Regular posters and contributors to the SFM may remember that in October last year I wrote to Mr McRae, President of the SFA.
I posted the text of my letter on 28th October http://www.sfmonitor.org/whose-assets-are-they-anyway/?cid=20786
I had not received a reply or acknowledgement by 12th December, so I sent a reminder. I received a reply to that reminder, dated 16 December 2015, in which Mr McRae apologised for not having responded to my previous letter, and invited me to come and see him. We arranged that I should visit him at Hampden on 19 January 2016 at 2.00 p.m.
Following the meeting, I wrote a summary of the conversation. I emailed that summary to Mr Darryl Broadfoot, Head of Communications, asking him to check whether my recollections were accurate, because I was my intention to post the summary on SFM.
I have not had a reply and I think I have waited a fair enough time, so, here is the summary of an approximately 45 minute conversation.
I should first make it clear that Mr McRae said that he had no recollection of airing any of the views recorded in my letter as attributed to him. I should also say that I made it clear that while I contribute to SFM, I was not there as ‘officially representing’ SFM, although what I would say broadly reflected the view of many.
“Note of informal meeting between me, and Alan McRae, President of the SFA, with Darryl Broadfoot, Press Officer, at Hampden park, 2.00 pm Tuesday, 19th January.
Background: I had written to Mr McRae in October 2015, to ask whether Mr McRae had really (as had been reported to me) aired the following opinions:
- that Rangers FC were not Liquidated
- that Rangers FC were put down to the third Division
- that Rangers FC were bought by Charles Green and that the team currently playing out of Ibrox Stadium and calling itself The Rangers Football Club Ltd is one and the same as the club known as Rangers Football Club, which is currently in Liquidation.
Mr McRae, through Mr Broadfoot, went through the points one by one.
On point one, there was no difficulty in agreeing that RFC had been Liquidated. That was accepted as a matter of fact.
On point two, I argued that;
- Mr Green’s new club had had to apply for league and SFA membership, and were therefore admitted as a new club to Scottish Football and allowed into SFL Third Division.
- They had as an emergency measure been granted conditional membership, and had had to seek the Administrators’ and Football Authorities’ agreement to the use of certain RFC (IL) players who had decided to sign on with the new club in order to play their first game as a new club.
- They were ‘put in ‘the Third Division as a new club, not as an existing club being relegated.
Mr McRae, through Mr Broadfoot, argued that ‘put in’ and ‘admitted to’ are pretty much the same thing, and that the legal advice obtained was that Mr Green’s new club was not a new club, and the Authorities were stuck with that.
I referred to the 5-way Agreement, and made the point that two entities other than league or SFA representatives were signatories to that agreement: RFC (IL) and Mr Green’s new club. The two could not be one.
Mr Broadfoot said that was a matter of opinion.
I said that it was rather a matter of fact.
Likewise, on the third point, there was disagreement.
Mr Broadfoot, for Mr McRae, argued that Charles Green bought the club (and Mr McRae personally added ‘and the “goodwill”’).
I pointed out that Mr Green had NOT bought the club out of Administration, as had happened with other clubs, but merely had bought the assets of a former club that was NOT able to bought out of administration and was consequently Liquidated.
Mr Broadfoot said that Celtic and Rangers supporters might continue to disagree but that could only be expected.
I pointed out that this was not at all a Celtic-Rangers supporters’ issue, and that the Scottish Football Monitor, for instance, represented the views of supporters of many clubs. I further made the point that many sports administrative bodies had come under the spotlight in current times and people were naturally concerned that the governance of football should be above suspicion: and that substantial numbers feel that the Football Authorities have been at fault, in permitting a new club to claim to be an old club and pretend to the honours and titles etc etc.
Reference was made in the passing to some allegations that had been made that certain evidence relating to the Discounted Option Scheme had been withheld from the LNS commission, which occasioned Lord Nimmo Smith to be misled; and to the apparent negligent performance of the SFA administration under the previous President, who, both on account of his personal knowledge of the use of the DOS by Sir David Murray, and as a subsequent recipient of an EBT, might reasonably have been expected to ensure a thorough and diligent examination of the information provided by clubs about payments to players.
Mr Broadfoot ruled out discussion of the first of these matters because ‘there was no evidence’, and the second matter was also ruled out because, he asserted, the previous president is a man of the highest integrity.
I replied that work was in hand to provide evidence, and that the question of negligent performance of duties was not a question of ‘personal integrity’.
Mr Broadfoot opined that the future would show whether Scottish Football supporters were really concerned about the old club/new club debate, if huge numbers turned their backs on the game.
I replied that a sport based on a false proposition, on what could be seen as a lie, no matter on what pragmatic reasons, would certainly wither if and when people thought the sport could be rigged.
As the meeting drew to a close, I was asked if, coming from Edinburgh, I was a Hibs or Hearts supporter, or perhaps a Celtic supporter? And whether I was going to tonight’s (Celtic were playing that evening at home) game?
I replied that as my name suggests, I was of Irish extraction and perhaps conclusions could be drawn from that. Also that I would not be going to tonight’s game, and that my interest in the present matter was rather more academic and objective than partisan.
The meeting ended cordially at about 2.45.pm “
I think I can say that Mr Broadfoot, opening the meeting, explained that
“for the purposes of this meeting, I am the SFA.”
Mr McRae’s personal contribution to the conversation was therefore very little more than mentioned above, Mr Broadfoot doing most of the talking.
