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.
StevieBC says: (922)
December 3, 2013 at 9:42 pm
That is one angle of the TRFC shambles which I still don’t understand.
Nobody can deny that McColl is a smart, driven guy.
Probably not a sterling billionaire, but a pretty wealthy multi-millionaire all the same.
I was surprised that a ‘cash rich / time poor’ sort of guy would show any interest at all in TRFC.
I was even more surprised that whilst he publicly declared that TRFC/RIFC could be a great investment , he would not be investing any of his – or other people’s money – in this particular ‘dog with fleas’.
I don’t believe that McColl is the sort of character who would be affected by ‘Rangersitis’.
I also don’t believe it’s just a massive error of judgement on his part to risk his reputation on TRFC.
It just doesn’t stack up.
There must be more behind his initial decision to get so publicly involved ?
Just another curious thread of the long running Govan club saga… 🙄
================================================
Maybe he was told to get involved, just like Jack was ‘ordered’ back to ibrox 😉
upthehoops says: (695)
December 3, 2013 at 9:30 pm
I just read an article in the Herald where Lee McCulloch is heavily quoted. Assuming he is being quoted correctly, the arrogance is oozing from his every word. The truth is if Referees actually had the guts, this player could be sent off in every game he plays, for two yellow card offences, some of which should be for diving. Unfortunately Referees don’t have the guts.
_________________________________________________________________________________
If the NCOC debate is shunted to its own thread can we also do that with all things referees? If you think McCulloch could be sent off in every game he plays then I’m assuming you watch more Rangers games than that of your own club. You watch every game McCulloch plays in?
Reading Celtic fans complain about biased refereeing is a bit much. Ask any fan of a ‘diddy’ team when they have to play against Celtic.
fergusslayedtheblues says: (265)
December 3, 2013 at 8:58 pm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But thats the problem Mr Blues, I don’t want the truth acknowledged in 20yrs time. I don’t want ‘justice’ meted out to the elderly and infirm.
I want an admission of culpability now. I demand accountability – NOW.
This wishy-washy bampottery of “we know that they know that we know” isn’t cutting the mustard. Where’s the justice in that? I resent being portrayed as an obsessed whacko by those who rely on the press for their information. I have a burning desire to be vindicated. Which, I suppose, does make me obsessed. But only because it is so blatantly unfair, unjust and downright bloody untruthful. That puts my teeth on edge.
Regarding the SFA fit for purpose debate. Someone queried what would happen if TRFC are granted a dubious decision late on say in a cup game. It actually works both ways now since if a 50:50 comes up in such a situation the ref is going to be thinking I’d better be 100 per cent sure before I give this else they”ll all say its a plot. Its actually quite an achievement to alienate both sides of an argument!
paulsatim says: (643)
December 3, 2013 at 9:32 pm
StevieBC says: (921)
December 3, 2013 at 4:36 pm
The search for the 5 Way Agreement at Hampden is getting serious !
Plagiarised from PMcG twitter. 😉
https://twitter.com/NickPLittlewood/status/407840079198289921/photo/1
==========================================================
Maybe they’ll find the Pinsent Mason report too!
———————————————————————-
Steady on, they’ve only got digging gear, not mining equipment!
Smugas says: (598)
December 3, 2013 at 10:01 pm
That is the position that this feckless bunch of feckwits has got themselves into. Whatever they do, whether it is its Door A, Door B, or continue to sit with their finger up their rear end, they will upset people.
Of course it should be remembered that one group may well resort to sarcasm, and even, gulp, irony, whilst the other has a track record of resorting to….
willmacufree says: (245)
December 3, 2013 at 4:20 pm
—————————-
I think you’re giving me too much credit, but I’ll take it!
================
OK but careful how you go. Its a dangerous thing, credit. Can get you into all sorts of bother.
Scapa,
To be absolutely clear in no way was I offering them my sympathy. In fact, remembering back, I distinctly recall certain eminent posters saying things along the lines of it’ll all end in tears (referring to the lack of balls at the top) and thinking heh, how bad can it get?
Boy am I learning.
