It has taken a year longer than predicted, but a critical appraisal of TRFC’s progress through the lower leagues must include recognition of the improvements on the playing field made under the new manager Mark Warburton. SFM usually precludes lengthy discussion on subjective issues like relative abilities of players and managers and referees, but on this subject, and by any objective standard, that is a given.
It is therefore right that he and his players should receive the congratulations of us all at SFM.
It has to be said that, despite the pitfalls, man-traps and honey-pots that remain to be successfully negotiated by the Rangers board, they have implemented their own stark version austerity, contrary to their rhetoric, whilst managing the expectations of their supporters. Perhaps some of what we have come to term “reasonable” Rangers fans would argue that the lack of humility still evident in the demeanour of the TRFC board is an essential part of managing those fans whilst imposing the austerity package on them.
Much like a political party conference, a football board has to play to it’s core support as well as the rest of the country.
How that will pan out is anybody’s guess, just like the random bagatelle that is the “TRFC in Court” saga.
There is also the existential problem to deal with. Many TRFC fans bought into the ‘same club’ myth at the outset, not because they actually believed it, but because it suited them, and because it served as an understandable GIRUY to the rest of us. With the passage of time, the suspension of disbelief, even in that constituency, is now complete and arguably irreversible. The problem for them is that the rest of have not subscribed to that rather bizarre set of contradictions. No other club has to have the “company that operates” prefix. Nor does any other club compel observers to skirt around the facts and search for a form of words acceptable to both sides of a mutually exclusive argument. In short, and existentially, the new Rangers don’t fit into the same kind of comfortable groove that other clubs do.
All of these problems for the new club, and many more, will exercise our minds to a greater or lesser extent moving forward, depending on how sensitive our outrage thresholds are to the various legal and Jungian issues. However we at SFM need to focus our sights on those whose maladministration of football gave rise to those problems in the first place – the SFA, SPFL, and by extension, the clubs – all of them.
Here are some facts;
- The SFA award clubs a licence to participate in UEFA competitions.
- The licence is only to be awarded if the applicant club has no unpaid tax debts.
- Both the club and the SFA have responsibility to notify UEFA of any debts (belt and braces routine in case the club ‘forgets’ to notify the SFA).
- In 2011, one club applied for and was awarded a UEFA licence.
- That club had accepted debts to HMRC – which were outstanding and overdue.
- These facts have been in the public domain since 2012,and were brought to the attention of ALL clubs in Scotland as well as the SFA.
- Nothing has been done by any club, or the SFA, to investigate the claim at #5
- SFA Chief Executive Stewart Regan, when asked by an SFM member what he would do if these claims could be substantiated, said; “Nothing!”
- All clubs will be within a few weeks, issuing season ticket renewal forms.
The story contained in points 6 and 7 above is a lengthy and protracted one.
From sources inside two clubs I have been informed that the problem here is subversive and obsessive fans, who don’t represent the vast body of fans generally. On points 1-5, my sources refused to comment. Conversations with SFA officials and print journalists yield the same reaction, with the addition that it is “just Celtic fans obsessed with Rangers” making the claims.
The lesson, if there is one worthy of the name, is that the bearers of the message need to attacked, and the message itself ignored. We could speculate why that is, but that would be to fall into the trap, taking our eye off the ball.
Perhaps I am being naïve, but my inference is that the SFA and clubs have no intention of doing anything about what was at best incompetence on an unbelievable scale, or at worst corruption. A source at Celtic Park was complaining in victim-like fashion to SFM that many Celtic fans were threatening to close their season book accounts over this issue, and that Rangers might have 45,000 SBs next season whilst Celtic could be down to as low as 20,000.
It had never occurred to him that actually supporting an investigation into SFA malpractice would add another 10,000 to the SB takeup.
Overall, the clubs and the SFA want us to believe that an investigation into this licensing issue is a Celtic or Rangers thing. It is neither of those.
An investigation, even if finds that corruption or incompetence has taken place cannot harm Rangers – old or new. There are no titles to strip here. The licence has been used and thrown away, so it cannot be “un – awarded”.
The only people who have anything to lose out of this are those individuals who allowed it to happen – those who our clubs seem so keen to protect.
More importantly, an investigation may be the catalyst for changes in procedures at the SFA to ensure that rigorous accountability is enforced -accountability that the clubs are eager to avoid.
Are we wrong? I hope we are not foolish enough to imagine that everything we believe is set in stone. I am confident that we are correct in our assumptions and in our interpretation of the facts, but please, let’s hear the counter-argument. Thus far, not one word of rebuttal save the usual invective reserved for the messenger has been uttered.
So what do we do? For me it is simple. If we really love our sport, and do nothing, the sport is lost to us completely and irrevocably.
If our view that sporting integrity has been killed off by those in charge of the game is correct, we lose nothing by embarking on a season ticket boycott. However by doing so we may awaken those in charge to the realities of our power as fans and prioritise in their minds the need to listen to what we say.
My view? if they ignore us, they can take their industry that they pretend is sport, and put it somewhere away from my reach. I neither want it nor need it.
If enough of us feel the same way, we WILL get a clean game. If we are as few as the MSM claim we are, at least we will have freed ourselves from a bent one.
I won’t be buying any more season books until I see these issues addressed. It certainly is tough love, but it is the only way for me. And it is driven by love – a love of the game I spent decades supporting, thinking that on the whole it was played on a level playing field. Certainly not driven by a sneering disregard for truth and integrity and a worship of acquisition.
Maybe it’s not just the end of Rangers’ journey then. Certainly if it’s not the end of ours, we find ourselves at a crossroads. The fans, the clubs, and Rangers too. The decision we make over the next few months may determine the future of our clubs, our sport, our Saturday afternoons.
I can tell you this though. Even when the dark facts are laid before us starkly as this, and when football is at the mercy of those who really do hate sport for its own sake, it is worth mentioning the common thread of decency and purpose we have all shared here on SFM, the friendships we have forged, and the love of football we have demonstrated.
Dear Madames & Sirs,
2nd time poster after several years here.
Inestimable thanks for all this site – and what its wonderful, pyoor brill dumfooneringly and more than admirably persistent admins & contributors have done and continue to do in the interests of truth and common justice and decency, re. Scottish fitba’ as a ’sport’. In my humble opinion, this is also an early forecast of the required resistance to the ingrained establishment corruption that characterises nearly all levels of the failing model if UK Incorporated.
That said, I’m a Clyde supporter, season book holder and CIC owner, who came back to the game (not least because of the truth-telling of this site, as well as those of Paul Mc, Phil etc) to support one of the wee-est, diddiest teams in 2012.
