Auditors should look to its own good name and be ready to distance itself very quickly indeed from such a highly unsatisfactory client.
I have no reason to believe that Deloitte are NOT carefully considering how they can safely,professionally, and honourably fulfill their duties to their ‘client’ and, more importantly, to the Market generally.
I think it is plain that they may have some difficulty. It is plain to me, at any rate.
And I am open enough to have expressed myself directly to Deloitte about the way matters are, as a matter of fact, being speculated upon.
No bad-mouthing of Deloitte going on here!

View Comment

mcfcPosted on3:24 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Boyd and Nerlinger

The MSM seem to agree with themselves that these deals are done and dusted. The only people not joining in are Boyd, Nerlinger and The Rangers.

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on4:59 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Here’s a question that the Media and all Rangers fans should be asking.

The Easdales are from greenock. They are essentially West of Scotland business people. They have no international business’ and the more influential brother has had a chequered past involving spending time in jail for fraud.

Mazen Houssami is from Beirut. He is a Lawyer , he has had no connection to Scottish business previously that we or companies house are aware of.

Who introduced these 2 parties to each other ? This is an important question. Based on Houssami’s interview today it couldn’t have been Green or Ahmad.

Why would a lawyer from Beirut trust his voting rights to an ex jailbird from Greenock ?

My take is Rafat Rizvi is behind all of this. Houssami may be the only shareholder in Blue Pitch, but a side letter between Blue Pitch and a 3rd party could easily confer all financial benefits accruing to Blue Pitch to the 3rd party.

Who and why are critical . Having said that , I would take every word uttered by Houssami with a huge dose of scepticism.

View Comment

scottcPosted on6:21 pm - Jun 24, 2014

wottpi says:
June 24, 2014 at 10:23 am

To overtake Laxey Blue Pitch need 12.74 – 6.14 = 4.60%
Easdale’s 4.61% would do the trick!!!

Doesn’t quite work, wottpi. 12.74 – 6.14 = 6.6

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on6:25 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Ally Jambo
I have wondered that if the MGMRT ebts had been declared illegal before any enquiry by LNS and that the use of side letters had only emerged at that point rather than before the FTT ruled exactly what rule Rangers would have broken.

That is where matters stand on the two DOS ebts that no one wants to investigate and where matters will stand if the UTT find for HMRC.

It is also a reason why the SPL advice was to investigate side letters and delink the investigation from the FTT as a win for HMRC would make the charge against Rangers the equivalent of under the counter cash stuffed brown envelopes variety.

It becomes clearer by the day that a cover up to mitigate the consequences of Rangers duplicity has taken place, something that Eddiegoldtops can add to his charge sheet.

To save me searching what is the rule that covers the other charge that would have applied if the illegal nature of payments had already been established.

View Comment

cowanpetePosted on6:46 pm - Jun 24, 2014

For any St Johnstone fans planning a wee trip to Lucerne, I think you’ll have a great time. A lovely town. Can’t speak for how good Lucerne FC will be but I’m sure it will be a cracking tie over the 2 legs. Pricey trip though, could have been worse could have been Norway.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on7:36 pm - Jun 24, 2014

scottc says:
June 24, 2014 at 6:21 pm

My bad.
New batteries for the calculator on order 🙂

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on9:41 pm - Jun 24, 2014

It seems that Dave King has disposed of a holding of 15M shares in a SA company called MICROmega Holdings Ltd. The official statement says that there was no consideration, but the value of shares at the current price of 10 Rand works out at around £8.5M.

Now what could he buy if he had £8.5M to spend?

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on9:42 pm - Jun 24, 2014


From Twitter

Auldheid ‏@Auldheid · 2h

@eddiegoldtop Perhaps a point your club can raise with SFA/SPFL by Ally Jambo. … Read back

EGT ‏@eddiegoldtop · 58m
@Auldheid It appears that the link that AJ posted to the original SPL announcement has expired . Anyone got it ?

I had a look at the link from which the SPL statement referred to by AllyJambo was copied but like Eddiegoldtop got an error message. Now it may have been removed under normal housekeeping or somebody at the SPFL removed it because it was evidence that the original enquiry was due to start from 1st July 1998 or even that the SPFL have realised the very point that Ally Jambo has raised i.e. that players are prohibited from receiving payments unless in a form the SPL approved and the SPL could surely not have approved of side letters as a proper form of contract?

So where does that take us on the LNS Commission?

1. It was misled by the concealment of evidence that proved that at least two EBTS were irregular payments (which would have made them prohibited by their very nature regardless of contractual form)

2. The consequence of this concealment i,e. treating all ebts as regular was not pointed out by Campbell Ogilvie in his testimony to LNS or later when decision published.

3. The issue to be addressed in the original SPL statement i.e. did prohibited payments in accordance with SPL rules take place from 1 July 1998, changed in the actual commissioning to an investigation into registrations placed with the SFA from a later date that also excluded the irregular ebts at 1.

3. And – this is new – that the evidence of the original SPL statement that Ally Jambo’s point is based on has been removed from the SPL web site, possibly as a result of the enquiries made to Harper MacLeod by TSFM.