Smugas says: (600)
December 3, 2013 at 10:13 pm
Levity aside, I fear we will find how bad in the run up to the start of next season. I think by then the SFA board will look back on 2012/13 as the good old days, and wish they had had the guts to take a little pain then.
If we think the behaviour of a large section of the Ranger’s fans was bad in 2012, then think how much worse its going to be now that they have been amped up on the, (unchallenged by the SFA), nonsense spun by Mr Green and perpetuated by some of the posters on here.
Totally OT but was there a new record set for the lowest crowd at the park which the team in blue play at tonight???
Fair play to TSFM for doing what they/he/she thinks is best for this website. The same stuff does inevitably get dragged over and if that, along with some of the anger that these discussions seem to stoke up among some, is turning off posters who have interesting contributions to make in other areas, then moving things on is the wise choice.
I’ve enjoyed engaging with folk on the site and am happy to continue to contribute and provide an alternative perspective where I can.
ps.
Brenda says: (720)
December 3, 2013 at 10:26 pm
0 1 Rate This
Totally OT but was there a new record set for the lowest crowd at the park which the team in blue play at tonight???
I gather the official attendance at Ibrox, if that is to where you refer, was in the region of 38’000.
bryce9a says: (81)
December 3, 2013 at 10:28 pm
I gather the official attendance at Ibrox, if that is to where you refer, was in the region of 38’000
———————————————-
You really shouldn’t believe everything you’re “officially” told mate . A lot of it is what they call spin to make people feel good about certain unpalatable situations.
😆
For the avoidance of doubt the following is hypothetical……the question is whether it is feasible
Stages 1-3 are what could hypothetically have happened. Stages 4-5 are hypothetically what could happen next.
Stage 1
Gather investment of £5.5 million, much of it from people who need to remain anonymous. Use that to acquire the assets, in a process the losing bidders say was stacked in your favour all along. Operation “be nice to your initial investors” swings into phase 1 action by giving many of them as many shares for 1p as they bought for £1.
Stage 2
Having acquired the assets, use Green’s silver tongue, and Malcolm Murray’s old boy network to get institutions and fans to pony up £22.5 million. Phase 2 of ” be nice to your initial investors” now kicks in, and much of the initial £5.5 million is “earned back” in the form of commissions, fees, salaries, supplier service contracts and benefits in kind.
Stage 3
Your initial investors now effectively have their shares for zero, and still have control of the board. You plan now for the refinancing stages you knew all along would be necessary
Stage 4
You decide to raise funds through a discounted rights issue. Now you have a choice on how you do this, and to avoid a technical white paper on here, you will go for whatever gives you the absolute control you want assuming the requisitioners don’t take up their rights. That could be a 3 for 10 issues, it could be 1 for 2 , it could even be 1 for 1. Whatever it is will be geared to raise the minimum needed to cashflow through at least 12 months.
There is the possibility that the requisitioners could take up their rights, or sell the right to buy at a discounted price to someone else. However you probably figure that risk is low, and even if they do take it up, it will give you more working capital whilst still controlling how its spent
Stage 5
Discounted rights issue is succesful, lets say to the tune of £10 million, because you bought and ensured the funds needed were put in place. Your opposition didnt subscribe and are now an irrelevance as their shareholding presents no threat to you at all, and you are able to have MH savage them publicly for yet again failing to write the cheque . All mouth and no trousers as you have been telling everyone all along.
The reality for the initial investors is you will completely control a business which has over a 3 year period had investment of £32.5 million through ipo and rights issue, £5.5 million to buy the assets and £28 million through 3 tranches of season book money. Total £66 million over 3 years, and your end is nett £10 million for complete control. That £10 million will now be worth double when the top league is reached.
Caveats
The requisitioners may feel they have to stay at the table and buy into the rights issue. However with no board control that seems very unlikely.
The other caveat is getting to the top league at the first attempt. McCoist has fairly spectacularly managed to mess up Whyte’s chances of making it through 2012, he repeated the incompetence last season, so no guarantees he gets them up to the SPL in one go.
All in all, the initial investors are probably feeling its all going reasonably to plan…….hypothetically of course
Reilly1926 says: (201)
December 3, 2013 at 10:47 pm
I’m aware that club’s offiically released attendances include season ticket holders regardless of whether they’ve bothered to take up their seat on the night. I gather both sides of the Old Firm do that, not sure about other clubs.
