On the Old Club vs New Club (OCNC) debate, the SFA’s silence has been arguably the most damaging factor with respect to the future of the game. Of course people get frustrated when there is a deliberate policy of silence on the part of the SFA which results in the endless cycle of arguments being trotted out again and again with no resolution or closure possible.
The irony (it’s only irony if you assume that the SFA have gone to great lengths to create the conditions for the unbroken history status of the new club) is that the mealy-mouthed attitude they have adopted has actually polarised opinion in a far more serious and irreconcilable way than had they just made a clear statement when Sevco were handed SFA membership. A bit of leadership, with a decision either way at that time would have spiked a lot of OCNC guns very early on, but as history shows, they were afraid of a backlash from wherever it came.
I am now convinced that Scottish Football has passed the Event Horizon and is broken beyond the possibility of any repair that might have taken it back to its pre-2010 condition. Rangers fans will never – no matter what any eventual pronouncement from Hampden may be – accept that their next trophy will be their first. The trouble is that no-one else – again despite anything from Hampden – will cast them as anything else other than a new club who were given a free passage into the higher echelons of the game. Furthermore, they will forever force that down the throats of Rangers fans whenever and wherever they play. A recipe for discord, threats of violence, actual violence, and a general ramping up of the sectarian gas that we had all hoped, only a year or so ago, was to be set to an all-time low peep.
There is a saying in politics that we get the government we deserve. It works both ways though, and the SFA will get the audience it deserves. In actual fact it is the one it has actively sought over the last couple of years, for they have tacitly (and even perhaps explicitly) admitted that Scottish Football is a dish best served garnished with sectarianism. They have effectively told us that without it, the game cannot flourish, and they stick to that fallacy even although the empirical evidence of the past year indicates otherwise.
That belief is an intellectual black-hole they have now thrust the game into. They have effectively said that only two clubs actually matter in Scottish football. The crazy thing is that to put their plans into action they have successfully persuaded enough of the other clubs to jump into the chasm and hence vote themselves into irrelevance and permanent semi-obscurity.
That belief is also shared by the majority in the MSM, who despite their lofty, self-righteous and ostensibly anti-sectarian stance, have done everything they can to stir the hornet’s nest in the interests of greater sales.
Act as an unpaid wing of a PR company, check nothing, ask nothing, help to create unrest, and then tut-tut away indignantly like Monty Python Pepperpots when people take them to task.
Consequently the victims of all the wrongdoing (creditors and clubs) walk away without any redress or compensation for the loss of income and opportunity (and history) – stripped of any pride and dignity since they do so in the full knowledge of what has happened. But even as they wipe away the sand kicked in their faces, those clubs still insist on the loyalty of their own fanbases, the same fans whose trust they have betrayed with their meek acceptance of the new, old order.
The kinder interpretation of the impotence of the clubs is that they want to avoid the hassle and move on, the more cynical view that they are interested only in money, not people. In either case, sporting integrity, in the words of Lord Traynor of Winhall (Airdrie, not Vermont), is “crap”.
The question is; which constituency of 21st century Scotland subscribes to that 17th century paradigm?
Sadly, this massive hoax, this gigantic insult to our collective intelligence, is working. Many will leave the game – many already have in view of the spineless absence of intervention from their own clubs – but many, many more will stay and support the charade.
If you doubt my prediction, ask yourself how many tickets will be unsold the first time the New Rangers play Celtic at Parkhead? That my friends will be final imprimatur of authenticity on just exactly who New Rangers are, no matter the proclamations of both sides of the OCNC argument.
john clarke says: (1403)
November 29, 2013 at 8:30 pm
Squiggle says: (117)
November 29, 2013 at 8:13 pm
‘..-Not likely. The day it happens will be ‘job done’. ..’
——–
Which is why the next best thing would be a boycott by Celtic fans, to possibly highlight the illegitimacy of the new club and the insidious perfidy of the SFA: except we could not rely on the Police and/or Ibrox stewards to protect the Celtic team, should they happen to manage to win.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Best not to rely on the Police or stewards the Army are your best bet here. They are clearly impartial.
Danish Pastry says: (1734)
November 29, 2013 at 6:54 pm
Kenny Shiels on Sportsound talking sense about teams blooding Scottish youth players; a few nights ago Stephen Thompson was on talking to Jim Spence about how the only thing DU did not cut back on was youth development, and look at their consistent success on that front.
It’s not all doom and gloom, the voices of reason and common sense are out there. As Stevie BC mentions above, the demise of RFC (and as a magnificent side-effect the end of the OF) has liberated people to take another look at their local teams and their own in-house kids. Long may it last.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And with no “Old Firm” no longer in existence to buy the cream of the Diddy Clubs and then bench them the future is rosy. Rangers won’t be in a position to buy them as they have no money, Celtic won’t because they have signed enough diddies from abroad already.
Problem is with no money in the Scotch game any team from the Premier or Championship or even the fallen giants in League 1in Englandshire can scoop them up relatively cheaply.
It’s a no win scenario.
4 1 Rate This
Danish Pastry says: (1734)
November 29, 2013 at 6:54 pm
Kenny Shiels on Sportsound talking sense about teams blooding Scottish youth players; a few nights ago Stephen Thompson was on talking to Jim Spence about how the only thing DU did not cut back on was youth development, and look at their consistent success on that front.
It’s not all doom and gloom, the voices of reason and common sense are out there. As Stevie BC mentions above, the demise of RFC (and as a magnificent side-effect the end of the OF) has liberated people to take another look at their local teams and their own in-house kids. Long may it last.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And with no “Old Firm” no longer in existence to buy the cream of the Diddy Clubs and then bench them the future is rosy. Rangers won’t be in a position to buy them as they have no money, Celtic won’t because they have signed enough diddies from abroad already.
Problem is with no money in the Scotch game any team from the Premier or Championship or even the fallen giants in League 1in Englandshire can scoop them up relatively cheaply.
It’s a no win scenario.
————————
The Championship and Lge1 in England are in serious financial trouble. They also now have quite tough FFP rules in place, so I think they are much less likely than in previous years to buy .
The Premiership might, but they have most of Europe available to them
GeronimosCadillac says: (102)
November 29, 2013 at 10:07 pm
———–
I see only positives.