I’m currently reconsidering whether to renew my season ticket/ ownership etc, in the light of the current tipping point we’re at regarding the sporting integrity of Scottish football from here on.
I know there are a few Clyde supporters on here, who may also be season ticket holders or CIC Owners.
I’m wondering if any of you are interested in discussing what we should do as season ticket renewal approaches.
If so, could yez PM me?
Merci.
RPMCMURPHYMAY 1, 2016 at 20:34
Following the character assassination of Keef by johnjames, I’d love to hear his views on the author of this piece -http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/james-traynor-why-this-is-my-last-ever-newspaper-1470050#6Wot6mHb75vLIO9I.97Ah, the beauty of hindsight !
========================================
I’ve just read the JohnJames piece on Jackson. If he is to be believed Jackson earns £80-100K a year. I’ve noticed Jackson on Twitter referring to what he earns (without actually stating the figure) as a GIRUY to some adversary or another. My experiences of life tell me the only people who feel the need to ram it up others about what they earn are those that know they didn’t achieve it on merit. People of genuine quality feel secure enough within themselves not to show such a lack of class.
upthehoopsMay 2, 2016 at 07:19
RPMCMURPHYMAY 1, 2016 at 20:34 Following the character assassination of Keef by johnjames, I’d love to hear his views on the author of this piece -http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/james-traynor-why-this-is-my-last-ever-newspaper-1470050#6Wot6mHb75vLIO9I.97Ah, the beauty of hindsight ! ========================================
I’ve just read the JohnJames piece on Jackson. If he is to be believed Jackson earns £80-100K a year. I’ve noticed Jackson on Twitter referring to what he earns (without actually stating the figure) as a GIRUY to some adversary or another. My experiences of life tell me the only people who feel the need to ram it up others about what they earn are those that know they didn’t achieve it on merit. People of genuine quality feel secure enough within themselves not to show such a lack of class.
___________________________
I know exactly what you mean, UTH.
It’s very similar to those who know they are not what they would like to be, so continually ram it up others with ridiculous false references, like adding the date of another club’s foundation to the reverse of their football tops (something the genuine club never felt the need for), claiming to be world record title holders (when they’ve only been in existence for a short time), and so on… In this modern world they will even use a PR firm to ensure that as many references to being the same entity are published by the media as possible – again something the genuine article never feels the need to do.
The really sad thing is, this reinforcement of a belief they would like to force on us all, this gilding of a very tarnished lily, is actually more for their own benefit than the rest of us – as a sop for their own insecurities.
AllyjamboMay 2, 2016 at 09:10
‘……..The really sad thing is, this reinforcement of a belief they would like to force on us all, this gilding of a very tarnished lily, is actually more for their own benefit than the rest of us – as a sop for their own insecurities.’
__________
The following passage might be of interest in this connection.
“Psychotics literally hate reason and thought for if one has to engage in rational thought, one then has to face the true, underlying reasons for one’s immense psychological pain. As a result, they choose unconsciously to run away from pain by avoiding thought altogether. This helps to explain why facts alone are insufficient to dislodge someone from strongly held positions. Without dealing with the underlying emotions that undergird our beliefs, facts and counter-arguments only serve to strengthen a person’s beliefs.”
There does seem to be such a phenomenon as mass psychosis. And the ridiculous , almost lunatic behaviour of the new club might just be an example of it.
John ClarkMay 2, 2016 at 10:56
AllyjamboMay 2, 2016 at 09:10‘……..The really sad thing is, this reinforcement of a belief they would like to force on us all, this gilding of a very tarnished lily, is actually more for their own benefit than the rest of us – as a sop for their own insecurities.’__________The following passage might be of interest in this connection.“Psychotics literally hate reason and thought for if one has to engage in rational thought, one then has to face the true, underlying reasons for one’s immense psychological pain. As a result, they choose unconsciously to run away from pain by avoiding thought altogether. This helps to explain why facts alone are insufficient to dislodge someone from strongly held positions. Without dealing with the underlying emotions that undergird our beliefs, facts and counter-arguments only serve to strengthen a person’s beliefs.”There does seem to be such a phenomenon as mass psychosis. And the ridiculous , almost lunatic behaviour of the new club might just be an example of it.
_____________
Not only within the new club, John.
Your post might also show the reason why the media have failed to even attempt to justify, or explain, their about turn over the death of Rangers. Not only can they not come up with an explanation, or reasoning, worth publishing, I suspect they daren’t even try, for in doing so (they are aware that) they run the risk of proving the opposite of what they (want to) believe.
The same could be said for the SFA and SPFL. They have never given anything more than the findings of an enquiry they set up and paid for, LNS, as their basis for the claim (or in the case of the SFA, any concrete guidance), ignoring precedent and real court of law statements, including the laughing out of court of the very idea that a club can survive liquidation. It is possible, though, that the heads of those organisations choose not to look for any reasoning; for their ignoring of the facts is an act of choice to avoid the truth which might well damage their personal ambitions.
Extracted from the The Evening Shark-Jump [ (c) The Clumpany, 2015]
“…Celtic have announced “the biggest ever shirt sponsorship deal in Scottish football history”, as they confirmed that betting company Dafabet will be their new main club sponsor.
The four-year agreement will see the firm’s logo appearing on the front of the club’s jerseys from the beginning of next season…”
================
Call me idealistic…
OK, so a football club literally “sells the jerseys” to the highest bidder – in this case to a betting company.
CFC is no different from many other clubs taking money from drinks companies, fastfood, junk food etc. companies.
But what exactly are the common / shared values and aspirations of a football club and a betting company ?
Simply to extract the maximum amount of cash from punters ?
My club is CFC, and IMO I would be happier if they took less cash but from other, more relevant sponsors.
And hypothetically speaking: just say recreational drugs were legalised in the UK at some point in the future.
Would a football club be happy to take the cash to have e.g. a major cannabis manufacturer’s logo across their shirt ?
Where do you draw the line, if at all ?
But I appreciate this could create a dilemma for any plc, as maximising shareholders’ interests / income is the top priority.
Professional sports though, IMO, should be about much more than just money, but judging from the last 4+ years in Scottish football we are a long, long way away from that position…
Stevie,
I was working in Edinburgh at the time Hearts announced Wonga as the shirt sponsor. Opinions from the Jambos ranged from mortified to raging.
Pride has been restored it’s now Save the Children. Admirable.
Just had a wee look at the details of Hearts displaying Save the Children on their shirts.