Lets not forget that one particular individual, namely David Murray :slamb: , started this Train Crash!
I can understand why Murray ( :slamb: ) has been protected, after all he sold the carcass for £1, Knight of the Realm after all! Fair doo’s!
“Officially” Murray has gone to pasture, whether that’s true or not! If he has retired, then I just hope that the Law of the Land will eventually catch up with him one day.
However, another individual is up to his armpits in the stench! This individual currently holds the position of:
“President of The Scottish Football Association :slamb: ”
Despite the fact that both CEO’s of the SFA and SPFL find it acceptable to keep this individual in post, and also despite the fact this individual SHOULD have voluntarily resigned due to a “Conflict of Interest”, I am extremely P$£ssed Off that not one of the other 41 League Clubs has ever came forward and DEMANDED that he goes now!
Ogilvie is holding back the progression of Scottish Football at the moment. I’m sure that with him out to pasture, Regan might just have the freedom to take the game forward.
Get Rid now! Regan, Grow a Pair!
41 Clubs and not one questioned his re-election? FFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Or maybe he is “The Greatest Administrator in The World!”
I’ve only ever seen 2 of his words of wisdom, first one after Lawell’s comments and,secondly, throwing flares on the pitch! What exactly does he do apart from arranging EBT’s?
It’s time for the SFA to have a good clearout!
Reilly1926 says: (201)
December 3, 2013 at 10:47 pm
__________________
Or possibly ‘manipulate’ cash flow figures. As was oft common practice, allegedly, at football grounds the length & breadth of the country, including Celtic Park*, during the 60’s & 70’s.
* “Jock Stein: The Definitive Biography”. Archie Macpherson.
Reilly1926 says: (201)
December 3, 2013 at 10:47 pm
5 0 Rate This
bryce9a says: (81)
December 3, 2013 at 10:28 pm
I gather the official attendance at Ibrox, if that is to where you refer, was in the region of 38’000
———————————————-
You really shouldn’t believe everything you’re “officially” told mate . A lot of it is what they call spin to make people feel good about certain unpalatable situations.
😆
==============================
Sevco have 36k season ticket holders
common practice is to count all tickets sold – even if they don’t turn up
so, 38k means 2k non season ticket holders turned up, on top of the 36k that may or may not have turned up
Midweek game for a club romping their league with no real challenge – i’m surprised anyone even bothered to go and fund the spivs as they fleece the club.
I just listened to Q&A session from last week with P.Murray, M. Murray, J McColl, G Smith a couple of others and 500 Sevco fans.
M Murray spoke about merchandise and the fact only made £1.3 million in the last 15 months. He stated as a world wide global brand Sevco should be selling 1 million tops which would bring in £35 million. Problem solved then.
Oh and fans all agreed Lawell runs SFA. P Murray states need to get rangers men on all boards at SFA.
That seemed to work out ok in the past.
Barcabhoy says: (310)
December 3, 2013 at 11:07 pm
%%%%%%
The reverse ponzi. 1p buyers scoop @ 40p, mugs buy @ 70p and watch their emotional investment pay for the 39p and fees.
The rons pick it up for a song and turn it into ‘mirren on the Clyde’.
Brenda
Congratulations
Your worm caught the biggest catch of the past few months,well done.
Barca,
Agreed.
Caveat2 though. If by some miracle ally does get them back to where they feel they belong they will again be potless. As you say yourself those in the know have a problem. They know! They know its a dog. They know its a blumin hungry dog. At what point do they cash out? That’s why I’ve always questioned if they knew some kind of euro restructure was going to come along and bail them out, else why the continued cash leakage when the league is won?
Barcabhoy says: (310)
December 3, 2013 at 11:07 pm
===============
I’ve no doubt that 1-3 is a pretty accurate summation of what has generally happened but I’m not sure about the future in 4-5. I’m not really sure if Stockbridge and whoever is pulling his strings are really interested in running a loss making football clumpany. Once the 1p shares are cashed in they will have had their final monetary win fall. I don’t really think they’ll be bothered to hang about to cash in for 2014/15 season ticket money.
