JPP: Perverting Justice?

The SFA’s Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal (JPDT) process itself  is now under scrutiny .

Aberdeen FC have asked for change and the Celtic Supporters Association  have written to Ian Maxwell SFA CEO expressing concerns about judgements reached concerning recent on field incidents that appear to herald in A Cloggers Charter.

However the whole Judicial Panel Protocol (JPP) on which the JPDT is based (and which was the brainchild of the discredited former SFA Chief Executive Stewart Regan) has shown itself to be a means of perverting justice rather than providing it since it was introduced amidst a loud fanfare at the SFA AGM in June 2011 (the same one that saw Campbell Ogilvie elected SFA President)

To see how the JPP  has been misused  we need to start with a definition of  judicial which according to Websters dictionary is:

 of or relating to a judgment, the function of judging, the administration of justice

The latest Judicial Panel Protocol can be found on the SFA Web Site  .

One of its Founding Principles is:

2.2 Principle 1 – Economic and expeditious justice. The objective of the Protocol is to secure the Determination of disciplinary proceedings arising in respect of Association Football and that Decisions are made economically and expeditiously in a fair manner. Tribunals appointed from the Judicial Panel may impose reasonable procedural requirements on Parties to ensure that matters are dealt with economically and expeditiously.

The word justice actually appears nine times and injustice three times, so it would appear that whilst economy and speed are the means to the end, that end is justice, but how has that panned out since June 2011?

I am grateful here to Glasnostandtwostrickers  for three enlightening articles in Pie and Bovril in which he reviews the protocol a year later in 2012 with suggestions that with the passage of time have been shown to be prescient when made. They can be read at:

Of particular interest is the important view that the process is not independent of the SFA and the following is an extract from Pie and Bovril 3 covering that aspect which explains how the JPP has been used by the SFA to pervert rather than administer justice.

“So to what extent does the JPP system achieve that independence? We think that it does so to a far greater extent than the old system, but not nearly enough. Ensuring that the Tribunals are chaired by respected members of the legal profession was perhaps the single most important reform to make. But there remains a serious lack of independence in the JPP system. This centres on the roles of the SFA’s Compliance Officer (Vincent Lunny) and the SFA Secretary (Stewart Regan) in the process of bringing a case in front of a Tribunal.

The Compliance Officer’s task is to monitor what goes on in Scottish football, assess whether anyone has broken any rules, and – if so – to initiate the disciplinary process.  What happens if the Compliance Officer reviews a given event and decides that the conduct of the club, player or official in question doesn’t breach any rules? Well, that is the end of the matter. Neither the SFA executive nor the Judicial Panel can do anything about that decision. And, given that some SFA rules are very vague (e.g. ‘bringing the game into disrepute), the Compliance Officer wields a great deal of power. If the system is to be independent of the SFA, it the Compliance Officer must be independent of it. Yet, as things stand today, Vincent Lunny is an employee of the SFA.

The lack of independence associated with the SFA Secretary’s role is even more flagrant. Firstly, he can veto any decision of the Compliance Officer to mount a disciplinary case. Secondly, even if he allows a case to go ahead, he has the power to select (from the 100-strong Judicial Panel) the 3 individuals who will hear the case. The SFA claims that this takes place on a ‘cab rank’ basis (i.e. the Tribunal is formed of next 3 people in line), but no such rule is to be found in the JPP. On the contrary, it states that:

“Tribunals shall be appointed by the Secretary or his nominee from the Judicial Panel…The Secretary or his nominee may take such steps in respect of the appointment of Tribunals as he considers, in his sole discretion, to be appropriate.” (sections 7.2.1-2)

This applies equally to the Appellate Tribunals as it does to the first-instance Disciplinary Tribunals. So, in theory at least, the SFA Secretary gets two bites of the cherry. He may appoint to a Disciplinary Tribunal the individuals who he thinks are most likely to return the result that he desires. If they don’t, and there is an appeal, he also gets to choose the make-up of the Appellate Tribunal that will hear the appeal. And that’s only if he hasn’t blocked the case from happening in the first place. That is not to impugne Stewart Regan himself, but rather a system that allows him (and his successors) such great power.

The reasons why the JPP is structured in the way that it is are unclear. Despite the fact that it represents a great improvement over the system it replaced, more work must be done if we Scottish football is to have a genuinely independent – and therefore credible – system of footballing ‘justice’.


This  article however will let the readers decide if they impugn Stewart Regan and shows how he has used the Judicial Protocol not to deliver justice but to prevent such an outcome,  which might just clarify the reason  why the JPP was structured in the way that it was and why it absolutely must be replaced on the lines of the suggestions in the excellent Pie and Bovril articles.

Perverting the Course of Justice.

The Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal on Craig Whyte – Bringing The Game Into Disrepute.

The First instance can be found in  this E Tim’s article  where Regan and LNS met in February 2012 to set the terms of reference for the Judicial Panel that charged Craig Whyte with bringing the game into disrepute.(  Telegraph Report 21 Feb 2012 )

As the E Tim’s article shows, whilst Whyte was charged with non payment of PAYE and VAT no charges were made with regard to his failure to pay the £2.8m tax liability that CW undertook to pay in his statement to Rangers shareholders of June 2011. This omission prevented scrutiny of what lay behind that liability, what created it and why it was accepted by RFC in March 2011 and  how  the SFA were able to grant RFC a UEFA licence in April 2011.

Whatever information Regan had from his telephone conversation with Andrew Dickson  on 6th December 2011  and subsequent meeting at Hotel Du Vin with Craig Whyte along with Campbell Ogilvie and RFC CEO Ali Russell, appears not to have been passed to Lord Nimmo Smith in February 2012 when Regan and Nimmo Smith were drawing up the JPP Terms of Reference for the Craig Whyte Tribunal.

The Lord Nimmo Smith Commission

The second instance of Regan’s ability to shape outcomes  is in respect of the LNS Commission. Here the SFA stood aside on the grounds they were the Court of Appeal should RFC wish to appeal the eventual LNS Decision and let the then SPL take the running in March 2012. This was a convenient argument given that Regan knew by March 2012 that RFC had a £2.8m tax liability that Sherriff Officers had called to collect that prompted a number of enquiries asking how the SFA were able to grant a UEFA licence in March/April of 2011.