I will say further that I spoke to BP, and consulted one or two other posters before I went to the meeting, in order to make sure that my general understanding both of the principal events of the ‘saga’ and of the thrust of most of SFM’s contributors, who are drawn from supporters of many clubs, was sufficiently sound.
I give it as my opinion that I may have been invited to a personal meeting only because it might have been thought in some quarters that I was in possession of an electronic recording of what I told Mr McRae that he was reported as having said.
And, finally, I declare here that my note of the meeting was written within two hours of the meeting, and reflects the substance of the conversation. It is exactly the note I sent by email to Broadfoot, except that I corrected a typo in the spelling of Darryll (I had ‘Caryll’), have omitted my own surname, and changed references to myself from the third person to the first person.
Smugas 6th February 2016 at 4:33 pm #
At least ten goals (not like us where two counts as double figures ).
Way back philosophers discussed how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. Completely pointless exercise.
I felt that OC/ NC debate was just as pointless.
I never believed that a QC would say:
Actually said it out loud in a court.
Even very bright and accomplished people mess up when they are asked to defend something that goes against all logic.
I feel for Mr O’Neil, he can only play the hand he is given.
I have been looking forward to the court cases as I had hoped a lot of facts would emerge, I can’t take much more of ephemeral stuff.
Now about those angels !
Smugas 6th February 2016 at 4:33 pm #
Sorry, see what you mean now !
Den 6th February 2016 at 5:36 pm #
I never believed that a QC would say:
O’Neil “The entity that rose from the ashes of the liquidation event is the club.”
Actually said it out loud in a court.
—————————————————————————–
I have this vision of a swelling angelic chorus accompanying Mr O’Neil’s words….
Then a voice butting in saying “No it’s not some ethereal thing, it’s just a very naughty (dead) football club.”*
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
*I’m not in contempt of court, am I? If so, is the SFA’s insult to the intelligence of the judge not even more so?
Den 6th February 2016 at 5:36 pm #
————————————
Lord Brodie actually asked Aiden O’Neill QC, directly, if Rangers FC was a “legal entity”
O’Neill cleverly avoided giving a direct answer by stating that its legal status was obtained through the corporate structures which surrounded it.
I was surprised that Lord Brodie didn’t follow up that remark as it was clear that he was having some difficulty with O’Neill’s reasoning about the ethereal entity in its current incarnation.
Personally I would have settled for a voice butting in and saying, “Hello, I’m from BDO’s creditors committee”
“The Licence Applicant may only be a football club, that is the legal entity fully responsible for the football team participating in national and international competitions and which is the legal entity member of the Scottish Football Association (Full or Associate Member). The licence applicant is responsible for the fulfillment of the club licensing criteria.”
… and other non-ethereal thoughts from Paul McConville.
https://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/09/08/the-corporate-entity-is-not-rangers-football-club-unless-mr-green-tries-to-sell-shares-in-it/
I am disappointed that the debate has focused so much on semantics and legalistic fudge without regard to the moral/ethical dimension to the whole liquidation debate. C.V.A.s and Liquidations carry penalties imposed for very good reasons. No person or agency should benefit from injuries inflicted on others – especially when these injuries are inflicted by carelessness, bad governance, dishonest conduct, etc.
In the case of football clubs, the damage extends to creditors, all the other clubs and the Game as a whole. Scottish football has been damaged and endangered by the collapse of one club. It was the conduct of the owners of that club that caused all the harm and the threat of Armageddon. That old club is not worthy of any more sympathy or special consideration than any other club that has gone the same way before it.
The new company/old club solution is clearly the result of ‘post hoc rationalisation’ liberally sprinkled with legalistic semantics and sophistry. As such it insults the intelligence of all of us, bears included, and is likely to leave a legacy that will blight the game for decades to come.
John Clark 6th February 2016 at 2:32 am #I can’t believe it’s that time of night (or early morning). A long skype family session with the granweans in Oz knocked the timetable out quite considerably!Just to say that I had hoped to finish writing up my jottings( such as they are) of the two-day Ashley Judicial Review proceedings earlier this evening.I’ll finish tomorrow, and ask BP if there’s a way I can send them to him to put them somewhere where those who might want to read them can do so, rather than for me to try to post them as a ‘comment’.It might bring a smile to some if I say that the Judge at one point observed, with humour, that there were people present in the public benches who perhaps knew a lot more of the history of events than ..I would love to have had one o’ they big pointing finger glove things you used to see on the ‘another one bites the dust’ TV thingy. It would have pointed straight to eJ!
==================================
Any update on the notes yet JC.
Prohibby
In a nutshell for me. The moral arguments DO matter, and they should. Just as all aspects of the sport’s integrity should.
On OCNC itself, I am rather less concerned with the substantive situation going forward than I am (as you have suggested) with the insult to my intelligence inherent in offering me those kinds of preposterous metaphysical solutions to an imaginary puzzle. It is not a puzzle at all. It’s as plain on the nose on my face what has happened.
I wonder if those who peddle it realise that the implicit insult to our collective intelligence has been more injurious to the perpetration of the myth than the myth itself?
I think it will eventually become analogous to the revisionism in the media fter the end of the old RFC signing policy.
Any journalist plying his trade in those dark days will tell you now that in fact they always campaigned fiercely (but apparently silently) against it, and that they always knew it was wrong and absurd.