I suspect that Sevco will be put into administration and whoever owns the assets of Ibrox and Murray Parks will rent them out to whoever takes over the running of the club.
To be honest, I really don’t care anymore how much money will be fleeced and taken off to BVI in a swag bag. I have felt sorry for my friends who lost their debentures, but let down by their unwillingness to do anything about it. Same with the folks who bought the IPO last year – its not as is anyone never warned them. Its not my fault they continue to lose money – its down to people (ahem!) who are willing to peddle any nonsense from Jack Irvine to maintain the myth that is the “then, now and forever” fairytale to keep the Bears believing in the rainbow – only the pot of gold has been taken by the spivs!
The real culprits who I care about that allowed this all to happen were Neil Doncaster and Regan along with the puppet master CO (Serious question – under what criteria is someone measured to become the worlds best administrator and who decided he met that criteria? Jack Irvine?)
Neil was the first to fantasize about clubs shedding debts and staying afloat – at the same time Walter, Charles, Traynor and their ilk were all wishing the new club good fortune.
So let’s focus on the miscreants – the ones who tried to bully Sir Turnbull of Hutton and his fellow chairmen into accepting what they were told was good for them along with promises of enrichment if they went along with SFL1 plans for Sevco. The same ones who preached Armagedon and Social Unrest and have not been seen or heard of since, while all their predictions go awry.
So my only concern is that if or when there is an event such as Barca’s good post indicates is feasible or Goosy’s long range forecasting turns out to be on the mark, we need to ensure that there are no special cases anymore with SFA and SPFL. Each member must all be treated the same – no favours, no special considerations and no rule bending. And moreover no more back room deals – everything explained to the hard of thinking exactly why/what/where etc.
What has been done over the last 18 months needs to be understood for the good of the game. Without this warts and all analysis backed up with documentation and resignations of the culprits, there can be no cleansing of the game and coming together. The 5 way (note Bryce09 not 4 Way) agreement MUST be published. The Pinsett report given to the SFA MUST be published. The transparency promised MUST be adhered to. The WTC MUST be explained by SFA why it was excluded from LNS and the implications surrounding the UEFA license.
Ally and Mini Murray want TRFC to be cleansed – and hopefully BDO are also “cleansing” the old club RFC-NIL and putting SDM under the microscope – so while they are all doing that, how about the SFA and SPFL all getting a similar high pressure hose to get rid of the muck that has accumulated at Hampden. I would hope that it would be easier to cleanse Hampden than Ibrokes!
With impending UTT decisions, possible UEFA places being allocated if TRFC do indeed make the final and issues with clubs in financial difficulties (not Raith Rovers!), then all of these upcoming issues and decisions need to be shown/explained and communicated in order to ensure that all the members are happy with the decisions. This information also needs to be disseminated to the customers – the fans. Without this, this sore is going to fester – and we will see 2013 as only the beginning of the deep divides and division in Scottish football. If we don’t get it sorted now, it never will be! Only then will the game be able to regain the respect and confidence of its customers. Without this being achieved there is no hope!
The we can progress onto better topics like revenue sharing, grass roots coaching and betterment of our game to get us to a WC in my lifetime hopefully.
The title for a mundane Hollywood blockbuster sums up what The Three Stooges did – We Know What You Did Last Summer! Now let’s deal with the consequences and then lets go from there…………
Just stop asking me to move on in the current scenario!
bryce9a says: (84)
December 3, 2013 at 11:10 pm
I’m aware that club’s offiically released attendances include season ticket holders regardless of whether they’ve bothered to take up their seat on the night. I gather both sides of the Old Firm do that, not sure about other clubs.
=================================
Officially released police figures under F.O.I last season suggest that was the case at both grounds. If you were to believe the media before the police released the figures, it only happened at Celtic Park.
Hello all,
I used to post on RTC,but due to the course and actions,and some times lack of action that the so called governing bodies at Hampden exhibited,I decided to minimise my my following of the domestic game in Scotland.Cancelled the pay tv,dont buy any club merchandise etc.