That event caused UEFA and the SFA in September 2011 to discuss the submission RFC made in June 2011 under Article 66 of UEFA FFP that described the status of the liability as postponed and awaiting scheduling of payments but more of this SFA/UEFA discussion later in the context of the current JPDT  charges of non compliance against Rangers FC.

It is inconceivable that by March 2012 when the investigation into ebts and side letters began that this  September 2011 discussion along with his conversations in December 2011 that  Regan was unaware that the tax owed was the result of RFC use of unlawful ebts nor the reasons why RFC had accepted liability for the sum owed arising from their use. However by standing aside there was no specific mention in  the SPL Lawyers letter of 15  March 2012   that began the investigation  of the by then clearly unlawful ebts that caused the £2.8m tax liability, although it did refer to all ebts with side letters from 1998.   All rather convenient for Regan under the powers the Judicial Panel  Protocol gave him.

The impact of this exclusion in skewing the LNS Terms of Reference and so the LNS Decision is now a matter of Social Media record that can be followed from beginning to end  HERE.

The E Tim’s article already mentioned covers how events from February to April 2012  allowed the exclusion from the Craig Whyte JPP and  The Reasons  given by Lord Nimmo Smith in September 2012 appear in a  follow up E Tim’s article   where LNS himself justifies  the exclusion of the £2.8m tax liability caused by RFC’s use of unlawful ebts in from 1999 to 2003 on what are less than convincing grounds unless he was kept in the dark by Regan.

 SFA JPP Charges In Respect of UEFA Licence in 2011

The final instance of the misuse of the JPP begins in September 2017 when after court testimony stating when the £2.8m tax liability was accepted, the SFA, whilst rejecting an investigation into the handling of RFC use of ebts with side letters (and the foregoing on LNS spells out why) Regan accepted that the granting  of the UEFA Licence by the SFA in 2011 should be subject to the Judicial Protocol process.

It took until mid-May 2018  for that process to come up with two charges of non compliance of SFA Articles by RFC that were put to TRFC presumably on the basis that they were responsible for the events in 2011, particularly when at least three current TRFC officials/Directors were in place in 2011, charges which TRFC said they would contest and subsequently in July wanted CAS involvement on grounds that the secret 5 Way Agreement requires it but on scope that that have still to be made known as the parties  negotiate the terms of reference to CAS.

Now seven plus months is a long time to finally arrive at charges that according to a TRFC statement in May 2018 in this BBC report excluded the very period at end of March 2011 stating accusations were groundless, that caused the SFA to invoke the JPP process, but what is interesting about those charges is the absence (and as Regan left in February he might not have had an influence or was his parting shot), of any charges against the SFA itself of aiding RFC noncompliance at end of March  in September 2011. The Compliance Officer himself resigned not long after the charges of non- compliance were made which raises eyebrows higher than Roger Moore level.

Perhaps it was because of possible SFA complicity in September 2011 that the Compliance Officer agreed to exclude this end March period although that exclusion was challenged by Resolution 12 lawyers just before the SFA Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal (JPDT) sat on 25th June. No answers to the evidence backed questions in that letter, copied to Celtic, have so far been provided.

So what are the SFA hiding from or behind the JPP process this time?

Here is a copy of the Good News  e mail of 19th September 2011 between Keith Sharp the UEFA FFP man at the SFA and Ken Olverman the Financial chap at RFC. In it Sharp tells Olverman that UEFA have verbally accepted the RFC submission of June 2011 under Article 66. (This admitted that the 2.8m EBT proposed settlement also required to be disclosed but is shown as a status of postponed (awaiting scheduling of payments)  but that a further declaration will be needed under Article 67. This can be read here but note the Comments were not part of original exchange.

Note the tone of the advice given about the Article 67 submission but the point is, either Sharp of the SFA told UEFA porkies to get the monitoring submission under Article 66, that itself was false at the time it was made, verbally accepted or told UEFA the truth and as RFC were out of Europe there was an agreement to bury it between SFA and UEFA.

That UEFA involvement if the latter instance, would explain Celtic’s reluctance to take Res12 to UEFA in 2013 especially as we don’t know UEFA’s response to Celtic’s earlier  letter  of May 2012 to SFA re ebt investigation copied to Infantino at UEFA.

If the former instance i.e. SFA told UEFA porkies it makes SFA complicit in covering up the non compliance they are charging Rangers with!

I mention this in the context of the SFA Judicial Process being totally  inappropriate in this case and why there should be  a speedy independent investigation because the charges of non-compliance that the JPDT are covering relate to RFC and NOT the SFA which is perhaps why the terms of reference to CAS are taking so long to emerge.

There is clearly a conflict of SFA self interest here.

It would be more than ironic if the organisation bringing charges against Rangers were in fact complicit in the non-compliance by Rangers after it became public HMRC were owed tax in August 2010!

Summary

The point of this long blog is that the Judicial Panel Protocol introduced by Regan in June 2011 with the flaws pointed out a year later in The Pie and Bovril articles has been used by the SFA under Regan not to produce justice but pervert it since 2011.

Only a truly independent investigation will provide the justice that the crimes perpetrated against Scottish Football and its supporters since 2000 by RFC under the dishonest leadership of Sir David Murray requires, an investigation that should recommend changes that make the JPP independent of the SFA..

Justice is there to uphold the rule of law, that applies to football law as much as natural law and without justice there can be no law. That is where Scottish football now exists, in outlaw territory with the bad guys still ruling as they please, not as justice demands.

Until justice is served and seen to be served there is no law in football and no fake Judicial Protocol Panel is ever going to provide it.

 The owners and Directors of all SPFL clubs need to revisit the scene of the crime, the 5 Way Agreement has done its  job, a form of Rangers drawing big crowds will continue to exist, but on it has to be on more honest grounds, where who knows, they might even earn redemption.