In a few years time, the Keith Jacksons of this parish will be assuring us that NC = OC was a complete load of old tosh too – a fairytale – and they had always been at pains to point that out in print.
I notice that the question which has been asked over the last few days (on TRFC’s absence from the SPL after being newly founded as a 140 year old club), remains unanswered.
Simply because the logic diagram at that point runs into a cul-de-sac of legal action which no-one at Ibrox will want to get into.
Prohibby 6th February 2016 at 8:22 pm #the whole liquidation debate. C.V.A.s and Liquidations carry penalties imposed for very good reasons. No person or agency should benefit from injuries inflicted on others – especially when these injuries are inflicted by carelessness, bad governance, dishonest conduct, etc. In the case of football clubs, the damage extends to creditors, all the other clubs and the Game as a whole. Scottish football has been damaged and endangered by the collapse of one club. It was the conduct of the owners of that club that caused all the harm and the threat of Armageddon. That old club is not worthy of any more sympathy or special consideration than any other club that has gone the same way before it.
———————————————
I may just phone SSB and leave that right there
Thanks Cluster One but SSB is only interested in the ‘Old Firm’ perspective, isn’t it!
I think it was about a week ago just now on here that I predicted Celtic would beat Ross County 7-1. Well we all know how that worked out. !
So I have changed my formula. I hereby predict East Kilbride to beat Celtic 7-1.
LG to score for Celtic and seven own goals from our defence.
Big Pink 6th February 2016 at 9:12 pm #
……. In a few years time, the Keith Jacksons of this parish will be assuring us that NC = OC was a complete load of old tosh too – a fairytale – and they had always been at pains to point that out in print. ….
——————
I wonder BP. Is it not likely that the narrative will be revised only when another club, Hibs perhaps, having passed through liquidation, pleads the RFC precedent and claims to be the same club!
It was wonderful to see Broadfoot’s legal advice explained in great detail By Mr O’Neil whilst representing the SFA.
If your reading Daryll……………….Do you want to buy the Eiffel Tower? I’ve got a spare one. 50 quid and it’s yours. Comes with it’s own metaphysical stamp of authenticity.
McRae will be beelin’, because it trumps the philosophical idea that he owned London Bridge, that I sold him last week for a ton.
I’ll meet you outside Doncaster’s cathedral, just opposite Regan’s tower, and we can do the deal.
Corrupt official 6th February 2016 at 10:28 pm #
_____________________________________________________
PMSL
Sometimes I wonder if Regan, Doncaster, Ogilvie, Bryson, et. al. read this site. I would be mortified if it was me. But then you think of the politicians during the expenses scandal. Defending things like garden furniture as being legitimate expenses in the course of their work. As they say, you couldn’t burn these people’s necks with a blowtorch.
goosy goosy got me thinking, can we have the moderators put THE squirrel posts aside when something juicy comes to the fore[court sessions]. put them on hold for a couple of days until a full/reasonable analysis has been determined.
Thanks Jean
Jimbo, Don’t you be worrying about Bryson….. He’s snowed in on Sandy mountain.
Apologies in advance for this.
.
cuddlybear
.
You brought up the matter of Sevco Scotland’s admission to the SFL and the statement made by the SFL at the time.
.
I thought it worthwhile then, to delve into the SFL Constitution and Rules (“C&Rs”) to see if some light could be shed on the matter.
.
You tell us that there was no club called Sevco Scotland. However, your quote from the SFL’s issued statement includes: “That the Scottish Football League Members agree to admit Sevco Scotland Limited as an Associate Member…”
.
Usefully, the SFL C&Rs tells us:
So, it is clear that Sevco Scotland was the name of the club admitted as an associate member. I cannot read this any other way.
.
You say also that the SFL drew a distinction between the legal entity holding membership and the “club”. Once again, the C&Rs provide some assistance:
This tells us that a Member (previously defined as a football club above) can be in the form of an unincorporated association or a corporate body. In the case of Sevco Scotland the Member/football club is a corporate body. There is no distinction. I have trawled through the document to identify any rules that even hints the club/company can be distinguished from one another. There are none.
.
You point out the language within the SFL statement and the distinction it makes between Sevco Scotland and Rangers FC and also (a slightly spurious) example from England. Of course, and I’m sure you know this, Rangers FC is a trading name. as is Coventry FC. This is the designated name by which the club would trade.
.
Once again, the C&Rs help to clarify the point.
So, the statement simply tells us that Sevco Scotland (the Member/club/company) would be trading with the designated name of Ranger FC. Or to put it another way, Rangers FC would be the brand name of Sevco Scotland.
.
Again, happy to help.
.
Apologies to everyone else.
shug 6th February 2016 at 9:03 pm
‘…Any update on the notes yet JC.’
__________
Yes. I’ve only just finished them.
I have a 12 page doc saved on my hurdy-gurdy.
I won’t post it until I ask BP how to do it without just posting it as a ‘comment’: not everybody can be bothered with extra-long posts just appearing, so it would be better if it was somewhere where people chose to go!
Are you abed, BP?
JC, what in the name of goodness is a ‘hurdy gurdy’ ?
John Clark 6th February 2016 at 11:57 pm #
shug 6th February 2016 at 9:03 pm‘…Any update on the notes yet JC.’
__________
Yes. I’ve only just finished them.I have a 12 page doc saved on my hurdy-gurdy…
=================
Are you angling for some ‘overtime’ there JC ?! 😉
Your contribution will be worth the wait, as usual.
Thanks.