Did you see the Victory Shield match tonight? With the right training, nurturing and attitude our lads can be as good as any. No reason we can’t run a conveyor belt of talent. We used to, before silly money led us to neglect our own kids.
Sensible managers and clubs will bind these kids to some decent contracts, let them become big names at home, then let them go. It works for other small countries.
Danish match report
Scotland 1-0 England
Sky Sports Victory Shield
Friday 29 November 2013
Stark’s Park, Kirkcaldy
England failed to retain The Victory Shield for the first time in over a decade as they suffered a disappointing 1-0 defeat to Scotland in Perthshire.
With both sides knowing it was winner-takes-all, the game failed to live up to expectations as chances proved few and far between, and a first-half defensive mix-up was to cost England dear.
Buoyed by a vociferous home crowd, the hosts had an early chance to take the lead as Theo Archibald outpaced Layton Ndukwu and attempted to loft the ball over the on-rushing Alfie Whiteman from the right edge of the penalty box, but his effort drifted just wide.
Following the early scare, what had started as a tepid affair sparked into life as the Young Lions sought to bite back.
Moments later, a cross from James Yates looped towards the far upright, and as goalkeeper Robby McCrorie rose to collect he dropped the ball at the feet of Jonathan Leko, but the West Brom striker was unable to turn it into the net.
Kenny Swain’s side were starting to assume control of the game as Scotland appeared to be happy to sit back and hit on the counter, but a goal against the run of play on 28 minutes swung the momentum back into the hosts’ favour.
An innocuous looking cross appeared an easy catch for Whiteman, but after a collision with team-mate Cameron Humphreys, he spilled the ball and Calvin Miller pounced to take a touch before stabbing the ball into the net.
Scotland had their tales up, with Miller in particular looking full of energy. And it was the Celtic youngster who again caused England problems at the back, as he had a header blocked on the line by Ndukwu as his side pressed for a second.
Knowing that only a victory would do if they were to retain The Shield, England made a double change at the break, introducing forwards Rushian Hepburn-Murphy and Kaylen Hinds.
But Scotland were not prepared to lie back, and they came close to doubling their lead six minutes into the second half.
A corner from Mark Hill was met by the head of Ross McCrorie, but the defender’s effort cannoned off the outside of the post.
A swirling wind was now gusting around Stark’s Park, and perhaps sensing a few nerves in the English defence, Scotland piled on the pressure through several successive corner kicks, but the Young Lions held firm to withstand the danger.
As the minutes ticked by and the game entered the final quarter, England struggled to create a meaningful attack, which led to further changes as Jacob Maddox and Benjamin Cull entered the fray.
The alterations failed to have the desired effect, as the Young Lions were unable to breach the resolute rearguard of their hosts.
And with that they relinquished their grip on the crown they had made their own in recent years, as Scotland claimed their first Shield title in 14 years.
Scotland U16s
1 Robby McCrorie, 2 Ross McCrorie, 3 Leon Jones (C), 4 Daniel Higgins, 5 Daniel Harvie, 6 Sean McKirdy, 7 Theo Archibald, 8 Mark Hill (16 Frank Ross, 75 minutes), 9 Calvin Miller (18 Aaron Norris, 64 minutes) 10 Mackenzie Heaney, 11 Alastair Coote (15 Ben Stirling, 80 minutes).
Subs not used
12 Ross Doohan, 14 Ross Lyon, 17 Imnes Murray, 19 Kevin O’Hara.
England U16s
1 Alfie Whiteman (13 Connor King, 73 minutes), 2 James Yates, 3 Layton Ndukwu, 4 Thomas Davies, 5 Cameron Humphreys (C), 6 Danny Collinge, 7 Christopher Willock (17 Kaylen Hinds, 40 minutes), 8 Herbie Kane (14 Jacob Maddox, 64 minutes), 9 Jonathan Leko (16 Benjamin Cull, 64 minutes), 10 Foday Nabay, 11 Lukas Nmecha (12 Rushian Hepburn-Murphy, 40 minutes).
Subs not used
15 Reece Oxford,18 William Patching
The Squad
Well done ALL
Goalkeepers
Ross Doohan (Celtic)
Robby McCrorie (Rangers)
Defenders
Daniel Higgins (Celtic)
Ross Lyon (Rangers)
Leon Jones (Heart of Midlothian)
Ross McCrorie (Rangers)
Daniel Harvie (Aberdeen)
Midfielders
Ben Stirling (Hibernian)
Sean McKirdy (Heart of Midlothian)
Mark Hill (Celtic)
Joshua Laws (Fortuna Dusseldorf)
Frank Ross (Aberdeen)
Innes Murray (Celtic)
Charlie Gilmour (Arsenal)
Mackenzie Heaney (Newcastle United)
Josh Jeffries (Rangers)
Forwards
Calvin Miller (Celtic)
Kevin O’Hara (Forth Valley)
Alistair Coote (Dundee United)
Aaron Norris (Aberdeen)
Theo Archibald (Celtic)
Ryan Watters (Motherwell)
Pethshire expanding its boundaries again. 🙂
Dancing in the streets of Perthshire tonight
Well done to the young Scots 😎
ianagain says: (46)
November 29, 2013 at 10:33 pm
———
Not quite the match I saw.
No mention of the penalty that was not.
But no need to grumble about that. Some very skillful young players out there, neat ball control, building from the back, creative, with that good old Scottish passion. An inspiration to watch.
I doff my bunnet to the lads and the coaches.
Exiled Celt
They say a man learns and is shaped in part by his experiences, this includes the workplace.
The situation when PM arrived at Ibrox was very different to the one he left. It has since developed into a long running on-going soap opera which has amazed onlookers for it’s intensity and twists. These extraordinary events have provoked PM into various proposals to ringfence assets (Ibrox) and that directors not take renumeration until the club returned to the top tier.
I see that as more than reasonable .
To compare this current situation with the one he found on his arrival in 2007 is apples and oranges.
It’s not hypocrisy, it’s learnt through bitter experience of spivs digging their claws in.
I’ve covered more detail in a recent conversation with Barcabhoy.