Apparently 3 anon. business men who support Hearts approached Ann Budge with a view to helping the club out. The outcome was this unique deal where a substantial 7 figure sum over 3 seasons is split equally between the charity and the club. Bravo those men.
Why couldn’t Dermot and Peter have thought of something like that?
(Or the SFA with the Scotland top)
STEVIEBC
Football is a business and there is no line that won’t be crossed to keep shareholders happy,remember betting and drinking are legal,it’s up to the fan to stop buying
I know loads of people who both enjoy a pint and who put a football coupon on.
They are adults who chose to do these things, they also go to watch Celtic play football.
I really don’t see why people have an issue with it.
I’ll just say this:
The Poor Children’s Dinner table
HOMUNCULUSMAY 2, 2016 at 18:03
I know loads of people who both enjoy a pint and who put a football coupon on.
They are adults who chose to do these things, they also go to watch Celtic play football.
I really don’t see why people have an issue with it.
==================================
In many people’s eyes Celtic simply can’t do anything right for doing everything wrong. That includes many from within the Celtic support, and many more outwith that. The sponsorship thing is just another stick to beat the club with. It’s getting really tiresome now.
Not being a CFC supporter I do find it difficult to understand something like this and can only think all this rubbish from the media is done to destabilise CFC for the benefit of the establishment club who next year will be playing in the top league for the first time.
The rangers v part timers: P36 W25 D6 L5 GD+54Celtic in SPFL: P35 W24 D8 L3 GD+55
Stats are similar but 1 manager hailed as the second coming and the media carry him shoulder high the other is ridiculed and classed as a dud and a clown.
The establishment club last won a league game at the start of April where they managed to beat Dumbarton 1-0 of course they were at home the last 5 league games were 1 win 2 defeats and 2 draws that record means that the breadman is the manager of the year aye right.
My above post assumes that those in charge believe that only CFC will be a threat to the establishment club winning the title next year everyone else has been dismissed as irrelevant.
upthehoopsMay 2, 2016 at 18:57
“In many people’s eyes Celtic simply can’t do anything right for doing everything wrong. That includes many from within the Celtic support, and many more outwith that…’
__________________
I think we need to make a sharp distinction , uth, between those who criticise out of pride in the fact that their club( in this case, Celtic) has always operated to the very highest standards of moral, legal and socially acceptable corporate behaviour and out of a desire that these high standards be maintained, and those whose criticism is nothing other than the malevolent, spiteful kick-back of liars and cheats when they are called out for what they are.
Moral turpitude simply cannot abide high principled moral strength, but seeks at every turn to tear it down for the reproach it is to them.
League reconstruction. Obviously I was against the idea when Neil Doncaster used it as a threat. But now that the new Rangers are finally promoted to the top division, how about it? Two leagues of 20 sounds good, but there are 42 clubs! Don’t know how that could be solved. Parachute payment?
It gets us away from the repetitive nature of the playing fixtures. It would mean 38 games per season so no financial loss.
One big problem now that the Glasgow Derby is back, greed. The authorities and if we are led to believe the sponsors and TV folk want as many of these games as possible. Maybe even Celtic and Rangers themselves, perish the thought.
I say stuff them.
Any thoughts?
jimbo
May 2, 2016
League reconstruction. Obviously I was against the idea when Neil Doncaster used it as a threat. But now that the new Rangers are finally promoted to the top division, how about it? Two leagues of 20 sounds good, but there are 42 clubs! Don’t know how that could be solved. Parachute payment?
++++++++++++++++++++++++
A top league of 18 and 2 lower leagues of 12.
Top league 34 games 17 home 17 away. Bottom 2 relegated.
Lower leagues as per the current premier league. 1 Auto promotion 1 via paly offs by 2nd 3rd 4th 5th placed teams.
Simples.
In consequence of one of those sudden changes of mind, instead of running up to Dunkeld and Perth this May-day holiday, we went to St Andrews-via Kirkcaldy. We stopped for a minute just short of Stark’s Park, and thought of Turnbull Hutton, and his moral courage,
And as I drove on, I was wondering whether the unprincipled, ‘armageddon’ chaps had already sat down with their calculators to work out whether more money would be ‘lost’ if Dundee United were to be relegated than if another club were to be relegated, and if so, whether they might ‘for the good of Scottish Football’ try to influence matters.
Maybe, though, it’s not so much a matter of principle as a matter of likely loss. Maybe the loss of revenue from the Dundee derbies would be considered not big enough to be worth the effort of making approaches about a secret, wee 3-way agreement.
That it should come to this, that those kind of thoughts should flitted through my mind!( And, of course, I know there would be no question of any such approach being countenanced by either club)
How about two leagues of twenty, so 38 games per season and 1 league of Rangers & Celtic playing each other 38 times?
Scottc, I’m nipping in and out of here whilst watching the snooker. If that happened – Celtic and The Rangers all season long I would give up the will to live.
You never get complaints about referees in snooker and yet I saw at least two flagrant breaches tonight. Firstly, Ding coughed out loud just as Selby was about to make a break. Then the cheat Selby bumped is bum against the table making the balls move by a micro. something just before Ding was about to play a tight shot.
Then there was all that ‘balls touching’ carry on when quite clearly they were not. But the ref. ruled it ok anyway.
That’s another sport I’ve given up on.
women’s beach volleyball, I wonder.
Congratulations to Leicester City on winning the EPL. A truly remarkable feat.
I guess it just goes to show that titles can be won by an ‘underdog’ club.
Could anyone follow Leicester’s example and breath new life into the SPFL next season?
SCOTTC
MAY 2, 2016 at 20:59
JIMBO MAY 2, 2016 at 20:41 1 0 Rate This League reconstruction. Obviously I was against the idea when Neil Doncaster used it as a threat. But now that the new Rangers are finally promoted to the top division, how about it? Two leagues of 20 sounds good, but there are 42 clubs! Don’t know how that could be solved. Parachute payment? It gets us away from the repetitive nature of the playing fixtures. It would mean 38 games per season so no financial loss. One big problem now that the Glasgow Derby is back, greed. The authorities and if we are led to believe the sponsors and TV folk want as many of these games as possible. Maybe even Celtic and Rangers themselves, perish the thought. I say stuff them. Any thoughts?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
As an ex CFC supporter
How about one league of 2 and two leagues of 20?
That would provide the sponsors with 40 hatefests per season with the sponsorship money shared equally between 42 clubs
Think I`m kidding?
It would limit bigoted behaviour, wife beating and civil unrest to Glasgow and NI
And give the rest of the nation the right to claim
“These people do not speak in our name”
not in scotland hirsute. the financial gap is way to big for that to happen.
all leagues IMO should follow the Aleague[australia] example.
clubs then would have a sporting chance of winning ,only then can we truly call it a sport.
capitalist football is now squeezing scottish sides out of europe,the cashed up karit almaty was just about the last straw for me.