Just a question. I’m not keen on biscuits. But some of my family are. What are those biscuits that big BP and wee Tris like?
Thanks JC look forward to reading it.
The one single thing I find really sickening about recent events is the SFA have sent a QC to court to try and defend their same club stance. Okay, they were taken to court and have to defend themselves, but they have never made a single public statement on the matter, save for Regan stating ‘it’s up to the fans what they want to believe’. Yet a court case over a fine of a few thousand pounds has revealed beyond doubt that the SFA agreed that the current Rangers can claim to be the one that was liquidated, despite there being no rules in place for that to happen. For me that is a statement that 41 of the 42 clubs are only here to make up the numbers. It beggars belief that any football association, anywhere, gets away with applying such preferential treatment, and where does it end.
On our recent guest with the numerous one subject posts.
They seemed well thought out, perhaps having taken a number of months to construct, but as so often in these cases, his/her large number of posts consist, almost entirely, of the same ‘argument’. But it is not an argument; for rarely, if ever, do they attempt to challenge anyone else’s counter argument, simply because they can’t. Or else, their posts are pre-prepared, hence the many long posts by ‘one’ person in relatively quick succession, or the ‘poster’ hasn’t been sufficiently ‘prepped’ with any counter argument and is tasked with merely clicking on ‘send’!
I wouldn’t claim cuddlybear is an out and out troll, he/she perhaps had something he/she wanted to say and have us accept, and had spent so long creating/inventing the argument that he/she was unable to brook any suggestion that his/her theory was wrong, but sure enough, in the end, the bear was trolling.
I just wonder, though, if cuddlybear had some forewarning of what was about to come up in a certain court case! Could Level5 have created their very own ‘call centre’?
While I agree with the sentiment I’m not sure it is that workable. Unless I’m mistaken its a wordpress setting that a first post has to pass moderation before all others from that user are accepted automatically. The other settings being no moderation or every post is pre-moderated as PMGB and JJ use. The first post setting does go somewhat against “innocent until proven guilty” but it does at least prevent those that may be openly hostile either through expletives or attempting to bring the site into disrepute by libelous comment or potential contempt of court.
Even the one post rule disrupts the flow. I am often confused, admittedly not difficult, that when I’ve picked up reading from where I left off people start responding to a post I don’t recall. If I scroll back I may or may not find that post because it may have been contentious and therefore was removed before I passed it or is from a new poster and only passed moderation after I read it.
I wouldn’t want to see all posts appearing in fits and starts as and when the mods get round to clearing every oost from pre-mod so I think we just after give posters the benefit of the doubt and let the mods decide when/if they cross the line from questionable debate to outright trolling.
Besides with all the court action coming up involving officers of the OC, NC and the SFA in the next few months, not to mention the awaited CoS decision on whether BDO can appeal their overturning of the UTTT when won’t there be juicy moments for squirrels to be released?
Does anyone know if this tweet is genuine/true? If it is…
https://twitter.com/SPFLTransfer/status/696183379339845632
If link doesn’t work it’s suggesting top tier of (I think) main stand was closed over safety fears!
Edit, this is about Ibrox yesterday.
On my previous post:
I suspect the top tier at Ibrox was closed purely on expected crowd size, but you never know with this saga!
Tweets are, after all, as likely to be a spoof as genuine.
jimbo 7th February 2016 at 12:23 am #
‘..what in the name of goodness is a ‘hurdy gurdy’
________________
I am grateful to ScottC for providing the dictionary definition!
I tend to use the word to describe any technical gizmo, gadget, thingamigig that I don’t understand and don’t really have the capacity to understand. Or, frankly, interest enough to go to the bother of trying to understand.
‘Hurdy Gurdy Man’ by Donovan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHV8Wzldlck
I think that is Jimmy Page on electric guitar.
Scottish Football needs good court reporters!
Somebody taking their stuff back since they haven’t been paid?
That SPFL twitter feed isn’t a spoof, but it has no official status, so far as I know. Just some individual tweeting or retweeting stuff about Scottish football. Not sure what his sources are.
RyanGosling 6th February 2016 at 12:47 am #
Ryan I admit that the sentiments expressed but Zilch are on the strong side but are not dissimilar to Ian Archers quote from 40 years ago.
The questions that you and other bears have to ask yourself is why does your club raise the hackles?
I won’t bother listing the all the reasons but from the old sectarian signing policy to recent the appointment of a tax dodging chairman I am struggling to think of any other club in Scotland or indeed the UK who has a ‘history’ of behaviour that ticks the whole range of boxes of why fans of other clubs take a dislike to one particular club with a passion.
From the statements emanating from the board and the ‘fans leaders’ who have somehow managed to grab the media limelight, what others see is a blinkered ‘No Surrender’ view of the world where everyone else in the game and society is to blame for the recent woes down Ibrox way and deserves to be boycotted or punished in some fashion, regardless of how trivial (as seen by others in the real world) the apparent offense is.
The rest of the world tends to think as their Grannies did – “Well hell mend them” for their behaviour.
Frankly your club needs a new PR strategy fit for the 21st Century and I can’t see people’s views softening until some progress is made in that department.
The Tartan Army managed to change their image from a dangerous bunch of marauding drunken fools to a bunch of more friendly and relatively harmless drunken fools.
We are all still waiting on the decent bears like yourself to come to the fore.
As I said the other day a well supported sustainable club minus the ‘traditional baggage’ and ‘entitlement complex’ would be more than welcome in Scotland.