Like all of us, PM won’t be without his flaws but the level, tone and scope of criticisms are IMO also flawed.
Barcabhoy says: (304)
November 29, 2013 at 10:20 pm
++++++++++++++++++
You are not considering the revised parachute payments the relegated clubs get.
Greenock Jack – I think what PM is stating is very good – however things like bids for services having no ties to anyone making the decisions to award the contract to me is a no brainer – seems like it is not needed to be stated. Some things like the fans representative sound good on paper – but when Malcolm explained the fans would have to come up with the method, it just sounded like another tired phrase rolled out at election time. They cannot agree on anything let alone the method of fans rep!!!!
Paul Murray may indeed be a nice guy or a very good chartered accountant – unfortunately for him, he has been cast as someone who wants all the nice things that go with the positions of power, but lacks the wherewithal to get there himself. He needed Brian Kennedy – and now he needs Jim McColl – both were dragged to the party and neither looked comfortable. Nothing Paul does or says casts aside the impressions that he is someone trying to get something for nothing.
Problem is Paul is trying to show his credentials by way of his accomplishments from the Murray era – nowhere has he said that Murray was to blame. If as you say he learned lessons, he did not show it with his deliberate clarification of “old company – not the club” when talking about “financial troubles”. Nor was any of his financial plans any different from before as he himself admitted. If he wants to show how his stint with SDM shows he is the man for the job by highlighting his accomplishments (even though reaching UEFA final was not really his doing!), then he has opened himself up for anyone like Barca to show that he is not using the same period of his activities.
Trouble for Paul is he is doubted even by the people who want the Requisitioners to succeed. Indeed it would not surprise me if he did not make it onto the board at the AGM vote whereas the others might.
As for Gordon Smiths joke about representing the Easdales because he got the bus to the meeting, it and other pot shots taken at Easdales and new board surely indicates that the 2 groups will not be able to work together – only Jim McColl was waving the UN flag – all others were adding fuel to the fire.
Not sure Easdales v Paul Murray is a fight where even boxing judges could make close!
TBH – I still think the AGM will be a damp squib as the strings are being pulled by others not at AGM. Would be great if all the Blue Pitch and Margarita “investors” all showed up in person to announce themselves – including the Interpol fugitive and certain Monaco/Normandy expats!
Well
It looks like Hearts will be saved
How refreshing to see a straight forward example of how a CVA stops the history of a football club being frozen in time forever
Best wishes to all Jambos tonight
The SFA Match Report reflects the game a bit better
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=12916&newsCategoryID=1
I was at the game and it was a good performance from the Scots. It’s the second time I’ve seen them at Starks Park this season (They beat Italy 3-1 in August).
It’s a good squad, with some excellent players, with Miller and Coote the standouts (other than the Hearts lads of course) 😀
GJ,
So PM was just sitting back watching DM make a mess of things? Why didn’t he try to stop the rot instead of sitting back and letting Murray senior run roughshod over everyone. Not much of a director was he? Quite happy to wear the tie and brogues but not prepared to speak out. Good luck with your team if you think he is leadership material.
Just catching up over the last few days. The Blog seems to have been taken over by GJ and bryce whateverhisnumber! It gets depressing.
Lest we forget:
The 1872 Rangers died in 2012
The 2012 Rangers are not Rangers!
I think I’ll leave it for a few more days and catch up again!
Tailofthebank.
Glad to see others cottoning on to the significance of the wee tax case.
These are the equivalents of payments made on brown envelopes. Incomplete registration is not the issue, hiding illegal payments is.
I really must look up the SFA rule that applies to brown envelope payments but it will be a different rule from the one LNS was commissioned to look at.
If you contact me by pm I’ll provide detail. Then you get on to your club chairman and ask him to ask questions.
Fergussingstheblues@12.15am. I could’nt agree more with your statement regarding the Blog. I’ll stay away for a few days too. Maybe the blog will get back to what it is good at. See you.
Exiled Celt says: (821)
November 29, 2013 at 11:20 pm
…
– only Jim McColl was waving the UN flag – …
=====================================
With all due respect EC, please don’t associate anything ‘Rangers’ related to the UN flag. 😉
… and congrats on your new role.
Barcabhoy says: (304)
November 29, 2013 at 10:20 pm
‘…The Championship and Lge1 in England are in serious financial trouble. They also now have quite tough FFP rules in place, so I think they are much less likely than in previous years to buy . ‘
———
I agree, not that I’m particularly knowledgeable.
But the insanity of mega-million spends on individual players has now become apparent.
There will be of necessity a re-wind and re-appraisal, to return to the whole idea of sport as being a contest of skill between more or less equals, as opposed to an uneven contest between thoroughbreds and carthorses.
Abu bloody dhobi megabucks oil states can buy the most talented sportsmen in the world. They will win ( or die if they don’t) . Where is the sport in that?
Horse-racing and boxing long ago recognised that fundamental principle.
And now Football is being forced to accept it as well, slowly but surely.
Just as American Football accepted it long ago.
Competition in sport is not, absolutely not, the same as competition in the market, in finance, in making money ( although, obviously, in professional sport, economic profit and survival are necessary) .
But It is not about market dominance and killing off one’s ‘rivals’ in the market-place.
Because if you kill off your rivals, there is no sport!
That is,it is ultimately self-defeating if the structure of a sport allows for the removal of a truly competitive sporting element simply because its financial structure favours the wealthy.
Football is beginning to realise this.
I hope.
John,
Absolutely dead on. But how come you’re always the last man out of the bar.
Greenock Jack says:
“Like all of us, PM won’t be without his flaws but the level, tone and scope of criticisms are IMO also flawed.”
I’m curious I have to say. I wish you’d give us some instances where the flaws in critique = flaws in PM performance?
Several days ago I said I would respond to Bryce on a disagreement we had on the meaning of “undertaking” in the definition of “Club” within the SPL’s Articles. – where it says:
To recap:
I say that SPL Articles 2 & 4 taken together mean that the word “undertaking” should be given the meaning ascribed to it by The Companies Act 1985 (as amended by the 1989 Act).
That is:
A body corporate; or
An unincorporated body of persons.