This entry was posted in Blogs, Featured by Auldheid. Bookmark the permalink.
Auldheid

About Auldheid

Celtic fan from Glasgow living mostly in Spain. A contributor to several websites, discussion groups and blogs, and a member of the Resolution 12 Celtic shareholders' group. Committed to sporting integrity, good governance, and the idea that football is interdependent. We all need each other in the game.

972 thoughts on “JPP: Perverting Justice?


  1. Homunculus 28th September 2018 at 18:01 

    It doesn't matter whether or not he is speaking for Celtic, all four semi finalists, or some other subset.

    =========================================

    Of course it matters, or are you suggesting he is not entitled to express his opinion if it doesn't co-incide with yours.

    Does that go for everyone else as well.

    ======================================

    Of course he is entitled to express an opinion. In my view, he (and/or Celtic) is comfortable with the arrangements, which puts him in the same position as Gerrard (and/or Rangers), both aligned to a position that neither criticises or challenges a decision of the SPFL, which has been roundly condemned by the other two semi finalists.

    In the absence of a collective will or purpose shown by all four semi finalists, then the SPFL is unlikely to yield, with the result that fewer travelling fans will attend the two games.

    The games have been scheduled in a way that doesn’t adequately recognise the needs of the fans, beyond that of the broadcasters, the football authorities and individual clubs’ self interest.


  2. Ex Ludo 13.59

    Why should Steven Gerrard concern himself with either the travel plans of the Aberdeen support or the condition of the playing surface for Hearts & Celtic?. 

    Paradisebhoy 17.52

    Nothing to suggest the Aberdeen fans will react in this way.


  3. I note that the SPFL has now provided further reasons for their decisions.  I stand by my contention that other interests have superseded those of the fans.

    Betfred Cup semi-final Q&A

    In response to enquiries on the arrangements for next month’s Betfred Cup semi-finals, here is some additional information…

    Q: Why are both ties being played at Hampden? 
     
    A: We inherited from the SPL a contractual obligation with Hampden Park Ltd to play certain matches at the National Stadium. These include any Betfred Cup semi-final game involving Celtic or Rangers, as well as any other semi-final match where the attendance is expected to be greater than 20,000.  
     
    Q: Could one of the ties not have been switched to the weekend after?
     
    A: We looked at every possible alternative.  Doing so would have created additional fixture challenges. Switching the Celtic vs Hearts tie until November 3 or 4 would have meant restoring the Celtic vs Motherwell Ladbrokes Premiership match to its original date of October 28. That would have created a situation where Celtic and Rangers would both be playing in separate stadia in Glasgow on the same day. Police Scotland would not have supported that. 

    Q: What has Police Scotland’s reaction been to this decision?

    A: We arrived at this decision only after lengthy and exhaustive discussions with all our stakeholders, including Police Scotland. They have reassured us they are content with the decision to play both ties at Hampden on the same day and have the resources to manage the situation. 

    Q. Why couldn’t the Aberdeen game have been chosen for the 7:45pm kick-off? 

    A. This was agreed following input from Police Scotland who advised they wished the Aberdeen vs Rangers game to be played first.

    Q: Some clubs have been critical of the kick-off times, with supporters travelling from all over the country for matches kicking off early in the day and in the evening. What is your reaction to that? 

    A: We explained to representatives from all four semi-finalists the rationale behind this decision. We understand their concerns about supporters and travel complications and sympathise with fans, but this is the best solution to a logistically-challenging situation.

    Q: Will the Hampden pitch be able to cope with two matches on the same day?

    A: The Hampden groundstaff have assured us that the pitch is more than capable of hosting two matches of this nature in a short timeframe, even in adverse weather conditions. 

    Q: Could this all have been avoided when the SPFL fixtures were being drawn up in the summer? 

    A: There are many issues which need to be factored in when producing the fixture calendar each season, including the recent re-introduction of the Premiership winter break, European football, international commitments and other cup tournaments. It has greatly reduced our options for rearranging matches. While it is hugely prestigious for us to have two of our clubs in the group stage of the UEFA Europa League, it has also presented us with logistical difficulties on this occasion.


  4. SlimJim at 19.33.

    Seriously?!? I'm all right Jack  – why should I give a f**k about anyone else in Scottish football? How very 'old Rangers' of him.,,,and you!


  5. Oh SJ, I should also have said if BR's less-nasty comment displays the same attitude, then I'm p*ssed off at him too.


  6. nawlite 20.06.

    It's nothing to do with Steven Gerrard so why should he comment on it?.

    His job is to achieve success at Rangers, not to concern himself with the perceived problems faced by the three other semi-final teams, whether this is kick-off times or the condition of the pitch. 

    The Rangers support want to know his opinion on matters related to us and only us. 

       


  7. So you -like Steven Gerrard, it would appear – don't actually care about the rest of Scottish football. Is that what you're saying?


  8. Slimjim@21.24

    Mr Gerrard was quoted as saying he was pleased that his team was playing first. Why bother making a comment like that ? He’s just rubbing peoples noses in it and practically gloating at the situation the other teams are facing. The SPFL have done The Rangers a massive favour by this arrangement. Brendan Rogers’ statement was bland and corporate. Neither manager can change anything. 

    Of course, in fairer circumstances, the travel plans of other supporters and the condition of the playing surface would not be an issue for any manager to pass comment on. The arrangements for the semi-finals are a fiasco created by the SPFL but since your team is unaffected, why would you care about fairness? Or perhaps it’s just one of those honestly made decisions which seem to only ever benefit one club.


  9. nawlite 21.51

    Nothing to do with whether Steven Gerrard or myself "care about the rest of Scottish football" though is it?

    Simply put,  had the Rangers game been scheduled to kick-off at 5.00am (would put nothing past them) or had we been the second game to play that day, then yes, i would have expected to hear from Steven Gerrard.on the subject. We aren't so i don't.

    Ex Ludo 22.09

    He is doing nothing of the sort. He is being honest in saying he would rather play in the first game rather than the second. 