GOOSYGOOSYMAY 2, 2016 at 23:00
Think I`m kidding?It would limit bigoted behaviour, wife beating and civil unrest to Glasgow and NI.
===============================================
Do you really believe that “bigoted behaviour, wife beating and civil unrest” are the sole purview of football supporters in those particular geographical areas. That’s certainly not my experience.
well said goosy. the best thing to happen to the game would be for celtic and the new club to move to a bigger league of course,never going to happen as other leagues wont touch them and for good reason.
homunculus. your comment comes across as condescending, anyone can see goosys point, it’s a simple fact he states, and no amount of mental gymnastics can change that. i think your being a tad dishonest myself
well done leicester, on a 23 million pound player budget that the dons could only dream of.
football for capping systems!.
motor redMay 2, 2016 at 23:03
‘…clubs then would have a sporting chance of winning ,only then can we truly call it a sport.’
__________
‘A sporting chance of winning’, is, as you say, motor red, the very essence of ‘sporting’ competition.
I first became aware of this when as a smaller- than- average eleven year old playing for my primary school I came up against a chap whose name I now forget ( but who went on to play for Celtic boys’ team or whatever it would have been in the middle to late 1950s).
While the rest of us wee boys could hardly hit a dead ball ( leather panels, bloody dangerous lace, and about a ton weight even when dry) the length of ourselves, this relative giant of a lad , naturally skillful , scored eleven goals in the first half, from about the half-way line. He was of ages with us, give or take a few months, but was powerfully built.
There was no way that my team had anything like a ‘sporting chance’!
The rules, of course, didn’t allow any kind of ‘handicapping’, the way that our street football ‘rules’ did. ” Gie ye three goals ae a start” or some such, when folk realised that teams were a bit unbalanced, so that some kind of meaningful and valid element of competition was involved.
And now and then I wonder whether a some such handicapping concept could be applied in the football world: The club which (without benefit of dodgy tax practices) could afford the ‘better’, more expensive, players having to kick-off a goal
or so down against the ‘poorer’ club’s players.
No one in the world of Racing is bothered by the fact that the best horses have to carry extra weight.
I know that I prefer real ‘competition’ to be the essence of sport, rather than the ability to buy ‘sporting achievement’, even if one is ‘buying’ one’s own achievements.
As for the ability to buy someone else’s sporting achievements………………I leave that to charlatan, asset-stripping con-men who have the secretly agreed assistance of the Sports ‘authorities’.
motor redMay 2, 2016 at 23:31
‘..homunculus. your comment comes across as condescending, anyone can see goosys point, it’s a simple fact he states, and no amount of mental gymnastics can change that. i think your being a tad dishonest myself ‘
______
Steady, motor red, have a wee think about what homunculus actually said.
And, more importantly, be a wee bit careful of making charges of ‘dishonesty’.
Better to respond with questions seeking clarification of what someone meant. I think I know both what goosy meant, and also what Homunculus meant. And I see no ‘dishonesty’ in either, just a touch of cross-purposes and lack of precision.
JOHN CLARKMAY 3, 2016 at 00:20 9 4 Rate This
motor redMay 2, 2016 at 23:31‘..homunculus. your comment comes across as condescending, anyone can see goosys point, it’s a simple fact he states, and no amount of mental gymnastics can change that. i think your being a tad dishonest myself ‘______Steady, motor red, have a wee think about what homunculus actually said.
______
I have some (some!) sympathy with both Motor Red and Goosy on this one. We all knew exactly what was being suggested. While the Geographical limits applied point made may be spurious, the oft quoted statistics from Police and hospital is not something that should be shoved to the back by a glib remark.
There are many in this nation that would welcome the removal of the Glasgow two from the league, allow everyone else to get on and njoy their football without the huge weight of propping these clubs up with all the baggage that entails (I include in that our wonderful corrupt authorities)
I see people on here who should know better are now lumping Celtic FC alongside a 4 year old club and calling the ‘those 2’ and other phrases that would suggest that they have short memories indeed. Celtic FC, no matter what Peter Lawell said, are not dependant on any other club. Everyone agreed that the last 4 years have been a success for all smaller teams in the country with silverware being spread out more evenly. Celtic FC have been part of this success. Now you want them out of the league? Why have Celtic FC suddenly become part of the problem? They haven’t been for the last 4 years.
Carfin. Just to be clear I don’t want them out of the league. I’d prefer the league sorted out so we have proper competition – what that means exactly and how you get there I haven’t’ a clue, but thats what we pay huge wages to administrators for isn’t it?
The problem is that I hear plenty folk talking about this situation – they see TRFC heading into the top league and there is a distinct feeling of “ach well, here we go again”. A return to the bad old days where everything is run to the tune called for by Celtic and TRFC. That being the case you can’t blame folk for looking for something more exciting, can you?
Yes, I know the truth is this isn’t a return for TRFC, but lets be honest, as far practicalities concerned it doesn’t matter, because that is what the authorities and the SMSM/TV companies etc view it as and that is how it will be sold. Yes, I know all Celtic fans will throw their hands up in horror at them being labelled in the same way as TRFC. Sorry, it is how you are viewed by many, like it or not – two cheeks and all that, just check out chat sites from other clubs (with your anti-sweary word goggles on!). The chance was there to make big changes, the chance has gone I fear. One difficulty for Celtic is that the blame for the lack of change is going to land quite heavily on their shoulders. That’s not fair, but its something that I think they are going to have a hard job to overcome.
Great achievement from Leicester considering they only spent £57 million on wages!!
Different world all together.
On another note while the world was watching the Chelsea Spurs game I thoroughly enjoyed the Dundee
derby. Proper game of football in a great atmosphere. I know we are supposed rivals but as a Dons fan I’m gutted
to see United out of the league. Good luck to them next season.
I see we are talking about how to set up a capping system in Scottish football. Well, anything for a change, here goes. How about a rule that forces playing home grown players, the further up the league you were in the previous season the more you had to field. Something like one extra player for every two positions from the bottom of the league. The moneyed teams would still be able to field their expensive purchases in Europe.
As to league reconstruction, how about more teams per league, a mid season split in all leagues with, apart for those at the top of the premiership, the post split games being in leagues made up of the bottom half of each league along with the top half of the next league down. I’m not going to stretch my brain any further than that just now as I have man flu and would end up with my brains filling my hanky.