So (in the case of an incorporated football club)::
Bryce disagreed with this interpretation. He feels that this interpretation renders some of the other articles nonsensical. In particular he points to Article 6:
His objection, if I understand it correctly, is that the “person who is the owner and operator…” is the body corporate and the expansion of article 6 (when my interpretation is inserted) is illogical – or so he says.
My interpretation (for an incorporated football club) would give us:
In truth I have some sympathy with Bryce. It is tortuous. It may be difficult language; but I do not agree that it is illogical.
What it boils down to is actually quite a simple.
1. Can a company own and operate itself?
2. Can an unincorporated association of persons own and operate itself?
3. Can an SPL Member (when a company) be the Club?
4. Can the SPL Member (when theoretically not a company) be the Club?
When a Club is a company, it can own & operate itself. Therefore there is no issue if the Member is the Club.
However, if the Club is an unincorporated association of persons, it has no legal personality and cannot “own” anything. The committee members individually and collectively own & operate the Club. In this case, because the nominated Member must have legal personalty and the Club does not ,they must (in these circumstances) be different things.
So, theoretically, the SPL Member can be a separate entity from the Club; but only if the Club is an unincorporated association of persons. In practice all SPL Clubs were companies which owned & operated themselves as Members of the SPL. The articles are written to cover both legal forms.
To help us we can look at some of the other Articles to see if they can be of any help. First we should look at Article 71, which says:
The key phrase here is “become a director of a Club”.
Of course (because this Article 71 prohibition is strictly related to the directorship of a company) the phrase can only apply if/when a Club is a company. So, unless we take “undertaking” to mean body corporate in the Club definition, this article would make no sense.
[and before you go there Bryce, this is about the Articles definition of Club – NOT the Rules]
We should also look at Article 97:
So here we have the article which directly relates a “Member of the Company” to “full member club of the SFA”.
Tthe SPL Member is presumed to be the member club of the SFA. If the SPL Member is a body corporate the SFA member club must also be a body corporate.
I have not yet heard anyone accept that the SFA considered The Rangers Football Club plc to be a club; but continue to argue that for SPL purposes this company was not the Club.
Perhaps Bryce, you could be the first.
My heartfelt sympathies to the McConnville family. As so many have said before me, the suddenness contributes to the shock and sadness felt at the loss of such a brilliant mind.
“Here’s to the King sir, you ken who a mean sir,
And every honest man that’ll dae it again.
Here’s tae the chieftains o aw the heilan clans,
They’ve done it mare than once, and they’ll dae it again.
When ye hear the trumpets soond, tooti taeti, tae the drum,
Up yir sword an’ doon yir gun, an’ tae the rogues again.”
The truth will out.
RIP Mr McConnville
Bryce(NinerAlpha), you would like to compare the scenario of Rory Bremner FC with that of Dunfermline Athletic FC & Heart of Midlothian FC?
You ask about moral indignation re. shedding of debt / stiffing creditors? Quite rightly so as there are losers all round.
I’ll tell you the difference, for at the end of the day it’s really quite simple.
One is immoral. The other is amoral.
I shall let you make up your own mind as to which is which.
After all, our esteemed CEO of the governing body has decreed that it’s up to the fans to decide what they want to believe. Personally, I’m over the moon that East Fife are the reigning Scottish Champions, Arbroath hold the Scottish Cup, Queens Park are European Champions…
:slamb:
The Lithuanians are really being pretty decent about the Hearts debts:
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/hearts-administration-cva-approved-1-3213979
Pretty good summary of the McColl position in The Herald:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/sidelined-by-his-investors-but-cheering-for-change.22832843
Lots of nothing much but fill copy media stuff – not a challenge to pull strings on the MSM
– Is it?
Well well – Back to the `17 techniques for truth suppression……….`
Or is it twenty five?
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
:slamb: :slamb: :slamb:
Nothing has been learned by Mini Walter. As a fan of Scottish football, I’d say the best thing about the end of RFC has been the demotion of this managerial attitude. Reminds me of a bit of English graffiti I once saw scrawled on a wall in Malmoe: “Don’t Panic, Keep Shopping”
[PS the above quote is from the DR]
I’ll probably regret raising it here but I feel one, and one only, particular aspect of the Scotsman’s other leading sports story is worthy of mention. Neil Lennon gets a fair degree of grief on here and as an opposition supporter he’s twisted my metal more than once as well. But the story today on the green brigade banner is heartening at a quick glance. No yes buts, no buts, whatabouts just No place here, pure and simple.
Well, done sir. Now back to getting your team ready for a hard fought, nail biting, exciting encounter this pm that you narrowly lose, obviously!
On a lighter note, how many read Exiled Celt’s recent career piece, about having a good job, well paid etc and saying he had given it up based on principle and thought (at best) uh oh!, right down to the bit about the new boss doing things HER way and then thought Aaaaaah!
Just me?
(OK, so sexist, irish political and anti celtic comments in one morning. Hi from the naughty step)
Back on message now TSFM, I promise…
EDIT: OK so I’m doing the saturday papers trawl. I went to the DR (again a name that comes up here quite often else I wouldn’t mention it) actually to get the latest on the helicopter situ. Hope no-ones involved there by the way. Couldn’t help but be drawn to the lead story about the wee lad led astray by his teacher. Not sure how easily it was to lead him astray right enough, check the posters in the background – and for once its not the poppy bestowed scarf that catches the eye. Not like the DR to miss the point kind of.
Apologies for O/T.
The Green Brigade have been around for a few years . Celtic since 1888. The Green Brigade have to be excised and eradicated. No ifs no buts. I am a Celtic supporter faithful through and through. Everyone in that section on Tuesday has to be banned from Celtic Park.
The police helicopter disaster last night crashing into the Clutha Bar in Glasgow city Centre ,a famous bar for folk music and football fans alike ,pray casualties are at a minimum ,3 confirmed dead so far.
Danish Pastry says: (1739) .
November 30, 2013 at 9:42 am
Would be nice to think Super might get his wish 😀 The division is already won, not even he could blow that kind of lead again 🙄 so any new players will just add to their financial troubles. As you say, though, he is not learning. His buy, buy policy isn’t actually doing him any favours as he’d learn much more as a manager if he had a squad he actually had to manage. Still, we have to remember, he is competing (competing?) against clubs who never have any injuries themselves and have the best medical facilities available at any level in Scottish football. That man really does earn every penny of his salary 😛
willmacufree @ 2:12am
I’m curious I have to say. I wish you’d give us some instances where the flaws in critique = flaws in PM performance?