Admittedly movement in the right direction wouldn’t get rid of die-hard ‘Rangers haters’ but many folk would be a lot more supportive if the club started taking small steps to get on with the Scottish game instead of lashing out at every opportunity.
HirsutePursuit 6th February 2016 at 11:47 pm
You tell us that there was no club called Sevco Scotland. However, your quote from the SFL’s issued statement includes: “That the Scottish Football League Members agree to admit Sevco Scotland Limited as an Associate Member…
————————————
Can i just add…”I confirm that i have no obligation for these players to play for Sevco scotland limited trading as the rangers football club in the SFL CHALLENGE CUP MATCH VERSUS bRECHIN CITY ON SUNDAY 29TH JULY
Duff & Phelps.
—————————-
Now can we put this squirrel to bed please
This is how football fans should react when things not going great for their club. This made me laugh and smile, well worth a watch.
https://twitter.com/SPFLTransfer/status/696183379339845632
wottpi 7th February 2016 at 10:01 am
I am struggling to think of any other club in Scotland or indeed the UK who has a ‘history’ of behaviour that ticks the whole range of boxes of why fans of other clubs take a dislike to one particular club with a passion.
———————————————————————————————————
The Govan club fans claim in one of their songs “everyone hates us we don’t care”.
They have issued threats/boycotts/got people sacked etc…. in abundance since the administration and liquidation of their club. They do not seem to want to their club or fans to admit any wrong doing as they are somehow the victims in all of this.
So could someone please tell me considering the paragraphs above how Scottish football benefits from this club (or clubs) and all it’s baggage? (and they could be in the top league next season). Worrying times IMO.
Red Lichtie at 9.25am
Cheers for the Donovan link Red Lichtie.
After I watched that one, I found this little gem;
http://youtu.be/Lc6HcA6kEJc
Dylan and Donovan. Hopefully the link works.
A true musical treat of a Sunday morning.
It’s all over now baby blue!
aRistotle defined metaphysics as the science of beng as being. Thus we are the people is a pure metaphysical construct.
There is an old warning epithet against making distinctions without differences. The SFA are arguing that there is no distinction in a case where there is clear difference, as ever they get things wrong. Their position is possible monism if I remember my half understood jargon properly.
Allyjambo 7th February 2016 at 10:37 am # This is how football fans should react when things not going great for their club. This made me laugh and smile, well worth a watch.
https://twitter.com/SPFLTransfer/status/696183379339845632
_________________________
Oops, sorry, wrong link! I wondered why anyone would TD this (hoping I’ve got it right this time
):
https://twitter.com/FootbalIStuff/status/695182683509538816
Watch it to the end, it starts with a smile, then becomes a full blown laugh. Probably wouldn’t be allowed/stopped in this country due to Health and Safety regs
!
Allyjambo 7th February 2016 at 11:49 am #Allyjambo 7th February 2016 at 10:37 am # This is how football fans should react when things not going great for their club. This made me laugh and smile, well worth a watch.https://twitter.com/SPFLTransfer/status/696183379339845632_________________________
Oops, sorry, wrong link! I wondered why anyone would TD this (hoping I’ve got it right this time ):
https://twitter.com/FootbalIStuff/status/695182683509538816
Watch it to the end, it starts with a smile, then becomes a full blown laugh. Probably wouldn’t be allowed/stopped in this country due to Health and Safety regs !
===============================
Allyjambo, many thanks for this link…who said the Germans had no sense of humour…?
Allyjambo 7th February 2016 at 11:49 am
Brilliant Ally ! Is that the wee arrow people?
What a fantastic game at Tynecastle.
Hat off to both teams,even the ref.
Corrupt official 7th February 2016 at 1:01 pm # Allyjambo 7th February 2016 at 11:49 am Brilliant Ally ! Is that the wee arrow people?
_______________
Nice one
I think Hearts could have dome with someone pointing them in the right direction in that second half 
Hibs certainly looked more capable of making an impact on the Premiership today than TRFC did yesterday!
Allyjambo 7th February 2016 at 2:31 pm
Hibs certainly looked more capable of making an impact on the Premiership today than TRFC did yesterday!
————————————————————————————————————-
I’m already salivating at the thought of the replay. That was a proper cup tie.
Corrupt official 7th February 2016 at 2:50 pm # Allyjambo 7th February 2016 at 2:31 pm Hibs certainly looked more capable of making an impact on the Premiership today than TRFC did yesterday! ————————————————————————————————————- I’m already salivating at the thought of the replay. That was a proper cup tie.
__________________________
I’ll leave the salivating to you, and let my bum do the squeaking
Allyjambo 7th February 2016 at 3:02 pm
I’ll leave the salivating to you, and let my bum do the squeaking.
———————————————————————————-
Like me noo!
Last word.
RFC did not have a set of accounts that would show SFA they were a solvent business.
That was a requirement for a new club applying to join the SFL and obtain Associate SFA membership.
A Registered SFA Membership was what a new club would be given and they had 2 weeks to apply to SFA for an Associate SFA Membership.
Under the normal rules TRFC could not have been given SFA Membership of any type as they lacked the necessary accounting evidence to demonstrate to SFA that they were financially sound.
So to get around that rules barrier the SFA used Art 14 about Prohibiting a Transfer of Membership to actually avoid the purpose of the rule. In exercising the discretionary power to allow membership the SFA swerved the need to prove solvency by producing historical accounts. I think 3 years was requirement.