I still looked in on TSFM regularly,and glad that it is still a platform for people to express amongst other issues the corrupt state that exists in scottish footballing authorities.Hopefully all the dirt will come to the surface,and the game can be cleansed of the imbeciles that have run and ruined a great game.
II see that sevco are claiming another record,soo many games undefeated post war.?,must be the war that occurred in Syria,this outfit are not even 2 years old.
Those stars on the strips……..oh dont get me started
Experiental avoidance. It’s endemic. And possibly square-ish.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/board-nominees-urge-current-directors-to-sign-their-rangers-constitution.22867626
Text size
Send this article to a friend
Print this article
inShare
Board nominees urge current directors to sign their Rangers constitution
Richard Wilson
Sports writer
Wednesday 4 December 2013
THE four nominees seeking election to the Rangers board at the annual meeting later this month have published a Rangers constitution which includes pledges to retain Ibrox and limit non-executive director pay and expenses.
The four men – Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson – have all signed the constitution, and they have urged the current directors to do the same.
There are eight pledges, which formalise any future board’s stance on core principles. They include “ring-fencing Ibrox” and ensuring that future boards can never sell the stadium; that “no director (including his/her family members or close business associates) shall have any financial interest in any contract involving the club; and that “all non-executive director fees are to be waived unless the club is in Europe”.
“We drew up the constitution because of feedback from fans and shareholders,” said Murdoch. “We’ve met all of the institutions and most of the rest of the shareholders and there were a lot of questions about Ibrox. As far as our plans are concerned, we would never consider anything like the sale and leaseback of the stadium, there is no way we would ever get rid of Ibrox, it is our spiritual home.
“We wanted to put down some simple commandments which we have signed up to and which we hope the existing board will also adhere to. We’re not sure about the chairman [David Somers], and we’re certainly not sure about Brian Stockbridge, while the other two [new] directors [Norman Crighton and Graham Wallace] have to prove their independence.”
The constitution pledges commitment to “fan representation on the board”, an undertaking “to ensure that all executive directors’ salaries and bonuses are approved by a Remuneration Committee and subject to market benchmarking”, “total transparency in all club affairs”, “no long-term debt” and the assurance that “all shareholders are treated equally”.
Rangers supporters, who continue to protest against the current board, were angered at the 100% bonus of £200,000 that the finance director Stockbridge took for Rangers winning last season’s third division title. There is also concern that most of the money raised in last December’s Initial Public Offering of Shares has been spent and Stockbridge’s estimate that only around £1m will be left in the accounts come April.
“A number of the institutional investors, as well as some high net-worth Rangers supporters, will invest if there is a clean board at Ibrox,” Murdoch said. “We believe [Charles] Green is still in the background pulling the strings. The [AGM vote] is going to be awfully close. We are hopeful, and quietly confident.”
Can anyone expect Richard Wilson to act journalistically and ask questions? Haha sorry. I’ll get my regurgitation 101 diploma.
“Ring-fencing Ibrox”, “some simple commandmants”, they are angered at Stockbridges £200,000 bonus!
Poor wee lambs, I’m glad they are “quietly confident”.
PMSL is I believe t’internet phrase.
I note that the Requisitioners have now put the ‘Ringfence Ibrox’ out into the wider public domain. The question now is – Is this a scaremongering tactic to get the Bears support or are these respected businessmen who have the backing of some institutional investors convinced, as many on here have been for a while, that Sale & Leaseback is Plan A for the current board?
Partizani Tirana says: (16)
December 4, 2013 at 6:56 am
%%%%%
‘Ring-fencing Ibrox’ is a curious way of putting things. Do they mean that the stadium is given to a trust which is constitutionally incapable of selling what is, except for sevco, a virtually worthless piece of real estate?
Thankfully there is no such requirement to protect the Albion car park from the floggers. Now that is a nice bit of land, ideally placed to benefit from the ‘BBC bounce’.
Why doesn’t the constitution compel the board to abide by the rules of the governing bodies and the law of the land? Seems to me if DM had had this constitution he wouldn’t have had to flog the million shirt club for £1.
“We wanted to put down some simple commandments which we have signed up to and which we hope the existing board will also adhere to.