You would start to think if you were an investigative journalist that someone was trying to hide something.

Eddiegoldtop rightly asks for sight of the original SPL statement now removed to back up the case of being supporters being deceived by the LNS Commission in its entirety to his club and luckily enough there is a copy from the SPL web site before removal in this document that looks at LNS/CO/SR/SPL statements, the meaning of which may have been overtaken by events but the statements still stand

Anyone reading TSFM who has the ear of someone in authority at their SPFL club, no matter what division it plays in could do Scottish football a big favour by drawing their attention to what seems to be a deliberate attempt to deceive Scottish football supporters by the very people clubs entrust to govern Scottish football on their behalf..

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on9:57 pm - Jun 24, 2014

Auldheid says: June 24, 2014 at 9:42 pm
It was just AllyJambo’s link that was corrupt. The investigation statement is still available on the SPFL site.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on10:05 pm - Jun 24, 2014

easyJambo says:

June 24, 2014 at 9:57 pm

Cheers. That possibility never occurred to me although maintenance did, however the Jambo’s point remains valid.

View Comment

Tic 6709Posted on9:39 am - Jun 25, 2014

Good morning…….is there anybody out there.

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on9:50 am - Jun 25, 2014

Sad to hear of the early demise of David Taylor; RIP.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on10:05 am - Jun 25, 2014

Tic 6709 says:
June 25, 2014 at 9:39 am

Its all gone quiet.
A bit like the non-appearance of Keef’s follow up story of Houssami’s failure yesterday to fulfill his hope of increasing his share in RIFC!!

Phil Mac seems to be giving out detailed figures that show some form of austerity down Ibrox way but I have still to see how that works in practice. All nice talk but no action as yet.

All very well having reduced wage bill for the positions of Director of Football, the coaching staff and aging strikers but what about the contracts that McCoist and his mates are on? What about Boyd possibly accepting £2k a week plus incentives when Elbows is on a fortune and Daly, Templeton, Black etc are still on bigger bucks and no sign yet of any of them being moved on.

A la Bobo Balde and other if no one comes knocking on your door then the player’s agent is going to tell him to sit tight and ask that his contract be honoured.

Raising cash, where a good deal is going to be used to pay people off seems a daft way to proceed when the option (Laxey’s proposal according to Phil) of administration for RFCL with no damage from a points deduction last season was there. Of course that’s my layman’s viewpoint. Who really knows what is going on behind the scenes.

I’m sure things will hot up mid July after the world cup and the panic sets in.

As for other clubs they seem to be doing business as usual.
Stubbs to Hibs seems like a decent shout but only if he is given a bit of time.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on10:17 am - Jun 25, 2014

Reality Check

Rangers ready to roll into Buckie
TICKETS are selling well for Buckie Thistle’s big clash with Rangers.
Over 1,000 briefs have already been sold for the friendly match with Ally McCoist’s men next Thursday, July 3.

View Comment

Tic 6709Posted on10:21 am - Jun 25, 2014

Sydney Aquarium @Sydney_Aquarium · 5h

Did you know… you’re more likely to be bitten by Luis Suarez than a shark.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on10:36 am - Jun 25, 2014

wottpi says:
June 25, 2014 at 10:05 am
5 0 Rate This

Its all gone quiet ….

Is it unthinkable that Wallace and his accountant chum have called in the highest earners and read the riot act? Certain players and staff must realise that each wage is a torpedo to the hull of SS Sevconia of Glasgow. So perhaps common sense and self-sacrifice will win the day?

I know it sounds unrealistic, but who would want their name (and over-inflated) contract linked in the press with the loss of the ship?

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on11:02 am - Jun 25, 2014

I noticed a headline that Gordon Smith is advocating Nerlinger to Rangers would be a good move. The fact Smith’s opinion is even valued by the media says it all. Smith was a director of Rangers at a time they deliberately withheld millions in PAYE, N.I, and payments to other creditors. He has also repeatedly stated Rangers ‘are one of the greatest clubs in the world’ without a hint of remorse about anything that happened. It is a total disgrace his opinion is deemed to count with regards to anything. In my opinion the fact he is entertained still goes to show there is an inherent Rangers bias within the Scottish media.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on11:06 am - Jun 25, 2014

Danish Pastry says:
June 25, 2014 at 10:36 am

Wholly agree that the riot act should have been read.
I have posted a number of times telling of how when the recession hit the company I worked for implemented reduced contracts hours etc to ensure the ship stayed afloat. It was very successful and while I left for other reasons those who stayed got rewarded when things picked up again.

However the problem is we are talking about footballers whose careers are short and these days are becoming more mercenary.
Being possibly the only Scotland player to be booed on his international debut, having a reputation as a red card specialist and gambler I’m sure Ian Black wouldn’t give a toss about being ‘named and shamed’.

Daly at his age has nothing to loose as some bears have already turned on him as being slow and useless to add other reasons for not caring for him much. Shiels and Templton are in the same boat as their careers are going nowhere..