    Did Brendan Rodgers not say that the poorer playing surface would be to the benefit of the table topping Hearts team  rather than his own  Is this not being disrespectful to a team who have already defeated his own side this season, and.what would the reaction have been had   these sentiments been reversed?.


  10. Interesting that Mr Doncaster cites a legacy SPL contract obligation to play all semi-finals involving Celtic and "Rangers" at Hampden.

    Of course, the old "Rangers" are no longer around, so one would have  assumed that it is only the Celtic v Hearts game that needs to be played at Hampden.

    This statement suggests the SPFL are gaining financial benefit from claiming that the "Rangers" that are referred to in the contract with the television companies is the same football club as is currently operating out of Ibrox. I think there is an appropriate legal term for that type of deception.

    Sorry if this is a little obscure, but it is important…

    Has anyone ever been party to (or even seen) a contract where the Recitals are expressly included as part of the agreement?

    The 5WA is the only contract I have ever seen where this device has been used.

    Why did the SPL, SFA, SFL, Rangers & Sevco Scotland have to agree, by contract, that "Rangers FC" was an ethereal entity that could be transferred between different corporate bodies?

    If this was the natural position for each of the parties, it would not need to be set out as a contractual burden to each of them.

    It is important to remember that this new concept for an association football club in Scotland did not align with any of the SPL, SFA or SFL Articles of Associations.

    None of those signatories had the power to make the necessary changes in their Articles of Association that could give sense to the 5WA.

    None of those bodies asked their members to agree to such changes.

    On the face of it, the 5WA would appear to clearly and quite brazenly constitute a conspiracy to defraud the TV companies.

    To pretend that the "Rangers" operated by Charles Green, was the same association football club as that operated by Sir David Murray cannot be supported by the regulations relating to any of those organisations.

    On the other hand, perhaps the TV companies were in on the ruse. If so, it is only the fans that are being taken for mugs.


  11. HirsutePursuit 28th September 2018 at 22:43  

    '…To pretend that the "Rangers" operated by Charles Green, was the same association football club as that operated by Sir David Murray cannot be supported by the regulations relating to any of those organisations.'

    ____________________________

    Absolutely correct.

    RFC(IA) could legally speak only for itself (as a still then member of the SPL)

    SevcoScotland ,as a non-member of anything, had no legal locus in  matters touching on the Articles of Association of a body of which it was not a member,

    Neil Doncaster( or whoever represented the SPL) had no authority to introduce change into the Articles because there had been no EGM at which such a resolution had been debated and voted upon,

    Longmuir ( or whoever represented the SFL) likewise had no authority ,derived from a majority vote carried at an EGM, to introduce a change to the Articles of the SFL

    And Regan (or whoever signed for the SFA) also had no authority to amend the Articles , because there had been no EGM at which such an amendment had been voted for. 

    the whole 5-Way Agreement is  a wholly fantastical piece of 5-Way lying nonsense:

    in which two of the lying parties assumed powers that they never could have,

    while the three others ,individuals who would have had the authority if the bodies they respectively represented had given them that authority at an EGM, quite clearly acted away beyond their legal powers.

    You do not have to be David Beckham's lawyer to  see that the Court of Session would blow the 5-Way Agreement out of the water if the matter came before it by way of a Petition for Judicial Review:

    3 individual 'office holders' of limited companies clearly acting far outwith the powers invested in them by the organisations they represented, and two bodies which never could have  any direct powers in the matter of Amendments to the Articles of Association of the SPL taking part!

    From the newest judge in the Outer House to the Lord President himself, the verdict on the 5-Way Agreement would be that it is null and void, completely without legal force.

    And that the 'swearing to secrecy' was a pernicious attempt  to hide a monstrous deceit.

    In my opinion, which of course I freely express, because I believe I am right.

     


  12. My normal  routine has been altered because Mrs C and I have had the daughter of a friend of my Pennsylvania-based son staying with us (again:she was here 5 years ago) just back from Nor'n India via Kyrgystan and sundry other middle eastern places). And today her sister and a friend arrived : the sister having come from Brazil to London to meet up with her friend who lives in London.

    The London friend is an Arsenal supporter.

    Now, I am  [spiritually only, mind] like putty in my wife's hands: a faint creasing of the brows across the dinner-table is a signal [that I am not to  stray into topics which she thinks may  possibly cause any kind of strained atmosphere to descend over said dinner-table] that I usually  acknowledge and execute. 

    But I simply had to ask the Arsenal supporter about the sale by CW of the Arsenal 'legacy' shares.

    He knew nothing about it.

    Further gentle questioning established that  he believed that 'Rangers' had been bought out of Administration, but had been relegated to the lowest division.

    Well, you can guess what followed.

    He was enlightened.

    And was genuinely astonished to learn that RFC of 1872 had been liquidated. He had believed that they had had the kind of money troubles that lots of English clubs had had, and had gone into Administration, but that someone had come in and paid the debts and bought and brought them out of Administration.

    Such was the lying propaganda!

    He had no idea that "The Rangers Football Club Ltd" aka SevcoScotland  had had to apply for membership of a league, had not been  accepted into the SPL , and had only just been accepted into the bottommost division of the SFL.

    Both he and the rest of us  enjoyed the truly beautiful dinner that the talented Mrs C had prepared. The Arsenal supporter complimented Mrs C on the Gordon Ramsay standard of her meal, and we shared stories of Ramsay's days as a player with the now defunct club.angry

    My hope is that he will on his return  to London-shire spread word of the truth.

     

     

     


  13. slimjim 28th September 2018 at 21:24
    2 30 Rate This

    nawlite 20.06.

    It’s nothing to do with Steven Gerrard so why should he comment on it?.

    His job is to achieve success at Rangers, not to concern himself with the perceived problems faced by the three other semi-final teams, whether this is kick-off times or the condition of the pitch.

    The Rangers support want to know his opinion on matters related to us and only us.
    …………..
    So is the making friends on the journey finished with now?