Yeah,great stuff. Here’s one you could run up the flag pole and see who salutes it
THOU SHALT NOT STEAL!
So four nonentities, who may or may not be minor shareholders, lead by a former powder puff ex director of RFC (IL), are attempting to dictate to the board of RIFC PLC
They appear to be long on talk, but crucially extremely short of readies, promising jam tomorrow from nameless high nett worth individuals, and institutional investors
You couldn’t mark their necks with an oxyacetylene burner
Like all of the would be leaders,past and present, they do know however, which strings to pluck, to get the mob onside, and back their vision of a glorious bright blue future
They present themselves as the acceptable face of modern spivdom, whilst playing the real Rangers men card
Should they manage to oust the present incumbents, I suspect we will see a lot of rhetoric, and very little action
They are no more than an “everything for nothing” cabal, and if they do manage to pull off their boardroom coup, the “Berz” will see through them very quickly especially if they try to make them live within their means
Another ‘fast track’ production brought to you by the SFA. 3 separate charges were made against Nadir Ciftci, all were either scrubbed or downgraded.
Meanwhile, the officials involved continue appointments under SFA auspices, and Campbell Ogilvie keeps schtum. Nobody is in the slightest embarrassed over the affair, it appears.
borussiabeefburg says: (201)
December 4, 2013 at 9:19 am
====================================
borussia, It certainly looks like the SFA have made a royal mess of this. I gather there was a free for all but haven’t seen pictures of the incident. Did Ciftci actually lay hands on the Assistant Referee?
Re: this Ciftci thing…
So, St.Johnstone defender Fraizer Wright got a 3 match ban for arguing with the 4th official… if only he’d known he could have twatted him in the throat and only got a 1 match ban (the 2nd being suspended)
It really goes to show how inept the people in charge of our game are…
blu and stevensanph, as far as I understand it, the officials didn’t realise Dundee United had their own cameras at the match which caught the supposed throttling of the official, and those clips helped exonerate the player. As far as ‘laying hands’ on the official goes (or ‘twatting’ him, stevensanph), the video I watched showed the linesman running in to the player who was pointing a finger accusingly at him (perhaps understandably, as the linesman had wrongly advised he be sent off).
On the official club site, Jackie McNamara said, “Whilst still disappointed at the outcome we respect the decision and accept that it is now a time to draw a line under this and move on. It is more disappointing that the sending off on the night of the game probably cost us our place in the Cup.” I think this would show the player was fully supported by the club throughout.
It shows “how inept the people in charge of our game are…” in that the player is injured anyway this weekend, so a one game ban basically has absolutely no effect, apart from covering the backs of the officials.
This may be OT as it doesn’t concern the club which plays at Ibrox, but it highlights the rather shady behaviour of SFA officials, so please bear with me. On 29th October, DUFC played ICTFC in a League Cup tie at Inverness. DUFC lead by 1-0 when an off-the-ball incident lit the touch paper for an old fashioned, Arthur Montford style, stramash. Players from both sides were involved. One player, DUFC’s Nadir Ciftci, was red carded for misconduct. After a further 75 minutes of play, ICT won the tie 2-1 AET.
DUFC (the club, rather than the company) was not happy with the referee’s decision and appealed Ciftci’s red card. Shortly after appealing, the SFA issued two charges against the same player. On Thursday 7 November a Disciplinary Tribunal convened in accordance with the Judicial Panel Protocol to consider the matter. DUFC’s claim of wrongful dismissal for violent conduct was upheld and the sending-off reduced to a caution.
The first charge brought by the SFA Compliance Officer (Violent Conduct by grabbing an opposing player by his face) was found to be not proven and no sanction was applied. The second, and far more serious, charge was not fast tracked, and was subsequently adjourned twice due to unavailability of witnesses. The matter was eventually considered last night (3 December).
The allegation was one of “excessive misconduct at a match by seizing hold of an Assistant Referee, namely Gavin Harris, by the throat”. As I understand the matter, the club (not the company) was not aware of any substantive evidence which would prove the allegation; just the opposite in fact.