———————————————————-
It’s not a case of ‘equals’.
I am saying that TSFM isn’t always balanced in it’s criticism of individuals, in this case PM.
That there is a general lack of objectivity that comes from being in a particular camp (at this point on TSFM it is Rangers v The Rest). It’s not unnatural and I’ll hold my hand up and say it’ll effect my output aswell. I’d add that on this blog there is at least an effort towards various degrees of objectivity, dependent on subject matter and poster. Although given that I measure that against sites like FF and KDS, it doesn’t mean a great deal (football supporters don’t find objectivity easy, especially when in groups). People on here won’t like that but it’s the truth or at least close to it.
Another poster aluded to PM and not being leadership material, I’d agree with that.
I’d say he has the skills and the experience (including his time observing spivs / re. to put in place anti-spiv pre-emptive counter measures) added to being a lifelong supporter, so as to make a constructive contribution as a non-exec.
Whether it happens is another matter because the internal politics are complicated. PM has picked up many ‘enemies’ along the way and I think there will be a concerted effort on their part to try and prevent him from being appointed.
Barcabhoy @ 7:21pm
“………………Paul Murray was a non exec during the period when MIH companies were awarded contract after contract at Rangers. Did he ever question these contracts ? Did he ever insist on a process of transparent competitive bidding ? Did he even consider the interests of the minority shareholders for even a nano second ?……………………………..”
———————————————————————————–
Just to remind BB of my simple question from last night.
What number of the “awarding of contracts to MIH post 2007” did you base the use of the term “contract after contract” ?
If not exact, approximate.
Thank’s !
willmacufree says: (239)
November 30, 2013 at 1:39 am
‘….. But how come you’re always the last man out of the bar..’
——-
Ha,ha. But I think that honour belongs this morning to Causaludendi ( 5.22 a.m.!)
causaludendi says: (72)
November 30, 2013
Bryce(NinerAlpha), you would like to compare the scenario of Rory Bremner FC with that of Dunfermline Athletic FC & Heart of Midlothian FC?
You ask about moral indignation re. shedding of debt / stiffing creditors? Quite rightly so as there are losers all round.
I’ll tell you the difference, for at the end of the day it’s really quite simple.
One is immoral. The other is amoral.
I shall let you make up your own mind as to which is which.
+++++++++++++
JC
Perhaps the Queens Park man was first of the day.
His club was certainly at the front of the queue 146 yeras ago.
I won’t comment on it’s current position.
Post removed, point taken.
This may surprise some but I’d defend the Green Brigades right to protest or to publicly put forward their views (including inside a football stadium). I don’t think it important who they are or the detail of what they have to say.
I am disturbed at the general tendency that sees society legislate and marginalise against the man or group in the street expressing their opinions in a supposed free society. The media is used as a tool to push for general acceptance for the gradual erosion of civil liberties.
If you use the criteria of ‘if it offends somebody’ then you’ll be able to put a lid on 90% of public protest and Joe Public is making it relatively easy for them.
Do you want to listen to a real journalist ?
Glen Greenwald puts over his points very well and it’s the first time I’ve heard this BBC interviewer quite so dominated. It’s the programme, ‘Hardtalk’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01m0ycb
I think this has relevance to the blog through the MSM angle and the general way the 21st century media are structured and go about their business. Also connected is the recent legislation brought in to be used against Scottish football supporters.
Greenock Jack says: (234)
November 30, 2013 at 11:28 am
===============================
I have only one concern related to Paul Murray, and his cohorts. It is the push from the fans and the media to get them in power because they are deemed to be ‘real’ Rangers men ‘who know what the club is all about’. Personally I believe that to mean much more than simply being suitable to take things forward, and I can’t see how Scottish football can ever progress until olive branches are extended from the Ibrox Boardroom rather than tub thumping WATP / no surrender nonsense. I have heard nothing from Paul Murray or any one of his cohorts to suggest they don’t still believe themselves to be part of something which is naturally superior over all others, and as such should be accountable to no-one but themselves. Worse still I believe this natural order brackets their opponents as an underclass, which could previously be tolerated as long as Rangers were generally more successful. What they simply can’t seem to stomach is that ‘underclass’ is now a strong, well organised opponent, that suffered some years of failure in order to get its house in order. Don’t dare class it as an ‘Institution’ or ‘part of the fabric of Scottish society’ though. It will never deserve to be spoken of in such grand terms. Just remind them when necessary exactly who are the people!
Charles Green on Rangers boycott of Cup tie with Dundee United last season…
“Rangers Football Club will not be taking its allocation of tickets for the forthcoming Scottish Cup match against Dundee United at Tannadice.
“This is a unanimous decision by the board, senior management and staff at Ibrox. Everyone at this club is dismayed at the actions of certain SPL clubs, which were actively engaged in trying to harm Rangers when we were in a perilous situation and we are acutely aware of their attitude to us.”
When McCoist says every team takes the same pleasure in beating his ‘Rory Bremners’ he’s probably right.
Any team that spend the amount they have done, display the utter contempt for teams that refused to let a new team hop, skip and jump into the top league, that continue to bring ridicule on the Scottish game on a daily basis, and as indicated by Green’s words above, show the same arrogance, self importance and misplaced entitlement that the Tony Blair version did. Until the impersonators go the route of the original, I hope every man and his dug hump your pretenders, McCoist.
In saying this our game has a lot to get on with, besides, and that starts with weeding out the rotten core of our football authorities shamed by their complicity in this Rangers-ness mess ..of both clubs.
bryce9a says: (55)
November 30, 2013 at 11:39 am
I, and I suspect most others who gave causa a thumbs up, read his post as meaning Rangers, in all their guises, are amoral ie without morals.