  14. Jingso.Jimsie 28th September 2018 at 19:23
    ………….
    Hence the word…..Could.


  15. slimjim 28th September 2018 at 21:24 2 30 Rate This nawlite 20.06. It’s nothing to do with Steven Gerrard so why should he comment on it?. …………… That line made me laughangry

    ……………………

     

    Replace Steven Gerrard for Ally or warburton or pedro or any of the other stand in managers at ibrox these last few years.
    And it is what fans of every other clubs have been asking themselves, these last few years.When a microphone was put in front of said managers.
    It’s nothing to do with them so why are they commenting on it
    …………………
    .The Rangers support want to know his opinion on matters related to us and only us.
    …………………..
    Great, and i hope it continues.We have all grown sick of managers from ibrox giving their opinions and foresight on matters that have nothing to do with them. We may that way see less of them in newspapers and tv, but we know level5 and the ibrox intitlement will not let that happen.


  16. I know this wont happen but I would love Aberdeen and Hearts to pull out of the competition .Doncaster has lied to both clubs and obviously has tried his best to suit celtic and rangers first and foremost .Although as expected Rangers come out smiling with playing first . As a celtic fan I am embarrased by it. Pull out the competition and banish Doncaster and the like from our game forever….go on Aberdeen and Hearts make a stand ,  be the true heros of scottish football ………ah a boy can dream


  17. With regard the issue of the league cup semi finals, I have mixed feelings and responses. On the one hand, I am in agreement with what seems to be a widespread response that this is a very poor decision by the football authorities. I also understand that it is right to discuss and analyse it, as it is symptomatic of much that many of us think is wrong in Scottish football. On the other hand, given the continued failure to address the deep and festering issues around the cheating that occurred by Rangers over many years (with the collusion of the football authorities and the media), I find it hard to get too animated and exercised by any issue like this. I am not saying that my response is the right one, only that this is the way I feel. Given what has happened over many years, how can we expect anything else? As for the clubs most affected by the semi final decision – I have no sympathy whatsoever for those clubs now issuing outraged statements when, with regard to the far greater issues that have existed around the cheating of Rangers, they either have issued no statement whatsoever or have issued the statement that we should 'move on'. The clubs and the media are quite selective about the issues that they will be eloquently outraged about!


  18. Cluster One 07.36

    Glad to see you agree that Steven Gerrard should comment on matters that concern Rangers and Rangers only.

    You give Level5 far too much credit if you believe they have any control over the media.  

    I think you'll find it's entitlement and not intitlement


  19. slimjim 29th September 2018 at 10:26 

    Cluster One 07.36 Glad to see you agree that Steven Gerrard should comment on matters that concern Rangers and Rangers only. You give Level5 far too much credit if you believe they have any control over the media.  I think you'll find it's entitlement and not intitlement

    I think you'll find it's The Rangers and not Rangers. 


  20. Mordecai 28th September 2018 at 08:58

    Thanks for that post.

    It contains enough info to start asking questions of the Scottish Government and not let them hide behind their shield of non interference in football matters by Government.

    Especially when solid evidence of what can happen when there is no accountability or transparency is put to them.

    Not one penny of public money should go to Scottish football until the major cause of misgoverence is addressed


  21. In his response to questions re LC Semi Scheduling I think Doncaster said putting the Aberdeen Rangers match first was on police advice.

    Did ND ask why the police advised so and if he did would he now do make public that advice?

    If anywhere in that advice was a hint of less public disorder, then how do other clubs feel about playing games under that threat?

    What was the threat behind the 5 Way that it sold the soul of Scottish football to avoid it?

    Is our game forever to be governed by fear? Is it not time the cowards behind it "moved on"?


  22. Aberdeen fans getting the Kris Boyd treatment today. Blaming the bad behaviour of some of their fans as the reason the Police wanted their semi-final first. Level 5 are cute, are they not? Getting the excuses in first.

    Any thoughts on the views expressed by Kris Boyd of Kilmarnock Slimjim?


  23. slimjim 29th September 2018 at 12:18  

    ==================

    So it cost the Rangers supporters, via Club 1872 £1m to have the same percentage of the clubs holding company as it previously had.

     


  24. Homunculus 14.07.

    Yes is the short answer.

    Ex Ludo 13.28

    Kris Boyd typifies the "shock jock" mentality that many of today's mouthpieces, sorry pundits have adopted to appear relevant and opinionated,  when in reality they are clueless, classless,crass and at least one other c word imo.

    Don't listen to him, don't read his column, don't give him the hits on social media would be my advice. 

    Oh and he's talking bs here if what you say is accurate, and i have no reason to doubt you. 


  25. So Celtic get a red card for a player being lippy.  Today a Celtic player is Kung Fu'd into injury.  Guess what? no red card or penalty from the Sevco supporting referee.  Scotland's shame.  Get rid of the refereeing in this country and hand it to England, Wales, NI and ROI.

    My previous idea of declaring allegiance etc. is not enough. They are rotten to the core and incompetent.

    Maybe they might be alright for amateur football and school football. But I’m not sure they would even be good enough for that.


  26. slimjim 29th September 2018 at 15:52  

     

    Homunculus 14.07.

    Yes is the short answer.

    ====================================

    I didn't ask a question, it was a statement.

     


  27. Homunculus 29th September 2018 at 17:27  

    How do you manage to get the photo on the site I can't seem to manage it.

    Look at it how can that be called a tackle that is a straight assault. I heard that madd un also had a go at the physio for the time he was taking to attend to the striker.


  28. Anyone who thinks that tackle was not worthy of a red card or tds it then all I can say is your specsavers appointment is overdue.

     


  29. Homunculus 29th September 2018 at 14:07    

    slimjim 29th September 2018 at 12:18  

    ==================

    So it cost the Rangers supporters, via Club 1872 £1m to have the same percentage of the clubs holding company as it previously had.