That imo was the reason Art14 was deployed to stay within the letter of the rules and sod the principles that required evidence of financial solvency .
From that decision to justify the unjustifiable grew the myth that because the SFA allowed membership transfer then RFC and TRFC were the same club.
They weren’t. RFC couldn’t field a team to play football because they did not have the money to pay their debt and field a team.
As a new club TRFC did not have the debt and so we’re able to fill the space vacated by RFC and field a team, but Art14 got them around the need to prove they could. CG’S business plan must have been persuasive and so keen were SFA not to lose 50000 supporters to the football industry the swallowed snake oil.
What have unicorns, the Loch Ness Monster and Alan McRae got in common?
.
Well, you may consider all three to be mythical creatures, but we may have a chance to actually see a unicorn on Monday at 6.30pm.
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1957&newsID=15916&newsCategoryID=1
.
The Loch Ness Monster was approached, but declined the opportunity, whilst Alan McRae is of course a fictional character invented by Campbell Ogilvie and Darryll Broadfoot to ensure that no-one ever finds the skeletons that RCO left in the fitted cupboards in his extensive bunker based office at Hampden.
I see that the squirrelesque dust which seemed to spring from the damaging submissions made by Senior Counsel for Charles Green has settled.
I can only assume that the submissions and observations in Ashley v SFA require Level 6 distraction.
If it isn’t bad manners, posting while others are interrupting, I’d like to drag the subject back to the opening post.
The most recent case produced many headline grabbing (as if) and eye catching if not eye watering submissions and observations but one in particular stood out for me.
As I read it (Bunnet Mr Doleman) and Mr Clark will be able to confirm or correct my understanding there was an exchange between Lord Brodie and Aidan O’Neill, Q.C. for the SFA.
Lord Brodie observed “I don’t follow your logic, are you saying the club is an idea?” and the reply was “It has a reality that the law has to catch up with.”
To my mind that is acceptance, at lowest tacit and at highest explicit, that the legal position is not as Mr O’Neill and his clients would wish it to be.
What is it that “the law has to catch up with?”
Why has nobody noticed that the law is lagging behind?
Crucially how does it come to pass that on 5th February 2016 Senior Counsel conceded that the law is not with him on his clients’ preferred version of the status of a club yet on 19th January 2016 Darryl I AM THE SFA Broadfoot told John Clark “the legal advice obtained was that Mr Green’s new club was not a new club, and the Authorities were stuck with that”?
What happened in two weeks and two days to explain why what was previously “stuck” became unstuck?
Given that Mr O’Neill, Q.C.was speaking on behalf of the SFA and further given that the SFA is Mr Broadfoot, and vice versa, it would appear that DIATSFAB owes us a few answers.
LUGOSI 7th February 2016 at 6:30 pm #<SNIPPED> Lord Brodie observed “I don’t follow your logic, are you saying the club is an idea?” and the reply was “It has a reality that the law has to catch up with.” To my mind that is acceptance, at lowest tacit and at highest explicit, that the legal position is not as Mr O’Neill and his clients would wish it to be. What is it that “the law has to catch up with?”
==========================================
The Five Way Agreement?
John James has put into print that there are too many posts regarding the Petition on “his” site so to try and ensure that some discussion occurs on the running of the petition please excuse me if I use this platform. Read the rest of this and you will see the relevance.
A regular on John’s site, Newsroom, posted a comment that contained this-
“People would have a higher level of professional assurance, if, for instance, SFM – Scottish Football Monitor was running a petition.”
Now, unlike JJ, my driving force is to try to clean up the cesspit that is football administration in Scotland and not some kind of ego booster.Notice I say Scotland and not any one club and if those who are already labelling me a “Rangers hater” cared to stand back and look properly they would see it would have been to their club’s advantage to have this done years ago. A decent administration of football would have seen no Craig Whyte, no Charles Green and no Vladimir Romanov.
So how does that tie in with Newsroom’s post. Well I have been as guilty as he of wanting someone else to tackle the problem and, as I am sure he will have noticed, nobody did. So, much too late, I stepped up. Tentatively, fearfully and with very little experience and competence to do so.
So, Newsroom, it is fair to say that I agree with you. Although I am prepared to carry on, learning as I go, despite there being people more qualified and carrying more clout than I. Would I stand aside if SFM offered to take the reins? Damn right I would! Not because this is all too much bother because afterall, being retired, I have the time but because above all I want this to succeed. Someone with the standing and gravitas that I lack would have a better chance of success. I am happy just to be a lacky in all this.
So guys, what is your response? If it is “no” then I carry on. Although the response we are getting is poor and if that continues we have no leverage to get action and it will all end anyway. A chance missed.
https://www.change.org/p/scottish-football-association-return-integrity-to-football-administration-in-scotland-94421b40-2d6b-4d4b-9cff-912c9849478f
As to the others who wish the same as I, you to can do more. Your signature may already be in place but what is needed now is for you to spread the word and, at a minimum, find three acquaintances with the same desire and get them to sign.
It is not a lot to ask to achieve so much.
https://www.change.org/p/scottish-football-association-return-integrity-to-football-administration-in-scotland-94421b40-2d6b-4d4b-9cff-912c9849478f
I’ve only just sent my notes on the Judicial review proceedings to BP- I got side-tracked by other business. BP might find a home for it.