Can anyone explain this in today’s BBC rumour mill –
“Rangers manager Mark Warburton has dismissed speculation connecting him with the Rangers job,”
I’m sure I asked this before, but is there a squad size limit? Would seem an easy way to start increasing competition. I have a feeling there was one, but it was done away with?
Admittedly it may penalise overly those teams that have to satisfy European matches as well as domestic, maybe an extra player or two for those.
Talking about changes to the game, FIFPro (the international Pro Footballers association) is campaigning to do away with transfer fees in order to balance things out between the big rich clubs and the rest:
“According to world-renowned football finance expert, Stefan Szymanski, who has been commissioned by FIFPro to analyse the transfer market in support of today’s legal action, it is apparent that the transfer regulations have significantly impacted the economic and social well-being of players, while having done little to promote competitive balance between clubs, financial solidarity (redistribution of revenue) or club stability.”
Obviously without transfer fees the big clubs would just pay even more ridiculous wages. Personally I would put a cap on player wages, if that was legally possible. The extra money would be used to eliminate all debt, invest in youth development, infrastructure and eventually reduce ticket prices.
Utopia!
tayredMay 3, 2016 at 09:18
‘……A return to the bad old days where everything is run to the tune called for by Celtic and TRFC. ‘
______
You’ve just reminded me: I meant to ask whether someone could point me to where I can find the stuff about the ‘veto’ rights held by the old RFC(IL) and Celtic? Was it indeed the case that either of those clubs, or both together, could sink any proposal for change in the the then SPL.? And if so, is there some similar arrangement in the new SPFL that allows the same thing to carry on in respect of both Celtic and TRFC?
John, current SPFL Articles, and rules here: http://spfl.co.uk/spfl/
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/competitions/premiership/spfl-blasted-for-face-recognition-plan-to-ease-crowd-trouble-1-4005477 The quote is from Michael Johnston of Kilmarnock.
That’s the latest I can find on the current voting structure. Looks like nothing has changed in the last 4 years, which is a disgrace. Shortly after RFC went bust, there was a modest proposal to change the voting structure, which was blocked by Celtic and Aberdeen. So next season we are back the 2 big Glasgow clubs being able to block any change that doesn’t suit them. I honestly despair.
This nonsense about the new Celtic sponsor is exactly that – nonsense being spouted by the ‘holier than thou’ element of the Celtic support who think the club operate on a moral plane well above any other club (other than the inexplicably beloved Barca).
These are the same people who wanted Leigh Griffiths (without whom the league title would’ve been in serious jeopardy) ostracised and kicked out of the club for an off the field indiscretion.
Yet many of those same fans welcomed John Hartson and Roy Keane into the club with open arms in spite of their violent pasts. Quite simply the rules are applied to suit agendas.
Celtic have no option but to take the best sponsorship deal available to them. A betting company is hardly any less of an appropriate sponsor than the previous sponsor (I suppose that was OK as it was an Irish company) or many that have gone before them. It’s not like they’ve gone to one of these payday lenders operating on extremely shaky moral ground.
There is much to criticise Celtic for at the moment, I cannot see how this choice of sponsor is one.
John Clarke, I think that SPL veto was vetoed
when they created the SPFL.
Currently,
“VOTES OF MEMBERS75. Subject to any rights or restrictions attached to any Share and Article 24, every Member present whether in person or by a representative or proxy shall have one vote whether on a show of hands or on a poll. The Chairman shall not have a second or casting vote.” (This is at Jan 2016)
Seems like one member one vote. I searched the rules and articles of Association and could see nothing that hinted of a device which would effectively be a veto. But they are huge documents so it’s as far as I could see.
Incidentally, A Quorum for a general meeting is only 8 ! Resolutions and polls require 75% to succeed.
bluMay 3, 2016 at 12:08
neepheidMay 3, 2016 at 12:28
____
Grateful to you both.
I have had a quick read at what the Arts of Association of the SPFL say about voting rights. They seem to suggest it’s ‘one member one vote’, certainly at AGMs.
But could the Board have separate Rules about voting at Board meetings? If they do, they would presumably have to have been approved at an AGM.
It would be interesting to see on what basis the ‘right of veto’ was or is conferred.
Not that I think it is necessarily ‘wrong’, it just feels sort of undemocratic and not conducive to the flexibility necessary to adapt quickly to changing circumstances. whatever the organisation.
I think that’s the third time I’ve read something like this, but what’s the evidence for it? Kairat Almaty were knocked out in the next round of the Europa League and failed to win their own domestic league last season, so they couldn’t have been all that “cashed-up”.
I went back and had a look, I can’t find anything about board decision making. Probably a show of hands with the chairman having the casting vote would be my best guess, it’s quite common.
I don’t understand Michael Johnston’s comment about 11-1. Something as major as facial recognition would need a resolution or at least a poll at a general meeting surely? As it stands that is quite clearly 75%.
Appointments to the board require 66%+ at a general meeting btw.
I don’t think folk have understood the “Magner-tude” of the Celtic sponsorship deal. Especially as the game is crying out for cash injections. Somehow it has been completely forgotten that the whole of Scottish fitba is sponsored by a major bookie.
When the New Balance deal is added to the Magners and Dafabet kitty, we are talking substantial income.
For what?….Breaking the law? Breaking the rules of the game?……..Naw! For pretty much doing bugger-all except putting the names of the companies on the jerseys. And don’t forget……..It will also be raising substantial returns for the tax man.
A good job well done by the Celtic board.
TAYRED
MAY 3, 2016 at 10:03
From memory the SPL have never had squad size limitations although there were for a while some limitations on the matchday squad (concerning inclusion of under 21/3s and possibly homegrown players). The SFL did have a squad size restriction but that was either temporarily dropped or ignored for 12/13 when a new club with a huge squad was admitted. It was definitely ditched 13/14 when the SPL and SFL merged
JIMBO
MAY 3, 2016 at 10:56
I agree doing away with transfers just leaves the bigger clubs with even more money to tempt players from the less well-off clubs. FFP would be a legal way round introducing salary caps but there seems little/no appetite in Scotland especially as the entity playing out of southwest Glasgow would pretty much fall down on every element
Tayred 3 May 09:18
‘……A return to the bad old days where everything is run to the tune called for by Celtic and TRFC……..
hmmmm, not sure I can recall the times when everything was run to the tune of CFC.
Think referee decisions, strikes, Tommy Burns leaving Kilmarnock ( I think that remains the record fine EVER PAID at K£200), Jorge Cadete,….oh, I could go on and on but would becoming paranoid.
as to the the two Rangers…couldn’t agree more. The authorities danced and still do to their peculiar little tunes.
