On Grounds for Judicial Review

By

Earlier this evening as Mrs C and I were having …

Comment on On Grounds for Judicial Review by John Clark.

Earlier this evening as Mrs C and I were having the (the everyday!) discussion about what we should/could/can-what’s in the fridge? have for dinner, an excited voice came over the Radio Scotland airwaves telling us [ I can’t quote the actual words used]  that Peter Lawwell might be on his way to being elected as chairman of the European Club Association(ECA)

It appears that Karl-Heinz Rummennigge , the current Chairman of the ECA ,is not standing for re-election.

And the ..seholes at Radio Scotland think that because Lawwell is in there as a representative of Celtic ( Celtic being an ‘ordinary member’ of the ECA) he could conceivably be elected.

Well, or lawwell, of course he could-as could several dozens of ‘ordinary members’!Including a rep from the other Scottish ‘ordinary member’-Aberdeen!

Now, I have  great grievance against that Association.

And I felt constrained to air that grievance, as I sat here. ( comfortably fed: we went for chicken, peppers and onions on creme-fraiched tortillas, with a crust or two of garlic bread, washed down with a nice wee Orvieto Classico- peasant fare, but delicious!!!)

I aired that grievance by writing to Karl-Heinz Rummennigge.

This is what I wrote. I will print it out tomorrow, and send it snail mail.


Mr Karl-Heinz Rummennigge,
Chairman,
European Club Association,
Route de St-Cergus 9
1260 Nyon,
Switzerland
 
 
Dear Mr Rummennigge,
I learned today that you are not going to stand for re-election as Chairman of the European Club Association (ECA)
Before you demit office, I feel obliged to remark that under your Chairmanship a great act of sporting deception and dishonesty perpetrated by a national football association was accepted and ‘authorised’ by the ECA.
This occurred when the Scottish Football Association (SFA) instituted and perpetrated the untruth that a new club,founded in 2012, which they had admitted into membership of the SFA as a new club, was the same club as the club known as Rangers Football Club, founded in 1872.
You will be aware of the facts, but I will summarise them:
Rangers Football Club was founded in 1872.
In more modern times it ran into debt over a number of years.
In 2011 faced the prospect of a huge tax bill running into many millions of pounds.
The owner eventually sold the club.
The new owner ran the club into Administration.
The Administrators could not find a buyer.
They tried to get the creditors to reach a Company Voluntary Agreement, so that the club could be saved, and brought out of Administration.
No buyer was forthcoming.
So the Administrators sold some of the assets to a newly set up company-SevcoScotland Ltd.
This company applied for admission, as a new club,to the then Scottish Premier League (SPL).Their application was rejected.
They applied for admission into the First Division of the then Scottish Football League (SFL).That application failed.
They applied for admission to the Second Division of the SFL. That application,too, was rejected.
Finally, they were admitted as a new club to the Third Division of the SFL, under the name “The Rangers Football Club Ltd”(“TRFC”)
Being thus a member now of a recognised Football League, they became entitled to membership of the SFA.
[Meanwhile, Rangers Football Club ( founded in 1872 and now’ in Administration’) was renamed as Rangers 2012 plc, and sank into Liquidation in 2012, where it still is, awaiting the final dissolution]
 Under commercial law and usage and under the ordinary rules of the SFA and the SPL/SFL, “The Rangers Football Club Ltd”, founded in 2012, is not, cannot possibly be, the very same football club as the still-existing Rangers Football Club( In Liquidation)
This means, of course, that “The Rangers Football Club Ltd” is not, cannot be, and could not possibly have been, a ‘founding member’ of the ECA.
It was Rangers Football Club founded in 1872 that had the honour of being a ‘founder member’.
The decision that the ECA arrived at , namely, that TRFC should be regarded as the same club as the founding member was and is therefore perverse, and contrary to fact and law and sporting truth. 
And is (actually)an insult to the memory of a club whose long history came to a dead stop on Liquidation!
TRFC is not entitled to be regarded as a ‘founder member’ of ECA
And is therefore, now that it is in the SPL, obliged to seek membership of the ECA , as a new applicant.
Those are the facts.
Facts that under your Chairmanship of the ECA were clearly swept aside for very base reasons.
Regrettably and regretfully, I have to say that your thrillingly superb achievements as a footballer are not enough to absolve you, as Chairman of the ECA, from blame in the ‘crime’ of allowing the SFA to get away with what many of us regard as a monstrous lie, of which the full consequences for Scottish Football are yet to be fully felt.
Nevertheless, on a personal level, I thank you for the pleasure you footballing skills gave me, and on that account, I wish you well’
Yours sincerely
 
 
 
 
 
 

John Clark Also Commented

On Grounds for Judicial Review
I woke up this morning to the news that Gordon Strachan has told his players that tonight’s game is not a ‘must win’.
I know that if I was a player, I doubt if my morale would be boosted by such straw-clinging remarks by the manager : I think I would think ” what a fatuous, unrealistic comment that is” ( oops, pardon my language, I meant  “what an ar.ehole of  manager”.
If Scotland don’t win tonight the pressure on them to win v Malta will be absolutely humendous, any defeat leaving us once again the rejects of World football.
All four games are  ‘must wins’, and the boys on the pitch have to be told that.It’s
It’s not  time for holding-hands-comfort, but for true grit, biting the bullet, and fighting to the death.
If we have to die, let it be at the feet of  a more powerfully skilled enemy.