While the shedding of debt under the insolvency laws may be seen as immoral, it doesn’t indicate an ongoing lack of morals as has been shown by consecutive regimes at Ibrox since before the end of the last century, that could rightfully be described as amoral. If Rangers had gone into administration merely through overspending until the bank pulled the plug, then they might have found some of the sympathy shown here towards Hearts and Dunfermline. As it was they fell into the mire of liquidation as a result, not only of overspending, but of using dodgy tax schemes and the deliberate misregistration of players amongst many other sharp practices. The ongoing attitude of board members, management and a very large proportion of the support could all be considered amoral too.
For your information, a number of posters here have been very critical of Hearts shedding of debt from purely a moral stance, while accepting it as part of the law of the land.
Edit: having read TSFM’s edit to Bryce’s post I have removed part of mine which is now irrelevant. I notice Bryce has also deleted his post but I leave the rest of my post as was as I think it is remains somewhat relevant.
Wake up mr Lunny all non-sectarian football fans ears are bleeding again with the bile coming from the team playing falkirk’s fans ( not sure who they are or what they are called 😉 )
Allyjambo,
Fair enough. I stepped over the mark there and if i misread the original poster’s comment i apologise.
I defend the right of any person to make a political point in a non violent or non aggressive way.
I’d fight for that right.
I guess most of the unpaid bloggers here would too. (The paid ones would do what their PR boss tells them)
Where I have issues is dragging Northern Irish issues, politics and militaristic heritage into Scotland and Scottish Football in 2013 and going forward.
There is no place for that and the poison it brings and ignites.
No place whatsoever.
Bryce,
apology accepted, though I didn’t really feel one was necessary. We are all guilty, from time to time, of misunderstanding someone’s post. It always help with the harmony of the blog when the misunderstanding is, as you have done, acknowledged.
Allyjambo says: (668)
November 30, 2013 at 12:21 pm
2 0 Rate This
———-
I’d agree with that @Ally.
As far as @GJ and the GB comments go, the manager and the CEO are spot on in this instance.
For the millionth time: Scottish football, and Glasgow in particular, can do without obscure Irish history and current Irish politics, thank you. Celtic were formed in 1888, but after all these years are they not now a Scottish club, albeit with a genuine Irish heritage?
Since another club in Glasgow now obsesses about union flags, what better time for Celtic supporters to display a few more Saltires? This is a chance to get the neutrals onside and become the pre-eminent ‘Scottish’ club.
Finloch says: (228)
November 30, 2013 at 12:51 pm
===================
Totally agree.
UtH @ 12:03pm
You can’t offer meaningful olive branches until there was control in the boardroom.
I think it inevitable and necessary that efforts are made in this direction so as to improve the general Scottish football enviroment regarding on-going confrontation. It’s a problem that will realistically need a joint effort in it’s management.
The other night (video still on TSFM) PM talked of a need for accountability and for any monies recovered to go to creditors.
The fact is, whether you like it or not is that historically Rangers regard themselves as the number one team in Scotland, that the club continues and that 54 titles is the base for this belief. Everyone else will disagree on pretty much all of those points but that’s football for you. I wouldn’t get so worked up about it and instead concentrate on your own team’s performance but I know that won’t be the case on here and wouldn’t expect it.
There comes a point though, when your own club doesn’t formally echo your concerns or vote against those on the governing bodies who are considered to be complicit, that leaves those who protest marginalised and whistling in the wind. The likely outcome is that it becomes the source of ongoing banter, it may even mean that other more political issues are put in the shade.
Think about what I have previously said about lack of accountability becoming fashionable in the corporate and poltical sectors, add the angles on the erosion of civil liberties/media used as a tool, in my post on the Green Brigade above.
Then consider if I had a point when I said that if you wanted to change at the micro level, then you had to look to effect change at the top. Corporate and political culture and examples are set at the high end and filter down the food chain, one very good example is the use of spin which is now widespread and the norm.
What a surprise
Sevco get a penalty and Falkirk get man sent off.
Haven’t seen it, though first thoughts are – Honest mistake or Not ?
On review
1. Not a foul
2. Player started to fall outside the box
but
I thought it was a stonewaller on first view
so
honest mistake
Greenock Jack says: (236)
November 30, 2013 at 1:23 pm
=========================
Perhaps you don’t get my point, which goes beyond football, and is to do with how Rangers and Celtic are still regarded in Scottish society. I see no indication from anyone seeking power at Ibrox to challenge what are in my opinion disturbing supremacist attitudes, while regarding another group as an underclass.
Jim,
Put it this way, after a number of replays the commentators didn’t sound all that sure. If it was a foul, then the sending off, under the rules, was correct.
Big Pink says: (147)
November 30, 2013 at 1:47 pm
1 0 Rate This
On review
1. Not a foul
2. Player started to fall outside the box
but
I thought it was a stonewaller on first view
so
honest mistake
Even RM are saying it was not a penalty. Missed it anyway so all’s fair although the man down won;t help Falkirk any. maybe after this one, they will stop describing themselves as the second best team on Scotland??
From Companies House
Sevco 5088 Ltd
AA01 29/11/2013 PREVEXT FROM 31/03/2013 TO 31/08/2013
Delayed annual accounts? For why?
TM01 14/11/2013 APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR CHARLES GREEN
TM01 14/11/2013 APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR CHARLES GREEN
Two terminations? Don’t want to waste a couple of quid (I could buy a football club for that!) – are these terminations for the same date?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Greenock Jack
I have told you twice that the information is available through Companies House. I provided you with a link to an article which showed the extent of two contracts alone run to millions. The Azure contract at Ibrox was a 9 year contract, at Murray Park a 5 year contract
Do your own research , publish the results. In fact do anything rather than just deflect and distract. It doesn’t work , it isn’t welcomed by the vast majority of the blog based on their verdict in your posts.
jimlarkin says: (668)
November 30, 2013 at 1:41 pm
5 2 Rate This
What a surprise
Sevco get a penalty and Falkirk get man sent off.
Haven’t seen it, though first thoughts are – Honest mistake or Not ?
———-
No real point in that debate Jim.
Positives: I was impressed by Falkirk, their stadium, style of play, young team, all good. Even with 10 men they looked composed. The future.
Negatives: an overpaid, under-achieving manager, a team with very little future-bulding apparent, the nauseating crowd singing. The past. Dearie me.