JIMMCIMAY 3, 2016 at 15:44 0 0 Rate This
Tayred 3 May 09:18‘……A return to the bad old days where everything is run to the tune called for by Celtic and TRFC……..
hmmmm, not sure I can recall the times when everything was run to the tune of CFC.
———————————-
No, I’m not saying things were in particular running in the favour of CFC. All I was trying to say in my awkward way was that this is the common perception of things from fans outside CFC/RFC.
Hi Jimmci.
I doubt anyone with any sanity will believe that at the very least there is a pyramid system operating, with RFC/TRFC right at the top when it comes to assistance from authorities. Whether you believe there is a second tier of this pyramid with CFC occupying it depends greatly on whom you support!
Not exactly a pyramid – more like a dropped ice cream cone – a sticky splat of 41 teams with the cone formed by one sticky-oot cone/club. Perhaps the perception may be of CFC as the ’99’ flake lying on top of the splat.
JC and others on SPFL Articles of Association:
Qualified Resolution means, in relation to those Reserved Matters referred to in Article 62, a resolution of the Company at a General Meeting, of which notice has been duly given in accordance with these Articles, and which requires the support of not less than 90% of the Members owning and operating Clubs entitled for the time being to be the members of the Premiership; 75% of the Members owning and 9 operating Clubs entitled for the time being to be the members of the Premiership and the Championship; and 75% of the Members owning and operating Clubs entitled for the time being to be the members of the Premiership, the Championship, League One and League Two, whether all the Members of the Company actually attend and vote or not, to be passed;
62. A Qualified Resolution, shall be required for the passing of a resolution in respect of the following Reserved Matters:-
62.1. the expulsion of a Club from the League;
62.2. the passing of a resolution to wind-up the Company or to approve the presentation by the Company and/or its Directors to the Court of a Petition to wind-up the Company;
62.3. any alteration to the authorised or issued share capital of the Company (other than as a result of the transfer of any share in the Company made in accordance with these Articles);
62.4. any alteration, variation or modification of these Articles, Rules C1, C2, C3, C42, C43, G16 and/or Section I (whole) of the Rules and/or any other part of the Rules the alteration, variation or modification of which would have the effect of altering, varying or modifying a provision or provisions in Rules C1, C2, C3, C42, C43, G16 and/or Section I (whole) of the Rules and/or of these Articles and/or the adoption of a new, substitute or different Rules C1, C2, C3, C42, C43, G16 and/or Section I (whole) of the Rules and/or of these Articles;
62.5. any expansion of the League by the addition or admission of new members (other than as a result of the operation of the Rules governing promotion and relegation to and from the League);
62.6. any alteration in the number of members of the League (other than as a result of a member ceasing to be a member of the League in accordance with the Rules and/or these Articles); and
62.7. the issue and/or allotment of a Share.
Thanks Blu, that’s very helpful.
I had a bit of trouble with the definition of a “Qualified Resolution” as it appears in your post, so I’m reposting it, as taken from page 8/9 of the “Articles”, part of the “Interpretation” section.
So to get a vote through on any of the matters listed, not less than 90% of the 14 Premiership clubs have to vote in favour. So 13 out of 14 Premier votes are currently required for any real change. As you were then!
bluMay 3, 2016 at 16:10
______
Thanks, blu.That sort of clears it up. Technically not a ‘veto’, ( the power to forbid something) just an agreed voting structure requiring a lot more than a simple majority to carry a resolution.
Comes to the same thing in the end, I suppose. And a bit puzzling when all the members have the same value of ‘share’: and not really all that democratic, except, I suppose, that the voting structure was presumably democratically voted upon?
neepheid
May 3, 2016 at 18:57
Thanks Blu, that’s very helpful. So to get a vote through on any of the matters listed, not less than 90% of the 14 Premiership clubs have to vote in favour. So 13 out of 14 Premier votes are currently required for any real change. As you were then!
———————————————————————————————————
When did they sneak in the other 2? Are the Arabs still there? We need to know. But yes 11-1 required as in the auld days when the then “auld firm” divied up the dosh to their advantage?
bordersdonMay 3, 2016 at 20:06 When did they sneak in the other 2? Are the Arabs still there? We need to know. But yes 11-1 required as in the auld days when the then “auld firm” divied up the dosh to their advantage?
. Anyway, I suppose it shows that the 90% rule means that even if they expand to 14 in the Premiership, 2 clubs could still have a block on things. In fact the 90% has that effect up to and including an 18 team Premiership. So it’s quite a clever formula.
====================
Sorry, folks- that was me getting ahead of things there
neepheid
May 3, 2016 at 20:27
bordersdonMay 3, 2016 at 20:06 When did they sneak in the other 2? Are the Arabs still there? We need to know. But yes 11-1 required as in the auld days when the then “auld firm” divied up the dosh to their advantage? ==================== Sorry, folks- that was me getting ahead of things there01 . Anyway, I suppose it shows that the 90% rule means that even if they expand to 14 in the Premiership, 2 clubs could still have a block on things. In fact the 90% has that effect up to and including an 18 team Premiership. So it’s quite a clever formula.
————————————————————————-
Aye a formula devised in the comfy old days before the implosion of one half of the “firm” (insert your own description folks).
It did surprise me that the “clever” voting formula survived the demise of RFC. I just can’t work out why Aberdeen stepped in to support Celtic when there was a vote on changing the formula to 75%. These are the mysteries of Scottish fitba’- I assume that Aberdeen felt the 90% formula was in their interests, but I can’t see how.
neepheid
May 3, 2016 at 20:57
It did surprise me that the “clever” voting formula survived the demise of RFC. I just can’t work out why Aberdeen stepped in to support Celtic when there was a vote on changing the formula to 75%. These are the mysteries of Scottish fitba’- I assume that Aberdeen felt the 90% formula was in their interests, but I can’t see how.
—————————————————————————————————-
See below. Not sure if it answers your question Auldheid.
http://www.afc.co.uk/mobile/news/3199.php
Bordersdon, It’s Neepheid not Auldheid. (Don’t know if they are related)
jimbo
May 3, 2016 at 21:48
Bordersdon, It’s Neepheid not Auldheid. (Although they might be second cousins)
——————————————————————————–
Apologies to both! The surname confused me.
I very much regret to say that I have to give up. It pains and embarrasses me, of course, but I see no way out, unaided.
I cannot interpret the picture at the head of this ‘Journey’s End/’ blog!