    =============================

    Not quite correct. Club 1872 paid £1m to limit the dilution of their holding to just over 1.2%, from an original 10.72% down to 9.50%


  30. SlimJim, on the 'old club/new club' thing you are welcome on here because it's always good to have an alternative view and allow an opportunity to have one's own blinkers lifted if the opposing view can win one over. From your comments, however, it appears that  you are so far out of line with the general feeling of this blog – i.e. that we should argue/fight for the best outcome for Scottish football as a whole – I wonder why you would want to be on this blog? It is clear from your comments on the semi-final shambles that you care not a jot for the concerns of other clubs' fans. You make it clear that all you want from your club is to worry and comment only on those issues which affect them adversely and have no appetite for supporting fans of other clubs when the authorities treat them shabbily. I, and it appears most on here, find Steven Gerrard's attitude of 'I'm alright thanks' abhorrent – you clearly don't.

    Genuine question…why are you here if it's not for the good of all Scottish football?


  31. slimjim 29th September 2018 at 10:26 0 32 Rate This Cluster One 07.36 Glad to see you agree that Steven Gerrard should comment on matters that concern Rangers and Rangers only. ……………… A change is as good as a rest,they say. …………. You give Level5 far too much credit if you believe they have any control over the media. …………… https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/oct/14/brief-encounter-illustrates-difference-between-journalists-and-prs …. Not enough credit. But a watchful eye. …………. I think you'll find it's entitlement and not intitlement ……………. You may find at that time in the morning and without my coffee, i'm entitled to make an errorno


  32. Homunculus 29th September 2018 at 14:07
    10 1 Rate This

    slimjim 29th September 2018 at 12:18

    ==================

    So it cost the Rangers supporters, via Club 1872 £1m to have the same percentage of the clubs holding company as it previously had.
    ……………..
    And back on the 26th of January they were the.
    The supporter organisation are the second largest shareholders in RIFC plc
    But not now.
    Happy to be corrected if that is not the case.


  33. Cluster One 19.28

    I wouldn't regard Roy Greenslade as impartial given his history.

    Good to see you took it in the spirit that it was intended and even more understandable given your lack of coffee.laugh

    Nawlite 19.14

    I enjoy the level of debate & comments on the site although i might not always agree with them. is the honest answer.

    With regard to the semi-final debacle i don't believe that Steven Gerrard should be commenting on matters that don't directly affect us.Should Stewart Robertson wish to give his opinion then i would listen to what he had to say as he is qualified to pass comment, as i assume he represented Rangers at the meeting.

    I personally think the whole situation was, and may still be avoidable given as none of the four clubs involved seem particularly happy with the decision. 

    I have been told that Anne Budge gave an interview to Sportsound this afternoon and will listen to it when i get the chance but having spent some time in her company i have to say she came across as a formidable women who would fight to get what's best for Hearts.

    Bill1903 20.05

    Try being a Rangers fan on here then.

     


  34. shug 29th September 2018 at 17:35
    18 3 Rate This

    Homunculus 29th September 2018 at 17:27

    How do you manage to get the photo on the site I can’t seem to manage it.

    Look at it how can that be called a tackle that is a straight assault. I heard that madd un also had a go at the physio for the time he was taking to attend to the striker.
    ……………
    From the other side of the stadium it looked as if he was ordering the physio to take the player off the field by way of behind the goals,but the player was helped off by way of the touch line.
    Later when an Aberdeen player was injured high up the field the ref had no problem when the player was directed off the field by way of the touch line,when behind the goals was nearer.A little disgruntlement from the crowd was henceforth heard.
    Hope that helps.


  35. slimjim 29th September 2018 at 20:30
    1 1 Rate This

    Cluster One 19.28

    I wouldn’t regard Roy Greenslade as impartial given his history.
    ………………..
    just picked by luck,could have been from any number of articles googled


  36. SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

    A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

    Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

    Being lippy with a referee is even worse. A new purple card should be introduced. An automatic 10 game ban. Referees are easily traumatised.


  37. slimjim 29th September 2018 at 12:18
    Homunculus 29th September 2018 at 14:07

    easyJambo 29th September 2018 at 18:46

    Not quite correct. Club 1872 paid £1m to limit the dilution of their holding to just over 1.2%, from an original 10.72% down to 9.50%
    ………………..
    If i’m getting this right.
    The supporter organisation in January 2018 were the second largest shareholders in RIFC plc.
    The supporter organisation paid £1m to limit the dilution of their holding to just over 1.2%, from an original 10.72% down to 9.50%
    And now will not be the second largest shareholders in RIFC plc.
    ………………….
    Anyway, back when it all started.Nov 9th 2012.
    Vital stake in the club?
    https://mobile.twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1046141884412956675?p=v


  38. Slimjim 

    Try being a rangers fan on here

    ————————————————–

    I'd rather not! angry

    You're pissing into the wind on here and I don't know why you bother unless you like being an irritant.


  39. slimjim 

    29th September 2018 at 20:30  

    Try being a Rangers fan on here then.

    =================================================

    It will be even more fun when The Rangers accounts come out. 

    Could the club have broken even for the first time in its history.

    I'm going to guess at a no.


  40. Now bear with me, but I would like to suggest Donald Trump to take over the running of the SFA and Boris Johnson, the SPFL.  I don't think they are enjoying their current jobs and would jump at the chance.

     

    They couldn't possibly be any worse than what we have got.

     

    Res. 12 might stand a better chance since both men love to blame others for everything wrong in the world.  Regan & Doncaster would be good scapegoats.  Donald & Boris would appear as heroes.

     

    Our monumental problems with biased & incompetent referees would be solved with privatisation.  we could probably get better referees from the 3rd. world for a fraction of the price.

     

    I'm thinking of starting a petition.  I'll let you know.


  41. Our young female American guests and their Arsenal-supporting Londoner friend went out this evening (after another beautiful dinner prepared by Mrs C, and served up by me to the highest standards of the 'waiting' profession) at 9.30.

    Naturally, Mrs C and I cannot just go to bed and sleep soundly, any more than we could when our boys were at home and were out of an evening, until we heard the key in the fumbling lock, and knew that they were home, safe. We feel a sense of responsibility, an anxiety, that will not go away until we hear the key in the lock.