No wonder Jim McColl isn’t backing that cocktail with his own cash. But huge credit to Falkirk. Another team with a stadium ready for an expanded top league.
Barcabhoy
I have told you twice that the information is available through Companies House. I provided you with a link to an article which showed the extent of two contracts alone run to millions. The Azure contract at Ibrox was a 9 year contract, at Murray Park a 5 year contract
Do your own research , publish the results. In fact do anything rather than just deflect and distract. It doesn’t work , it isn’t welcomed by the vast majority of the blog based on their verdict in your posts.
—————————————————————————————————–
But who is deflecting ?
I’ve been quite surprised by the general condemnation of that Green Brigade banner. It was an articulate and innoffensive expression of a rather awkward truth, that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.
Whether you agree with the sentiment or not seems irrelevant – on the principle of freedom of speech and right to protest, I’m disturbed that the GB look as if they are being prevented from exercising these rights.
It would be nice if the whole Northern Irish thing was absent from Scottish football, but sadly it is and denying freedom of expression in an attempt to drive it out seems disproportionate and misguided.
PS – very sad to hear about Paul McConville. A tremendously valuable voice who brought enlightenment to legal matters that nobody else does. Terrible loss.
(In writing this, I am mindful of the tragic incident at the Clutha pub in Glasgow, and while life goes on, I post this comment a little subdued, and mindful of those who have died and those who have lost them.)
_________________________________________________________________________________________
THE CULTURAL, SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY IMPORTANCE OF THE IBROX CLUB.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/sidelined-by-his-investors-but-cheering-for-change.22832843
Writing in today’s Herald, Richard Wilson uses a well known stock phrase.
“. . . .(With) McColl . . there is . . also an acknowledgement
of its (Rangers’) cultural, social and community importance. ”
I want to look a little more closely at this phrase, because of it’s acceptance when used wrt TRFC,
but also because it hardly ever, if at all,
gets used in connection with any other club in Scotland.
Now I can work out what the social and community importance of a football club is
and then apply it to Sevco.
I can also work out that football is culturally important to Scotland, as it is in Brazil or Italy and in many other countries.
And, there are many things I can think of which are quite obviously culturally important to Scotland.
But I am in difficulty in working out what the cultural importance of the now crippled and emaciated Ibrox club is to this country of ours.
I ponder a little more and ask myself, what is the cultural importance of Aberdeen FC, or Dunfermline FC, or of any other Scottish football club ?
Was it culturally important that Dunfermline FC be saved from liquidation?
If it was, the Scottish media never mentioned it, as far as I am aware. Anyone?
Or is it only the impoverished and dysfunctional Govan club which has the title ‘culturally important’ attached to it?
As if this was a reason why it must be ‘saved’ at all costs.
For the nation.
If so, what precisely is it about this new club, barely 2 years old, that makes it quintessentially Scottish, and qualify it as culturally important?
Is it their tartan strip? No.
Is it the Scottish songs the Ibrox fans sing? No.
Is it the Scottish flags they proudly wave at matches? No.
Is it their fierce desire for Scottish Independence? No.
Can you see my difficulty?
Now I can understand why TRFC would be considered part of the culture of NI, or at least part thereof.
But I ask again.
Why is the club down Govan way and which is in such current disarray, culturally important to Scotland?
This is the same club which is widely known as ‘a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace’. (Ian Archer).
Hardly an appropriate attribute for anything culturally important, unless one is thinking of events like the Highland Clearances or the Massacre at Glencoe or the trashing of Manchester.
You’ve been very patient, dear Reader and I thank you for it.
However, I have yet more demands to ask of you, for I have not, as you now know, as yet found the answer to my original question, and I’m hoping you will help me to progress my knowledge of the Scottish cultural landscape in which the name ‘Rangers’ is apparently and uniquely, writ so large.
Perhaps the redoubtable Mr Irvine, now with some time on his hands, or even Richard Wilson, might favour us on TSFM with an answer to this issue of the cultural importance of Scotland’s most beleaguered football club.
Night Terror says: (378)
November 30, 2013 at 2:54 pm
I’ve been quite surprised by the general condemnation of that Green Brigade banner. It was an articulate and innoffensive expression of a rather awkward truth, that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.
Whether you agree with the sentiment or not seems irrelevant – on the principle of freedom of speech and right to protest, I’m disturbed that the GB look as if they are being prevented from exercising these rights.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I’m not even sure I know fully what the GB stand for but Para 2 above sums up what I think about it all. We can’t just pick and choose who we give freedom of speech to just because we don’t like what they are saying – It’s a dangerous road to go down,
Today I decided to sit through a full Rangers match for the first time in a long time. Given the media outrage there was against the Green Brigade last week, followed by a rebuke from Celtic themselves, can we expect (a) media outrage over the political and sectarian songfest from Rangers fans throughout the game (b) a rebuke from Rangers that this type of singing brings unwanted attention to the club. My guess is the answer to both is no, and even in the unlikely event of media comment, I reckon the Ibrox response would amount to a circling of the wagons rather than condemnation. There is also an opportunity for the SFA to take them to task but I guess there is also an opportunity for a herd of pink elephants to land at Glasgow Airport.
I speak as a Celtic fan who dearly wishes the Green Brigade would take their protests of this type elsewhere as I believe it has no place in a football ground and only brings embarrassment to the club. Key to that embarrassment of course is that the media are up for comment on the subject. Clearly we still have a way to go in terms of a genuine, impartial media debate on the problem of sectarianism and offensiveness in Scottish football. The fact the Rangers support can freely have a 90 minute onslaught like they had today is evidence of that.
manandboy says: (337)
November 30, 2013 at 2:56 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I suspect you know the answer is that they are held to be an institution that defends the faith, Union and monarchy. Because these ideas are national ones they have a wider cultural significance than Dunfermline. Dunfermline have a cultural significance but it doesn’t reach out much beyond Fife.
GeronimosCadillac says: (104)
November 30, 2013 at 3:03 pm
I agree, with one caveat, lets see a statement from the GB saying that they will reimburse the club for whatever fine UEFA hits them with.
A passing comment about the old Rangers as world record holders or somesuch (for winning a record number of titles in a country roughly the same pop. size as Finland or Norway).