Likewise the others can easily say, as they did when previously asked about a pay cut (or have we forgotten that little episode) well sort out the Executive pay and the Coaching staff’s bloated salaries first and we might – might- play ball.

At the end of the day many of the players like Law and Clarke will be able to go and pick up a contract at another club at a rate that they would probably have been on if they had not taken the Ibrox shilling. They will just end up being yet another name on the Big Book of Ibrox Boycott and Boo Boys Targets and will be in good company 🙂

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on11:17 am - Jun 25, 2014

Given the issues many on here have with the SMSM, I am surprised that no comment has been passed on the outcome of the phone hacking trial.

The NOTW had a strong Scottish desk and provided many “exclusives” on sports. They had (and The Sun may still have) an interesting tactic in that they would only run a story if there was a second to back it up. Sensible, I hear you say. Reasonable even? Not in the same league of wrongdoing as hacking? However, what they also did was use the promise not to publish some incriminating stories as a lever to get corroboration for other stories from people. Effectively a form of blackmail.

Quelle suprise!

View Comment

tomtomPosted on11:31 am - Jun 25, 2014

Tic 6709 says:
June 25, 2014 at 10:21 am
6 0 Rate This

Sydney Aquarium @Sydney_Aquarium · 5h

Did you know… you’re more likely to be bitten by Luis Suarez than a shark.

On the subject of Suarez I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume that had he been sent off then Italy would probably have qualified. Therefore it would be a wonderful gesture if Uruguay were to announce two things:

1. An immediate lifetime ban from international football for Suarez
2. Their withdrawal from the tournament and to ask that Italy be awarded their place

Ok, it’s not going to happen but how much would something like this go to restoring our faith in the game. Do we really have to accept that incidents like this are part and parcel of modern football and, whilst they cannot be condoned, they can be tolerated in the pursuit of glory. Most (sensible) neutrals will be hoping that Uruguay get caned by their next opponents, any victories will be seen as tarnished, so why not do the decent thing. By doing this Uruguay would be sending out a message to the rest of the world that cheating and disgraceful behaviour have no part in the game. It could be just the game changing moment that the game needs. It would also put pressure on FIFA to get them to clean up their act. Perhaps in years to come people would be able to refer to “doing a Uruguay” in the same way that we refer to a player “on a Bosman”. It could become a metaphor for all that is good in the game.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:19 pm - Jun 25, 2014

Auldheid says:
June 24, 2014 at 9:42 pm

Thanks again, Auldheid, it’s good to know that the points raised in my post is being discussed here and elsewhere, I just hope I’ve not set others researching what might be a red herring.

I’ve long felt that the blog could best serve Scottish football, in the absence of honesty suddenly hitting the authorities or the MSM, by continuing to dissect the known knowns whenever something comes to light that previously hadn’t been married to a known known. We now have two known knowns that are linked by the fact that, in each case, the parameters of the investigation were changed. There can be no doubt that the start point of the inquiry was changed to take out the DOS scheme, there can be no other explanation (backed up by the fact that no explanation has ever been offered), so if we can establish that the charge was changed to accommodate a lesser one, and one more easily fudged, we will have a very potent combination of indicators of deception to use in the event we manage to find our conduit to the dark corridors of Hampden.

I’m sure many people, including club chairmen and directors, who were unhappy with the findings of LNS but, after decades of acceptance that it’s best not to rock the boat and general complacency, were happy to accept the findings of a Law Lord (hence the use of LNS) and, not being inclined to, didn’t question the findings. They moved on and got on with their own problems. We know that the internet is the only place that the goings on are discussed at any length (if at all), so I think it’s a safe bet that the people who could successfully rock the boat, if they were made aware of just how much they’ve been deceived, are still unaware of what’s been uncovered by people labelled as Rangers haters (in an effort to devalue our assertions and to deflect people away from here).

We know eddiegoldtop is making a magnificent effort to get his, and our, questions put to the SFA/SPFL in a way that must be answered, and the more he can ask that will cause them discomfort, especially where there is documented evidence, the better. I would suggest, if the blog is satisfied that we have new evidence of deception, that we back up eddie’s efforts as much as we (The Scottish Football Monitor) can, by, perhaps, writing to all the club chairmen with this and other findings, and just plain common sense, to make them aware of these findings and the level to which they have been deceived. It might also be a good idea to put such things into a podcast, especially if the guest is someone who might be in a position to use the information to force a response from Regan, Doncaster or Ogilvie.

Whether or not my analysis of the motivation behind the change in the charge against Rangers is correct, there is no doubt that the parameters and charges were changed. But if I am even close to being correct, then we have two pieces of documented fact that show they could only have been changed for one reason only – and that reason could only have been for the benefit of one club, as well as those involved in the wrongdoings, to varying degrees, in their capacities as the guardians of our game. Once that is established, then surely nobody, with an open mind, could doubt the perpetrators continued efforts to facilitate TRFC were motivated by anything other than self interest, and not for the benefit of Scottish football. And that that will not change without the clubs enforcing that change.

View Comment

Comments are closed.