On Grounds for Judicial Review
jimboAugust 29, 2017 at 14:53
 ‘….SFA & SPFL back in their bunkers.’
____________
And that is what we should be concentrating on, Jimbo.

Is there a split between the SFA and the SPFL in the matter of a ‘review’ of how Scottish football arrived at the ridiculous situation it is in, where the most outrageous sports cheating that ever took place was simply accepted, and endorsed in effect by the Sport’s authorities, and the Commission appointed to look into the cheating was sabotaged by the very ‘prosecution’?

Or is the SPFL’s readiness to support the call for a ‘review’ simply part of a joint strategy to shut the door on the past deceit, and ‘move on’?

Just what are they up to, the utterly discredited SFA and SPFL?

What a dog’s breakfast the whole shambles is!

All caused by a cheating knight of the realm, supported by a lying press,and ‘sports authorities’ who put money so far ahead of personal and official integrity as to create the myth that TRFC Ltd (founded and accepted into a professional Scottish football league  in 2012 is one and the same as the Rangers football Club that was founded when my grandfather was, what?, (?1851 from 1872) = 21 years old!

God give me strength!


On Grounds for Judicial Review
paddy malarkeyAugust 28, 2017 at 20:01
‘….Commiserations to the Jambo twins on the appointment of your new manager . .’
___________
It’s not for me to say anything whatsoever about the internal affairs of Heart of Midlothian FC.
But I listened with interest to the BBC Radio Scotland ‘Sportsound’ discussion. I use the word ‘discussion’ very loosely
I use the word ‘discussion’ very loosely indeed,for it generated more heat than light as Michael Stewart and Tom English talked over each other in such manner as to leave me confused about the points they were trying to makeAnd
And Kenny MacIntyre is no Richard Gordon as a ‘facilitator’ of discussion- he gets personally argumentative to the point of extreme irritation.
The subject matter of discussion turned to talk about Caixinha and his comments about O’Halloran, and I lost interest ( except to note that the people clearly want Caixinha out). That’s their business, and it’s not for me to comment.
But I was drawn up short ( when I was folding up the ironing board for Mrs C) to hear Boyd ( I know not which Boyd) tell the listeners that TRFC Ltd fans would rather beat one other team four times a year than win the league and qualify for Europe!
Boyd was not, of course, saying that that was his personal view, but saying that that was his view of what the TRFC Ltd support thought.
I would hope that his view could not possibly be well grounded in fact.
The absurdity of such a view is apparent, and I would hope that the supporters of the ‘new club’ would have higher sporting  aspirations than those attributed to it by whatever ‘Boyd’ it was who was on radio.


Recent Comments by John Clark

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
My brother and I, auld men now that we are, meet occasionally for a pint or three.
We tend to pay homage to our late dad by visiting one of the pubs he used as a young man afore the war ( he lived in digs near Partick Cross) , or one of the pubs he used when we were kids during his working life at what  used to be Glasgow Corporation Tramways Parkhead depot,  or the pub he used in Tollcross in his retirement days.
So I feel for the patrons of what had been Annie Miller’s pub in Ropework lane.
If and when the new owners of the premises tart it up gaily as a feeder bar for their adjoining sauna, I expect that it will no longer be a ‘Rangers’ pub,a place of shared enjoyment of football memories and celebration of former days of glory.

Like the historic Rangers Football Club, Annie Miller’s is dead. Ceased trading in 2016. No longer exists as a ‘Rangers’ pub, any more than the Rangers Football Club of 1872 exists as a professional football club entitled to a place in Scottish Football.
That’s the reality.
There isn’t even a ‘Scottish Football Pubs Association’ prepared to create and propagate a lie  that ‘Annie Miller’s’ lives on, there have been no white or green knights/knaves rushing in to found ‘continuity Annie Miller’s’, no running-dog SMSM types betraying their avocation by propagating untruths……and.no convicted criminals begging, borrowing and making false promises about good times to come if only other folk will produce the readies…
Annie Miller’s is dead and gone.
Only a lie sustains TRFC Ltd.
And those who drank in Annie Miller’s know that.
And the evil men of the SMSM and the SFA know it, too.
May 2018 see them confounded, and their untruths exposed.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
FinlochDecember 30, 2017 at 20:42
‘…Craig took a Corinthian and undisciplined club going nowhere fast, rooted it into a previously ignored community and has achieved some incredible health and social goals deep into that community using football as glue.’
________
Beautifully expressed, Finloch.