Rangers blogger John James seems to be hinting at something right at the end of this article. Interesting, although we do not know much inside info he really has.
https://johnjamessite.wordpress.com/2016/02/07/scottish-football-jurisprudence/
Reiver 7th February 2016 at 6:36 pm #John James has put into print that there are too many posts regarding the Petition on “his” site so to try and ensure that some discussion occurs on the running of the petition please excuse me if I use this platform. Read the rest of this and you will see the relevance.A regular on John’s site, Newsroom, posted a comment that contained this-“People would have a higher level of professional assurance, if, for instance, SFM – Scottish Football Monitor was running a petition.”
————————————
Reiver, I feel very much that fans should be speaking with one coordinated voice wherever possible to maximise the impact of initiatives like this.
I personally would support SFM becoming involved with this kind of petition but the decision is not one for me to make. I am sure there are other views out there that should be heard too.
I look forward to seeing some constructive debate on this matter….
Scottish Football needs to listen to the fans for a change.
When the current version of Rangers, personified in the actions of at least one board member, decided to target the Herald and Graham Speirs for challenging them on the sectarian issue – in my opinion a new and very serious precedent was set.
Instead of reacting as previous boards would have done by at least making noises about “minority of fans” or “don’t condone sectarian behaviour” etc etc, this board decided that it would accede to the demands of the vocal majority who were demanding that “haters” be pursued, livelihoods threatened etc.
Here we see a Scottish football club aggressively pursuing a newspaper for reporting on this issue. Not by taking the public legal route (if the story is untrue), but by applying behind the scenes financial pressure (apparently).
The key issue, for me, is that this approach, by the club, is widely seen by their own support as giving the green light to the sectarian behaviour.
The long-predicted descent into darkness for this club has reached a new but all-too predictable (actually predicted) low.
Previously one could have made the lame argument that the club was not able to control the behaviour of thousands of fans. I disagree with that, but the argument was often used.
The new scenario is that the club itself is actually taking direct action which encourages the sectarian element.
This is why I have reached the conclusion that Scottish Football and Scotland in general would be better if this club was consigned to oblivion.
It is not for me or anyone else to tell Rangers fans how to react to this.
I don’t know what to say to someone who isn’t absolutely appalled (i.e. sufficiently appalled to do walking away) by hearing fellow fans shout in their thousands that they want to be up to their knees in my blood, the blood of my family, or the blood of anyone at all for that matter.
I certainly don’t know what to say to them when their club acts the way it has when challenged about it.
You really do have to work that kind of stuff out for yourself.
A wee story from last night to finish with. Out on the town with a bunch of friends to celebrate a birthday – the birthday folks are big Rangers fans, previously season ticket holders etc.
These are people I love to bits. We go on holidays together, we babysit each others kids, they are involved in all the major events in our family life.
Last night, completely unprompted, one of them comes over to speak to me and says they are really struggling with what is happening at Ibrox. Has only recently realised how offensive the Billy Boys is (and other elements of the repertoire) and is now thinking that they will not be able to take their kid to Ibrox.
There is a mixture of profound sadness and terrible embarrassment in this conversation. I am trying to think of something to say but it is hard because I genuinely love these people and I can see they are hurt and I don’t know what I can say that will not cause further hurt.
In the end all I can say is that I don’t think of them that way. I don’t see that when I see them. I see them as the lovely people they really are. But for the life of me, I can’t see how they manage to square that up with what happens at Ibrox.
If things continue to degenerate on the current trajectory, maybe our families will start going to the rugby together instead.
Mods – I have tried to write this in as fair and honest a manner as I can. I will not complain if it gets pulled. I appreciate the previous post was strongly worded. That was deliberate as I believe the situation is serious and I needed to convey my absolute despair with the actions of the current incumbents at Ibrox. I stand by that post though I am sorry that it caused upset.
Zilch, a great post mate. It’s difficult not to get your dander up about Scottish Football governance. I’ve gave up on the press they are a joke. I’m not saying I will not come on and have a dig at them now and again but that is only because when they are not ‘busy’ they take a wee peek on here now and again, bless them.
Rangers? Rangers do what Rangers do. (Apologies to posters who don’t like the terminology, but I can’t be bothered with all the alternatives, I type with one finger and it is sore)
On the other hand I keep my bile for the SFA & SPFL. Corrupt for years (esp. the SFA) Hope it all gets exposed in the forthcoming trials but I’m not holding my breath. I blame the member clubs. Including Lawell.
Zilch. I have mates in the same boat but they admit that they would be mad to dissent if TBB is chanted. – they become pariahs to their fellow fans . Not staunch enough . Better to stay quiet and stay safe . They too are beginning to wonder if it is acceptable to subject their kids to this .
Well its been an interesting wee day on the telly. There was the EK v Celtic game live from Airdrie. Least said soonest mended.
The there was Songs of Praise with a great feature on Mary’s Meals charity.
Then the final episode of War & Peace, what a bore.
Still we have BBC Scotland to look forward to at 10 to eleven. We live in hope.
Jimbo
BBC Scotland at 22.50 you say,thanks but no thanks,I’m of to bed.
Zilch
I’m really struggling to get my head round your post about a pal only just realising how offensive the BB song is.
while I would have to accept that it’s better late than never, which part of wading around knee deep in other people’s blood did he/she think was just jolly banter for all these years?
justbecauseyoureparanoid 7th February 2016 at 10:57 pm
I’m really struggling to get my head round your post about a pal only just realising how offensive the BB song is.while I would have to accept that it’s better late than never, which part of wading around knee deep in other people’s blood did he/she think was just jolly banter for all these years?