After the Milan result, the few Celtic supporters who hadn’t already realised saw in sharp relief how hard it remains to compete at group stage level in the CL. To come from a small country, battle through the prelims then produce six creditable performances in that competition is tough. That defines the achievement of clubs like Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Man Utd, Milan or Real Madrid who have all won the trophy more than once in the modern era (last couple of decades).
Consequently, getting hung up on ‘history’ is a little beside the point when the benchmark for ultimate success – or excellence – is light years over the horizon. Getting into fankle about the number of stars above the crest or what the history books can truthfully relate doesn’t help anyone compete in European football’s top 32. Thinking aloud, it may even be a handicap.
Night Terror says: (378)
November 30, 2013 at 2:54 pm
Whether the message was an “awkward truth” or not I saw and see no reason for this type of political statement at a football match. I have my own personal views on many subjects and I would express them when appropriate. When stuff such as this is displayed at Parkhead I feel that the general impression is that the GB are speaking on behalf of all at Celtic Park which is certainly not the case. When I go to Celtic Park I go to see football and have no interest in this type of display whether relevant or not in terms of its message.
briggsbhoy says: (754)
November 30, 2013 at 3:17 pm
Night Terror says: (378)
November 30, 2013 at 2:54 pm
Whether the message was an “awkward truth” or not I saw and see no reason for this type of political statement at a football match. I have my own personal views on many subjects and I would express them when appropriate. When stuff such as this is displayed at Parkhead I feel that the general impression is that the GB are speaking on behalf of all at Celtic Park which is certainly not the case. When I go to Celtic Park I go to see football and have no interest in this type of display whether relevant or not in terms of its message.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And if that works for you then fine others may have a different view. Should they not be allowed to express it?
GeronimosCadillac says: (106)
November 30, 2013 at 3:23 pm
I have a good mate who is passionate about the removal of nuclear weapons from Faslane. Every now again when taking part in one of sit down protests, he gets arrested. He knows very well that the consequence of “breaking the rules” is that he may be arrested, spend a night or two in the cells, and probably be fined. That’s a price he is willing to pay for his act of “civil disobedience”, he doesn’t expect anyone else to pay the fine or do the time.
The UEFA rules are pretty clear, the GB knew they were breaking them, they should be big enough to take responsibility for the consequences.
I often have issues with Mr Lawwell, in relation to his part-time job, but, he is spot on in his day job
GeronimosCadillac says: (106)
November 30, 2013 at 3:23 pm
1 2 Rate This
briggsbhoy says: (754)
November 30, 2013 at 3:17 pm
Night Terror says: (378)
November 30, 2013 at 2:54 pm
Whether the message was an “awkward truth” or not I saw and see no reason for this type of political statement at a football match. I have my own personal views on many subjects and I would express them when appropriate. When stuff such as this is displayed at Parkhead I feel that the general impression is that the GB are speaking on behalf of all at Celtic Park which is certainly not the case. When I go to Celtic Park I go to see football and have no interest in this type of display whether relevant or not in terms of its message.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And if that works for you then fine others may have a different view. Should they not be allowed to express it?
=================
Thereins the rub though GC. Briggsboy missed a key step in his otherwise accurate answer. Not only is there a general feeling that sport and politics don’t mix anyway, but because it can have direct financial and other consequences the club I understand have specifically asked please don’t make statements of that type. Didn’t think that was such a hard rule to understand personally! If anyone cares to go back to my original point this morning (which I said at the time I would probably regret) it was that NL’s statement appeared to be an unequivocal no place for it here guys. I repeat now. No yes buts, no no buts not even a what about, just no. Simples.
Manandbhoy,
Sociocultural factors intrinsic to TRFC
I have an even simpler take on it. I am blessed with a northern upbringing so the ‘cultural’ influence has passed me by a large extent. What I do see is simply big. They are important because they are big. Dunfermline are not important because they are not big.
Two issues with that. I expect our games authorities to recognise that that size is a problem from the perspective of fair competition. Otherwise why don’t we all just buy a green scarf or a blue scarf and be done with it. I confess I don’t have the answer how it could be done since what I’m basically suggesting is some kind of handicapping system which would bring its own problems. I would however like to at least see some recognition of the problem rather a manifest deliberate policy of maintaining such a situation with a shrug of the shoulders (and in too many cases, a knowing smile to boot).
The second point is that when, despite the best efforts of the authorities to turn a blind eye to the scale issue, when one of them then completely implodes anyway, I am a little surprised to see an extra effort being made to recreate the situation, from a sporting perspective, never mind from social, cultural or any other dimension.
GJ, re your tet a tet with Barca
Not for the first time you are picking on a minor point and creating a circular argument. It matters not if contract after contract means 20 or 30, or just 2, the important point is that PM was in office at Rangers while David Murray gave contracts to his own companies (whilst carrying out a number of even more questionable acts), the very thing PM criticises Green and the current board for. Not only does he not criticise DM but he was there, in office, and should, if he believes the practice wrong, have vociferously challenged the contracts and demanded proper tendering. PM has shown himself to be particularly lax when it comes to corporate governance and happy to let the big boy do whatever he wants. Regardless of how many contracts were involved, do you think that makes him suitable to be a board member, once again, at Ibrox, or, indeed, any better than the men on the board at present? His one genuine quality, if quality it is, appears to be that he is a true blue, died in the wool, Rangers man. Is that all that’s required to produce a board capable of getting Rangers out of the mire?
manandboy says: (337)
November 30, 2013 at 2:56 pm
Excellent post, manandboy, and point well made. Sadly, I am unable to provide you with an answer, but suspect the truth has something to do with trying to find something positive to say about a malevolent entity, or, put quite simply, PR :slamb:
GeronimosCadillac says: (106)
November 30, 2013 at 3:07 pm
“manandboy says: (337)
November 30, 2013 at 2:56 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I suspect you know the answer is that they are held to be an institution that defends the faith, Union and monarchy. Because these ideas are national ones they have a wider cultural significance than Dunfermline. Dunfermline have a cultural significance but it doesn’t reach out much beyond Fife.”
_______________________________________________________________
I think the only people who hold them to be this institution of defenders are they, themselves. They are nothing but an embarrassment to all the things they claim to be defending.