Football as a glue of ‘community’

Of community trust,

of basic honesty,

of the  Corinthian spirit,

of sporting integrity….

and of all the virtues that the SFA has so spectacularly abandoned, in its determination to insist that Charles Green’s Sevcoscotland is entitled to call itself the Rangers of 1872

That such an incredibly monstrous perversion of truth of any kind, never mind sporting truth, is being, and has been for 5 years, propagated by our Football Governance body and supported by the SMSM is stark evidence of a deep, deep corruption at the heart of our sport, and, worse, at the very essence of our ‘free’ Press.

in this little country of ours.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
And since I’m talking to myself while all you guys and gals are snoring your heads off, can I just mention that in the local newspaper this morning there was a piece about school sports.

It seemed to be about the ‘pick’ of the best players.

I didn’t have time today to read the whole thing ( and it’s too late to disturb the household to go looking for the paper!) but it seemed to be related to the use by ‘soccer’ teams of the American  Football  concept of who gets to pick the best player in the ‘draft’.

I have only the haziest understanding of that concept.

But in so far as it might relate to attempts to create genuine ‘sporting’ , on-field, equality of talent, it must have something to recommend it.

Even the Americans realise that in order to make money out of sport,there has to be some concept of genuine ‘sporting competition’

Auldheid reminded us, quite movingly, of the joyous nature of our game as we all experienced it.
We all knew instinctively what was fair, and what wasn’t.
Remember how our street game teams were picked?

The two ‘captains’ tossed for first choice.Whichever won the toss would pick the ‘best’ player. The other guy would pick ‘the second best’ and so on.

And, if it appeared that there was an imbalance ,or if there was an odd number of players, then it would be agreed that a ‘John Clark’ would play the first half for one side to give them the extra man, and the second half for the other side, to try to be fair in the use of that useless lump!

( who, I may say, was actually quite good at lifting the wee ba’ from the street up onto the pavement, one hand on the lamp-post outside the Thomson’s house on Cuthelton Street, and bringing it to the goal at the lorry entrance to the Domestos depot ( formerly Donald Clarke’s steel kind of place, which in 1947 sirened One o’Clock,with the siren they used ‘during the war!’)

And it is these kinds of memories that fuel my contempt
contempt for the cheating bast.rd of a knight of the realm who killed the RFC of my day

contempt for the SFA who, like some referees,not only did not ‘see’ that cheating but went further and assisted in that cheating

And who continue to propagate the lie that the football club that cheated its way to death by Liquidation is somehow the same club as a five year old creation that they themselves have lied into existence.

And as for the the whole lot of the successive boards of either Sevco 5088, Sevcoscotland, The rangers football Club Ltd, RIFC plc  how can they be described otherwise than as  scavengers of carrion? Feeding as they do on the dead flesh of a once proud football club?

It gars me greet…
Quietly and solemnly, into my glass of “Goose IPA, 5.9%, made from hops from Idaho” ( And actually quite surprisingly pleasant, reminiscent of McEwan’s pale ale.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
It’s 11.43 pm in Scranton,PA,  and we have just come back from being wined and dined  in tremendously good company in a friends-of-the-son’s home.

I am therefore in a cheerful frame of mind. (Mind you, sitting in the back seat of the car I had one of those A9 moments of absolute fear, when the driver overtook another car on a blind bend, before I realised we were still on a dual carriageway!)….

For one reason or another, it suddenly strikes  me that I don’t actually know ( or remember) when it was that the concept of ‘transfer windows’ was introduced, or why it was introduced.

On the face of it, it’s as much of a restriction of ‘trade’ on ’employers’, as the pre-Bosman situation was on freedom of employment was on ‘workers'(players).

Is there a decently worked out rationale for the concept?


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
easyJamboDecember 27, 2017 at 17:49
‘..I think that the document will only be a restatement of the resolutions that were approved at the AGM (Resolutions 10 & 11).’
_________
You’re perfectly right, of course, eJ: it was only the official recording  of the AGM resolutions.

I think I for one (in my general ignorance) tend to think that any plc of which a director has been taken to the Courts( in an unprecedented action by the Takeover Panel) would have every form or document that it submitted to Companies House rigorously examined, cross-checked, double-checked, treble checked ,even, in a way that ,for example, the SFA does not do with documents submitted to it by its trustworthy gentlemen members.

The Takeover Panel has a lot riding on how the Law stands in its approach to the Panel’s need for support in their regulation of rogues in the market-place.

So I tend to look at anything touching on RIFC plc that seems even a wee bit different as something worth exploring.

Largely tongue-in-cheek, of course: -we’re not likely ever to be told anything confidential by CH! But if they say something will appear, and then it doesn’t appear when promised, then it allows one to ask why. Keeps them on their toes!

And we know that when even the gentlemen of our free Press are not above behaving with less than complete honesty when it comes to TRFC Ltd/RIFC plc  there may (God forbid!) exist a ‘protective of companies’ mindset in CH, rather than a ‘get the baddies’ approach.

Who knows?


About the author