Naming the Rose

Avatar By

New post up by guest poster James Forrest …

Comment on Naming the Rose by TSFM.

New post up by guest poster James Forrest

TSFM Also Commented

Naming the Rose
I think we have to ask two questions, which I know for sure are being asked at the BBC;

1. Why now? Whyte has had ample opportunity, especially when Lord Hodge ordered the report into conflicts of interest, to put the record straight.

2. Why the BBC and SuperChris? CW has had an historic dispute with the BBC going back to the first Mark Daly programme. He was treated with kid gloves by STV at that time. Why not them?

3. What does he have to gain? His reputation would only be restored if Bobby Ewing walked out of the shower. How does this help him walk away with a profit from his Rangers experience?

I’m with Gossy here. This is not bad news for Green’s ambitions. This is deflection yet again. The pantomime villain entering stage left will see a huge cry of “he’s behind you” go up from the assembled masses. Dropping the SPL in it is simply more icing on the cake.

I think this is designed to reinforce Green’s cred with the bears.


Naming the Rose
Apologies to all for last night’s show of impetuousness by Observer/abodywullie/carolingian2/lividolo/OldGold and his extended family.

For the record, Neepheid is not my alter-ego, although since he posted just an hour ago, I believe that may just confirm the accusation :mrgreen:

I do not post under any other aliases on the site, and in fact I think someone actually argued that I should to separate my opinion from moderator duties.

I was a reader on RTC, and never posted there. Myself and one of the other mods, also an RTC virgin, had the idea to take over where RTC left off, and at the start of the blog, we had some technical assistance to do so. I had considerably more time on hands than the other mod, so I assumed the eponymous handle πŸ™‚

As someone mentioned, it has been a slow day or two, and with time on their hands, anyone can get in and wreak havoc for a short while. We will continue to be vigilant to allow fair comment and to keep the discussion on-topic.

Please keep religion, party politics and testosterone away from the discussion.

TSFM


Naming the Rose
SouthernExile says:
Tuesday, October 16, 2012 at 10:32

Is it reasonable to ask who your co-moderators are?
_____________________________________________________________

Perfectly reasonable, but not appropriate for me to say. If they feel like “coming out” then they probably will.


Recent Comments by TSFM

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
bogsdollox says:

March 7, 2014 at 1:08 pm

Alan Price says:
March 7, 2014 at 12:54 pm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Rangers were not the lender. The Sub-Trusts, into which Rangers made a contribution via an EBT, are the β€œlender”. Rangers gave the money away and there can be no suggestion of repayment to them.
__________________________________________________________________

Yes, but had the loans been repaid by the lendees, Rangers would have been able to apply for one themselves had they set up a sub-trust in their favour. Therefore the money would have been available to the club in times of hardship.

Or perhaps I am missing something here?


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Auldheid
Res 12 is as you say important, but I am convinced that Celtic have no desire whatsoever to pursue its aims.
We could have a discussion about the possible reasons, but ultimately if DD is disinclined to seek a proper answer to these questions, then the SFA will dodge the bullet.
Thus my question to Campbellsmoney: do individual (or groups of) shareholders have locus to seek legal redress here?
Going at it in that fashion may even force Celtic and other clubs for that matter to come on board.


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Campbellsmoney

Is there anyone outside of the clubs who may have locus to challenge LNS? Is there any basis for a challenge?

β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”
I don’t know is the answer, but I doubt it. You see its not a question of law really. Its not a proper court – its a made up thing by a private body.
_________________________________________________________________

I meant a challenge in law. For example, is there a framework whereby a shareholder(s) of a club(s) could challenge the outcome?

It does seem rather odd that, if a most people here believe, RFC achieved honours dishonestly and in doing so denied other clubs prize-money and opportunity that those clubs are reluctant to seek redress.

My guess I that the must have something to lose by bringing that up – but what?

Is there a mechanism through which the SFA/SPL could be sued by individual shareholders for loss of earnings caused by a lack of proper regulation by the governing bodies.


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Campbellsmoney

Is there anyone outside of the clubs who may have locus to challenge LNS? Is there any basis for a challenge?


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Kicker Conspiracy

Double click or tap on the TU and it will change your vote πŸ™‚


About the author

Avatar