The landscape looks faintly medieval Italian, the pilgrim seems to be female, but wearing modern shorts and some kind of cape and bearing a pilgrim-like staff, the road ( long but not particularly winding) has a modern motorway-style central concrete barrier, and has modern road markings. One of the parts of the barrier has been knocked out of place, but the two vehicles (or is it one vehicle ripped in two?) sitting at an awkward angle seem to be too far distant to have caused that displacement….
Frustrated in my attempts to find the answers on the net, I give up. I have to ask- can someone please enlighten me?
What does it all mean? Am I the only one who doesn’t know? Is it a computer graphic? Some very deep pictorial metaphor for the difficulties facing us on the rod to restoration of Truth and Sporting Integrity?
apologies to mr homuculous. it was a tad harsh.yet the stats/facts cant be denied.
it’s also only fair to say that we cant charge celtic fans with a supremacist attitude unlike that other mob,who are way out of touch regarding our vision of the game .the insight here alone speaks volumes for many in the green hoops who are to be commended.
though at one time, id get asked on many occasion ‘who do you want to win in the oldfirm game’ , as if i cared. id say am looking for many players to be sent off and the game to be eventually abandoned, which almost came to fruition at times. it’s those type of questions that fans outside of glasgow find rather condescending. as for discussion on the voting system, i shake my head.
i see many thumbs down,well, rather than being cheeply offended , counter my points were all big boys in here, or simply ignore as i do from time to time.
united we stand for justice.
You already have the answers John. The problem is not with you. The Scottish football arena is corrupt. We all know that. But the message has to keep being repeated so that the truth is out there. For ever. Regardless of the liars. You, whom I have always admired kept reminding us all on an almost daily basis.
You sound despondent. I have often felt the same in this saga. But you and Audheid kept me believing.
Keep your chin up my friend. We need you.
BTW, read ‘Pilgrims Progress’ for a bit of inspiration. Or watch this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_c22M_Z9jc
JOHN CLARK
MAY 3, 2016 at 22:51
It’s an interesting question JC.
Most of the other similar images on the internet have another character in them. I have no idea why the image sans the person looking back was chosen for this blog.
See attached.
hello stevo, heres one article on kairat almaty. looking around,perhaps not quite as cashed up though still significantly richer from viewing other sites.http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/13582025.Familiar_tale_of_Euro_woe_as_Aberdeen_return_to_domestic_chores/
The second person was photoshopped out. If you look carefully his/her staff is still in the picture. I would imagine the purpose of that was to signify that the ‘journey’ was just that, and not more like a ‘goodbye’ perhaps signified by the two person version of the image.
My personal interpretation of the image relates to the SMSM declaration of ‘the journey’ being complete together with their complete inability to foresee the troubles abroad and the sheer length of the journey still ahead, for TRFC and for Scottish football itself. The world is rapidly encroaching on our little haven of corruption and an inability to complete the right journey will see the eventual impossibility of completing ANY journey as good, honest supporters desert the senior game in droves. It also implies the devastation wreaked on the landscape of Scottish football by the last four years showing what would appear to be a post-apocalyptic scene.
(Isn’t it amazing what p!sh you can write first thing in the morning.)
Alternatively, maybe Tris just did an image search for ‘travel’ and thought that one suited.
John, I am not sure what the origin of the picture was but it is available, in its original form, from many ‘wallpaper’ sites
I am a very long time lurker.
I caught the tail end of RTC, but most of my education has been here on TSFM.
I believe in this site. And I believe in its contributors.
To me the loss of Ecobhoy was significant, because he took no prisoners and played a straight, if pedantic bat to everyone.
We need another Clumpany, we need 4 or 5 Clumpanys. Can this site do what The Clumpany did alone? Probably not with the humour the Clumpany managed. But the media monitoring and rebuttals should continue. This site has the expertise to keep bursting the bubble of the lies that are foisted on the Scottish public.
The B*ds want to grind us down. They want to keep winning the small wars. To keep printing the lies and laugh at us.
We cannot let them grind us down. We have the truth. We must keep speaking it.
I am a long way from home. I decided to give up on Sottish football after this year.
But that is letting the B*ds win.
The Ibrox entity may well collapse under its own debts again. Or sleight of hand may keep a thing approximating it somewhat viable.
That does not matter.
What matters is our sporting authorities are utterly compromised. And utterly shameless.
They know we know it.
We must keep sending the signal that we see through them. Eventually, through slow glass, more and more people will get the message.
But this site must keep sending the signal. If the signal is lost, so is the message.
Do not lose the faith. This site is incredible. Keep going.
Thank you.
Can’t be bothered with the cheap shot ‘two cheeks’ comments I see on here. It is simply wrong to compare Celtic to a club who cheated the taxpayer and many others out of millions. Not to mention the support that club then received from many high level politicians, the SFA and the then SPFL, and all as a reward for cheating the taxpayer and many others out of millions. Please count Celtic out of that.
Try and be a bit more constructive.
UPTHEHOOPSMAY 4, 2016 at 07:25
UTH – I’ve not seen anyone on this site post that Celtic are tax-dodging cheats. But consider – two clubs, one city, intense rivals win 85% of championships over 125 years. You’re surprised that fans of teams based outside Glasgow might see that as a duopoly and resent it?
UPTHEHOOPSMAY 4, 2016 at 07:25
Can’t be bothered with the cheap shot ‘two cheeks’ comments I see on here.
———————-
Uptheehoops – That was not my personal description, that was a discussion based around what the Celtic fans (and decent fans everywhere) are having to fight against. I know you hate it, but there it is. While you can deny it all you like, doing so will get us nowhere.
Unfortunately, as many folks describe here, most fans really can’t be bothered with the details of the TRFC cheating. The cheating, the tax fraud, the misregistration, etc, etc has become irrelevant to them. From discussion with many folk where I have attempted to get them engaged with the arguments I constantly get hit with an argument roughly translating as “Those two have always cheated so whats new, nothing will ever change”
Thats what you are up against. Sorry if reporting that to the SFM offends you.
Being constructive starts with some form to acknowledgement of the issues. This is an issue, especially if there is a desire to bring together a collective of fans. The deep mistrust of, for want of a better term, the Old Firm remains a massive issue, and that term you hate so much remains in wide use.
scottcMay 4, 2016 at 05:49
jimboMay 3, 2016 at 23:38
HomunculusMay 3, 2016 at 23:49
______
Thank you variously, gentlemen. Jobs for you all as curators at the Louvre!
I still can’t decide whether to read the picture as an expression of
hope for Scottish Football, with the car-crash of RFC(IL leaving a clear road ahead,
or an expression of encouragement for those who would try to steal the crashed car’s registration and stick it on a new car
or an expression of the common sense of the pilgrim ( representing us) who is calculating whether to abandon that road altogether and find a better road to a better destination.