———————————————————————————————————————————
Fair point – I don’t have a good answer to that. I think you would need to get a psychologist to explain how people are able to compartmentalise like this.
There are probably aspects to do with what you perceive to be the norm. The environment you grow up in – the ideas you are exposed to – the behaviour you see people you respect engaging in.
In fact, I think it is this normalisation of otherwise completely unacceptable behaviour that is so insidious here.
I have seen similar things where people (particularly older people) really did not get the fact that some of the things they would frequently say were very racist and completely hurtful. Once the realisation is made – most would never say it again.
In this case I was hard pressed to accept what was being said to me on one level, but at the same time completely convinced that there had been a Road to Damascus type revelation. The way the conversation happened, the body language, the sense of shock that was expressed – I was genuinely convinced.
Nowt as queer as folk.
John C
Haven’t received anything yet ….
Zilch,
I agree that the normalisation of behaviour such as this is partly responsible for your friend’s late awakening. I think it helpful to see things which don’t involve me in any way to get a better understanding.
For example I know many people of a certain age who used racist language (despite not holding racist views at all) until it became unacceptable through public and private pressures, for them to continue.
Binding the Celtic/Rangers thing with racism, I remember an episode of the Lex McLean show in 1966 when Lex, in a sketch with Larry Marshall opined to Larry’s Celtic fan character that Celtic had got rid of three Brazilian players (who happened to be black) because they were “eating the ballboys instead of fish on a Friday”.
This was a BBC Scotland TV programme – and it was a joke that both sides of the OF – and the rest of the country – could laugh at. How the rest of the world must have laughed with us 🙁
Times have changed though, and it is no longer acceptable for that kind of language to be used. The role of the press and media has been helpful in that regard, which is why it is such a disappointing feature of today’s media that a stronger, zero-tolerance line has not been taken.
I don’t think sectarianism is a societal problem in Scotland (as the clubs would have us believe). In my view it’s a football problem, and an abject media failure.
We could just ban the Old Firm of course, but a serious war on sectarianism by the media and the football authorities would force it out of the country almost completely.
Trouble is, it is worth too much money to too many people. That is why the SFA can’t be trusted, why THE CLUBS can’t be trusted to continue to run the sport.
Sorry BP
Sorry BP but i think you are wrong sectarianism is a societal problem in Scotland and not restricted to the west it is all over this wee country.Zilch your mate may have only come to his realisation at this point depending on what age his kids are there are people from both sides for who it really is just banter and means nowt but maybe the thought of his kids hearing about being up to their knees in uncle zilch’s blood made him think,some mates and their families are close enough to be relative’s even when they are not.
Big Pink 8th February 2016 at 1:27 am #
==============================
Interesting view BP, which you are more than entitled to. I wonder where the sectarianism which takes to the streets of Scotland during the late spring, summer and early autumn months fits into what you say is only a football problem. Widespread attacks on Catholic schools – is that just football related? By ‘attacks’ I mean those schools are widely blamed for sectarian ills which raise their head. Feel free to delete my post if you don’t want this discussion on the blog, but you did raise the issue.
Guys. Irish ‘jokes’ are still accepted as mere banter in this country, in fact, they were the height of fashion throughout the 70’s!
When it comes to accepting songs of utter, fanatical hatred, well that’s on another level altogether. We won’t
move on as a society until we stop pussyfooting around the subject, or accepting that a certain club/holding company is doing all they can to eradicate offensive chants! Does anyone really believe this??
Shug @4.14am
Sorry BP but i think you are wrong sectarianism is a societal problem in Scotland and not restricted to the west it is all over this wee country
———————————————————————–
Born and grew up in the North east of Scotland and the only time we knew anything about sectarianism was on the news or when the Glasgow teams came to town.
This was the 60’s/70’s at the peak of the troubles.
I spent 4 years in Inverness and it was the same as Aberdeen as far as I could see anyway.
Its obviously a massive problem in large parts of Scotland but try not to generalize please
Having just watched the highlights of Celtic’s narrow win over plucky ‘diddy team’ East Kilbride, I feel compelled to ask, when will the month-long furore over the Lee Griffiths handball/goal incident begin? You may recall the level of outrage expressed on here last year when Griffith’s goalbound header was handled by an ICT defender, causing a seemingly never-ending deluge of wailing and gnashing of teeth.
After all, SFM is all about justice, fairness and non-partisanship and would not be susceptible to rank hypocrisy. Just saying.
Yours faithfully, Devil’s Advocate.
Sorry tried to hold my tongue but no, I have to agree completely with Bill1903 here
I arrived fresh faced in Glasgow from Aberdeen aged 21. I had no concept of what sectarianism was, I had no real idea beside having heard there were marches in Glasgow as to what the hell an Orange walk was. I knew Celtic sang songs about the IRA and that RFC fans sang songs about Billy boys. I had no idea what billy boy was, frankly I had little or no idea what a fenian was let alone why anyone would want to be up to their knees in their blood. The NE of Scotland at least is NOT sectarian, it does not creep into society there, you will not be asked what school you went to, or what your “big team is”. It’s not that its not important up there, its just not even seen as an issue.
So yes, sectarianism is a huge problem – but sorry it really is only in parts of Scotland. Don’t tar us all with the same brush.
This from twitter gave me a laugh on a miserable monday morning –