    So, on a quiet night on the blog , and  Mrs C ,having delegated responsibilities to me and  now at this minute sleeping soundly, here I am about to evoke in those of a certain age memories of those influences which shaped our view of the 'sporting' spirit, and of the dastardly, bast.rdly rottenness of sports cheating, (as practised in the lifetime of younger readers of SFM) by the likes of SDM and sundry folk in football Governance.

    I give you this:

    http://www.toughofthetrack.net/chapman_textA.htm

    Read it, if you will, and recall those innocent days when cheats were acknowledged as cheats, and came to a bad, ignominious end. The cheat who 'won' won nothing but contempt, like the contempt that must be heaped on creatures who feign disability in order to 'win' against disabled people!

    That's kind of like …

    [and it's now 1.40 a.m and the youngsters ( the youngest is 22!) are still not 'home'.

    Means I'll have to sit here for a while longer! Secretly wishing I was of an age to be out there with them!kiss

     

    I should add, perhaps, that I was reading about Alf in 1952  


  42. But soft! I hear the sounds of folk trying to  be quiet as they come upstairs! 

    And I can relax, and cuddle up with Mrs C ( now genteelly snoring) in the knowledge that the youngsters are safely 'home'. At what ? 2.25 a.m!


  43. Re: the SFA & SPFL's continuing incompetence / corruption / degradation of Scottish football…  

    Compare and contrast.

    Tiffany's (like many other decent retailers) sells over-priced trinkets etc.  Customers know it's overpriced, but they choose to literally buy into the brand. (My wife buys mugs there as presents: no stopping at any other counters. 🙂 ).

    Before you buy anything, the customer service is typically first rate, and very accommodating.

    When you do spend any money it completes a typically enjoyable experience.

    If you have any complaints, they are taken very seriously and dealt with promptly.

    If you take anything back to get fixed or adjusted, you are invited to have complimentary tea/coffee whilst you wait in a plush lounge.

    Your needs as a paying customer are met.

    Because you are paying for the service.

     

    The SFA and SPFL clubs 'typically' sell over-priced game tickets, over-priced pie & Bovril, and obscenely over-priced replica tops, etc.

    Football fans know it's over-priced, but we 'typically' choose to buy into our own football club, and/or the national team.

    Your money is gleefully grabbed by the SFA/SPFL and clubs.

    …and that's the end of any meaningful customer engagement.

     

    Even those clubs who do make a real effort to provide value for money and improve customer service are failing.

    In 6 long years I can't say that I have heard any of the senior clubs call out the poor performance and corruption at Hampden.

    Only Turnbull Hutton has publicly called the SFA corrupt – and whilst standing on the steps at Hampden!

    Scottish football has never treated its paying customers with anything other than utter contempt.

    The ignorant blazers occupying Hampden are a blight on Scottish football, IMO.

     

     


  44. John Clark 30 September 2018 01:33

    John, I really enjoyed that read.  I've never read Alf in this format.  I read him in cartoon form in "The Victor" circa 1962! Your version is far superior.


  45. Portbhoy 30th September 2018 at 10:06  

    '….a wee reminder to them, of what’s to come at the end of the season, …….'

    ___________________

    A much more desirable outcome to the season, Portbhoy, would be:

    a) the stripping of honours and titles won  over a decade by a club which systematically  fielded ineligible players in a planned programme of sports cheating engineered by a disgusting cheating bast..d of a 'knight' 

    b) a rooting out of similarly rotten bast..ds  in football Governance who accommodated that rotten knight

    c) a prohibition against TRFC Ltd claiming falsely to be anything other than a six-year-old club

    d) the successful criminal prosecution of anyone in football who may have been guilty of conspiracy to slide millions of pounds to an unentitled club at the expense of shareholders of other clubs

    e) the conviction ,for criminal contempt of court , of a particular chairman of a plc

    f) ( this would be a bonus) an investigation into (what I think was) the cack-handed 'trial' of certain individuals.

    After all, what price 'winning' if the whole sport is rigged?

    And how absurd that the SMSM is going ballistic over the (absolutely farcical and inept) semi-finals issue when they wholly ignored the cancer of the 5-Way Agreement, and banned any discussion of it.

    Ok, add an f) to the above list:

    f) the rooting out of Big Lie propagandists in the BBC


  46. J.C.,
    I agree wholeheartedly with your post but a treble treble would be nice as well, …. think o’ the bragging rights forever more! 🙂


  47. With regard the issue of the league cup semi finals, I have mixed feelings and responses. On the one hand, I am in agreement with what seems to be a widespread response that this is a very poor decision by the football authorities. I also understand that it is right to discuss and analyse it, as it is symptomatic of much that many of us think is wrong in Scottish football. On the other hand, given the continued failure to address the deep and festering issues around the cheating that occurred by Rangers over many years (with the collusion of the football authorities and the media), I find it hard to get too animated and exercised by any issue like this. I am not saying that my response is the right one, only that this is the way I feel. Given what has happened over many years, how can we expect anything else? As for the clubs most affected by the semi final decision – I have no sympathy whatsoever for those clubs now issuing outraged statements when, with regard to the far greater issues that have existed around the cheating of Rangers, they either have issued no statement whatsoever or have issued the statement that we should 'move on'. The clubs and the media are quite selective about the issues that they will be eloquently outraged about!


  48. Folks,

    Refereeing decisions are as you know, very problematic given the subjective nature of the topic.

    However the line is crossed even further when individual players are vilified because of their perceived character.

    I think it is reasonable to discuss the wider spectrum of refereeing decisions in the context of the 'new rules' on what constitutes violent conduct, however it serves no useful purpose to discuss individual cases when it is clear it will always come down to a 'aye it is …. naw it isnae'.

     


  49. Have to admit I'm well pleased for Livi.  Always had a soft spot for them.  To come up to the top tier and be sitting 2nd after 7 games is remarkable.  They have no history of fan troubles, very decent support.  Just wish for their sake there was more of them.

     


  50. I wonder if Hearts, Hibs and Livingston will make efforts to leave the Scottish league setup behind and apply to join the EPL in view of the mid-table mediocrity of the two Glasgow giants?  