Interesting that there is a figure missing, though.Maybe that’s the crashed car’s owner whose lunatic recklessness caused the crash and who has got off his mark sharpish.
Great fun, this ‘art appreciation’.
UPTHEHOOPS May 4, 2016 at 07:25
_________________________________________
I don’t think anyone is suggesting Celtic cheated the taxpayer in the way Rangers did for the best part of a decade. Whilst a number of Celtic players and managers did engage in dubious tax avoidance schemes that has absolutely nothing to do with the club.
For anyone who does not support Celtic or Rangers I’d guess they’ve seen both clubs carve up TV deals for their own benefit, talk down the league any chance they got but at the same time talk up their own rivalry.
Make arrogant claims of being held back in Scotland and beg for a move down south or anywhere else. It’s move that could never happen for a number of reasons, one being their tiresome obsession with Irish politics.
They’ve watched their club fail to get refereeing decisions against the Glasgow giants and seen some of their best players depart only to warm the benches at Ibrox and Parkhead. All while the SMSM show no great interest in them because it’s all about the old firm.
I can unberstand the frustration and it’s not a cheap shot to suggest the ‘two cheeks’ argument. It’s a simple reality for many fans in Scotland and you shouldn’t get trapped in a narrative of your own making.
bordersdonMay 3, 2016 at 21:09 http://www.afc.co.uk/mobile/news/3199.php
==================
Thanks for posting that link, Bordersdon, that is an excellent club statement. A great example of transparency, which some other clubs would do well to follow.
I don’t think I had seen that statement before. So now I know that the latest attempt to change the voting system was blocked by St Mirren and Ross County, rather than Celtic and Aberdeen.
However I still don’t understand why voting reform seems to have vanished from the agenda when league reconstruction was eventually agreed a few months later.
The Ross County response is here-
Read more at http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ross-county-chairman-roy-macgregor-1834844#Qlc5MdETRhLuBYoL.99
Here is the St Mirren take on it- from the Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2310219/St-Mirren-chief-Stewart-Gilmour-thanks-fans-support-stood-SPL-plans.html
UPTHEHOOPSMAY 4, 2016 at 07:25
I get your frustration and in now way would I associate Celtic with the type of financial shenanigans that went on at Ibrox but the facts don’t lie.
Over decades the ‘Old Firm’ brand was happily used and exploited by both clubs for their own gain and, in the opinion of fans of other clubs, at the expense of the rest of Scottish Football. Hand in glove both clubs have expressed a desire to leave Scottish Football to further their own ambitions.
The success of both teams on the park cannot be argued with in terms of their dominance of the Scottish game, especially since the formation of the SPL.
While many a Hoops fan like yourself, joined again by fans of all other clubs, hoped the connection would have been clearly broken and a distance put between the two clubs when the newco was formed, the fear is that it may not be the case.
Yes Celtic have gone and brokered their own sponsorship deals etc and that is to be welcomed as the way forward but the Old Firm agenda is back.
It can be argued that this is mostly being stoked up by a ‘T’Rangers loving media’ but you must see how Celtic’s silence can quite easily be read by others, possibly wrongly, as an quiet acceptance that ‘normal service is being resumed in the Parkhead boardroom and the GFA.
I can understand why the Celtic board don’t want to rock the boat but you must see why others can’t see a reason for why they would want to quietly play along with the charade.
I suspect both ‘cheeks’ see something to be gained next season by time both being in the top division.
As for your comment re the club from Govan receiving support from high level politicians, I can’t recall that club ever having an ex Cabinet Minister as their Chairman. Ex Secretary of Defence and Home Secretary, political influence doesn’t get much higher than that unless the Prime Minister is an avowed Raith Rovers fan!!
BBC
Celtic flop Nadir Ciftci wants a permanent move to Eskisehirspor to help his push for a Euro 20156 spot.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Well at least they got the year right
Though it is a fact that the Westminster Rangers Supporters Club had “members from across the political spectrum” including:
Adam Ingram, Lab
Eleanor Laing, Conservative
Baron Jim Wallace, LibDem
Gregory Campbell, Democratic Unionist
First the plea for sympathy. Man flu, I’m dying. Nothing? You’re a heartless lot.
Lying awake last night after another bout of coughing left my rib cartilage shredded I got to thinking about something that niggles every time I stress that we need to make effort to build to getting a result. You know, not just expect there to be a boycott when we haven’t got the wherewithal to tell the numbers of fans needed to make a boycott successful. We haven’t managed to let enough people know that there IS a problem. Then it struck me what the niggle was. We know what we want if change is agreed but we have no firm plan as to what would be acceptable to ensure that real change is implemented. If there were any brains behind the puppeteers controlling the SFA they would say “OK we’ll act” then “rebuild” to give themselves the same powers but probably with tighter control.
It may be satisfying to see Regan getting his jotters but that in itself will not clear the sport of the rot. I don’t know that Regan had enough local knowledge to have made the decisions when liquidation arrived so he must have had “guidance”. Any change that we achieve must be deep reaching enough to get rid of the attitudes that are destroying the game. Those that gave that guidance cannot still be in a position to influence The rule books will have to be ripped up and rewritten so that no room for maneuvre is given to those that take over control. Here though we come to one of the biggest difficulties, the clubs. It is they who say aye or nay. Look at the suggestion recently to enforce club responsibility for fan behaviour, an attitude that UEFA support. No one club banged that on the head, the majority did. How do we handle that. The changes that would need to be put in place would be so destructive to the status quo that I doubt that UEFA would accept the revolution. The game would be in a state of flux for a year or two at least. I doubt very much whether the authorities would be comfortable with allowing teams, club and national, into their competitions. How would we feel about that? What state would our game be in when we came out the other side, if we ever did? If confronted with such an hiatus would we let the standards of our aims slip or would we feel strong enough to say “Stuff ’em!” and reinvent the sport. Would the games from our own leagues and cups be enough for us? It was in the past when the quality of the sport was higher in Scotland but would it be now? Would we end up creating a split that echoes that of rugby into league and union?
No answers are being offered here only questions but I do believe that we need to prepare for success. We all have a habit of falling back on the hopes of a saviour, someone who will do all the thinking, the work, and take the responsibilty for giving us what we want. It has been so throughout these last months and years in the effort to get to where we are now and it hasn’t happened. The courts, Ashley, the media and the government. None have done what we hoped. Let’s not enter a phase of actually enacting change with only a hope that it will all be alright. We need to prepare.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36195987
Great wee story. The Real Red Star !