  51. easyJambo 30th September 2018 at 15:56

     

    Hopefully the police will use this video evidence to ensure the scumbag is too busy not bending down to pick up the soap to be able to attend his club's next match in Europe, and a goodly number of league and cup matches thereafter.


  52. Thirded.

     

    Btw,  Celtic were fined £45,000 when a coin hit Hugh Dallas.  What will TRFC punishment be?


  53. jimbo 30th September 2018 at 16:43 

    Thirded.

    Btw,  Celtic were fined £45,000 when a coin hit Hugh Dallas.  What will TRFC punishment be?

    ===============================

    Let's be clear about that. Celtic wasn't fined £45k for the coin throwing incident. They were fined for the conduct of their players during the match.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/scottish_premier/415569.stm

    TRFC will not be fined for today's incident as there is no "strict liability" on clubs for the behaviour of their fans.  The individual fan, if identified, will I'm sure be brought before the courts and face a a jail sentence / fine / community service or whatever, unless he appeals to the SFA, in which case he might get it downgraded to an admonishment.

    Clubs are only responsible for security within their ground, e.g. if there is a pitch invasion. You might recall that no action was taken against Hibs or TRFC following the 2016 cup final riot. Unsurprisingly, the SFA also failed to hold themselves to account as the lessee for Hampden. Responsibility fell to the licensors of the stadium, Glasgow City Council, who ended up having to pay £300k + legal costs in damages to the company that supplied the electronic advertising hoardings and whose equipment had to be replaced.


  54. John Clark 30th September 2018 at 02:28
    21 9 Rate This

    But soft! I hear the sounds of folk trying to be quiet as they come upstairs!

    And I can relax, and cuddle up with Mrs C ( now genteelly snoring) in the knowledge that the youngsters are safely ‘home’. At what ? 2.25 a.m!
    ………………..
    Such a lovely way with words you have JC.


  55. Something that has intrigued me about the confirmation of the RIFC share offer is the phraseology used by the company.

    RIFC discussed the placing with the Takeover Panel before completing the issue and can confirm that the Panel did not at the time of the placing regard any of the ‘new’ placees as acting in concert with those previously deemed concert parties by the Panel.

    The sentence doesn't require "at the time of the placing" to be included, unless the TOP has subsequently questioned the independence of one or more of the placees.  It's something perhaps to look out for in future TOP legal hearings.


  56. I watched Sportscene earlier and once again there was no representative from RIFC available for interview (unless S Thompson qualifies enlightened).

    I'd like to know if there is a contractual obligation for teams to make someone available for interview.

    If not then why do they all do it and if there is how do RIFC get away with not doing so without being fined every week?


  57. easyJambo 30th September 2018 at 18:25  

    '…at the time of the placing..'

    __________________

    It certainly seems to be a defensive phrase suggesting that the TOP has raised questions, perhaps after some digging by the TOP has maybe found evidence that they had been lied to.

    Maybe the Executive will issue a decision that there is another concert party, and a whole new process of Hearings will ensue!


  58. Wottpi,  I think you might have posted on the OC/NC thread by mistake.  I went on there because it wasn't being used and I could get up to my usual mischief.

     

    But, cheer up.  These idiots are a minority.  Every club has them, some more than others.  It's the same the world over.  For various reasons.

     

    I am tempted to go down the route of strict liability.  TRFC would be in the dock every week.  Unfortunately my own club might get in a bit of bother too with fireworks, banners and yes even songs, although it is debatable whether most of the 'rebel' songs should be illegal.  The people who would suffer most would be fans who go to watch a game of football, nothing else.  Losing points, closing stands, fines against their club.  Because of the minority.

     

    Anyways, you cheer up! sad


  59. In the '70s, '80's and even 90's  Scotland qualified for Finals.

    Ok, we had low expectations,('78 excepted heart ), but just being involved was exhilarating for any Scottish footy fan.

    It's been a long 20 years since the France WC.

    When will we ever compete in a Finals again?

    IMO, if we don't co-host a Finals…then mibbees never.

    So what is obvious: the SFA is a perennially failing organisation.

    When will they change?

    When nobody turns up at the Athletics Stadium at Hampden?

    They had c.20K for the Belgium game, c.17K against Lithuania…and probably a lot less against Israel at Hampden.

    So, the average guy on the street can clearly see that the SFA is a shambles of an organisation.

    But football is our game: the people's game.

    The SFA should not be allowed to kill our game.

    The SMSM is complicit in killing our game.

    The Internet Bampots deserve better.

    And, IMO, any criticism of the incompetent/corrupt SFA is an indirect criticism of the 42 senior clubs.

    If we want change, we have to give our own clubs a hard time.

    To state the bleedin' obvious…


  60. Ballyargus 30th September 2018 at 22:41  

    ==========================

    The BBC Scotland website get round that problem by taking comments from Gerrard straight from the Rangers website.  So while Managers such as Rodgers, McInnes, Lennon, Levein are often asked awkward questions with the potential for answers that generate a negative headline, Rangers and Gerrard are guaranteed sugar coated coverage no matter what. I just can't imagine how slanted the BBC coverage would be if Rangers actually DID speak to them, given how biased it is even though they don't.  


  61. On a quiet day – sad news Geoffrey from TV childrens' "Rainbow" has died – a little known fact – he was an Arab !


  62. upthehoops 1st October 2018 at 07:10  

    I am surprised that the other clubs/managers don't demand equal treatment , especially after a match lost or containing controversy . I'd be saying "after him ".


  63. paddy malarkey 1st October 2018 at 17:05  

    _______________________________________________

    Is there a problem with the site today?


  64. paddy malarkey 1st October 2018 at 14:05  

    I am surprised that the other clubs/managers don't demand equal treatment , especially after a match lost or containing controversy . I'd be saying "after him ".

    =====================================

    Would it be too much to ask that a publicly funded national broadcaster stopped using the club website as their sole source for quotes from the Rangers manager? 

Comments are closed.