The outcome of the Tribunal, rather suspiciously to one wearing tangerine tinted glasses, resulted in the excessive misconduct charge being proved but in relation to an amended charge, namely: “Excessive misconduct at a match by placing an open hand into the lower area of the Assistant Referee’s throat.” The sanction to be applied is a two-match suspension (one match immediate and one match suspended until the end of season 2013/14, to take effect in the event of a breach of Disciplinary Rule 201 during that period).
So, none of the allegations made during or after the match were upheld, yet the SFA manage to find something with which to find Ciftci guilty. I find this change of allegation at the last minute rather strange and, from a cynical perspective, rather convenient. I must away and check the Disciplinary Tribunal rulebook to ensure procedure has been followed. Equally concerning for me is that either the match or SFA officials may have concocted a story to suit the circumstances. That would never happen, would it?
stevensanph says: (192)
December 4, 2013 at 9:40 am
5 0 Rate This
Re: this Ciftci thing…
So, St.Johnstone defender Fraizer Wright got a 3 match ban for arguing with the 4th official… if only he’d known he could have twatted him in the throat and only got a 1 match ban (the 2nd being suspended)
It really goes to show how inept the people in charge of our game are…
—————————————-
of course….if you are a Rangers player….then there is no case to answer!
Constitutions ,they are really taking the p#ss out of the bers now ,who in the 4 amigos came out with this one ,no dont tell me ,let me guess over the next 5 seconds, the craic gets better and better from the jokers in this pack ,the foundations for a very good circus act are starting to appear from this lot ,roll up ,roll up. 4 for a pound
andypandimonium says: (12)
December 4, 2013
So, none of the allegations made during or after the match were upheld, yet the SFA manage to find something with which to find Ciftci guilty. I find this change of allegation at the last minute rather strange and, from a cynical perspective, rather convenient. I must away and check the Disciplinary Tribunal rulebook to ensure procedure has been followed. Equally concerning for me is that either the match or SFA officials may have concocted a story to suit the circumstances. That would never happen, would it?
======
This is exactly what TSFM should be looking at. We should be looking for the SFA to uphold rules (yeah) and hold them to account when they dont. Or indeed when they make things up as they go along.
andypandimonium says: (12)
December 4, 2013 at 10:10 am
===================================
andy, getting back to the match – did any of the officials start the stramash or get involved in it other than to try to sort things out? Did the players all behave like perfect gentlemen? Were the officials entitled to feel harassed?
Brenda says: (720)
December 3, 2013 at 10:26 pm
0 1 Rate This
Totally OT but was there a new record set for the lowest crowd at the park which the team in blue play at tonight???
I gather the official attendance at Ibrox, if that is to where you refer, was in the region of 38’000.
===========================================
I heard a wee rumour that last night’s half time draw didnt take place due to lack of sales/attendance, anyone confirm or deny this. Wonder what happens to the monies collected.?
“A number of the institutional investors, as well as some high net-worth Rangers supporters, will invest if there is a clean board at Ibrox,”
————————————————————————————————————–
WILL invest ? That’s a categorical , unequivocal statement ?
Is Richard Wilson not asking questions about Murdoch making this assertion ?
I begin to wonder about these “institutional investors”, I really do. Do they live in institutions , for the mentally impaired ? “Investing” in a massively loss making company (see what I did there Bryce ?). It’s absolutely laughable that the press in Glasgow continue to repeat this drivel.
The requisitioners are nothing but a bunch of chancers , to use a good old Scottish word. Doesn’t sound like they are that confident of winning at the agm. Let the melt down commence.
As regards the proposed “ring-fencing” of Ibrox, could this really be done legally? Fine if RIFC was a private company, but it isn’t, there are loads of shareholders, many of whom may have bought shares on the basis of the property values shown in the prospectus.
The directors of any PLC have a duty in law to look after the financial interests of the shareholders. Any properties “ring-fenced” in the way that Murray is suggesting immediately become worthless, since they can never be sold. How could that be in the financial interests of the shareholders?
The PLC is only solvent on paper due to the property values in the balance sheet. If those values are wiped out by ring-fencing the properties, then RIFC immediately becomes insolvent and has to enter administration.
These points seem blindingly obvious to me. Paul Murray is a Chartered Account and has served as a PLC director. He must surely know that this proposal is pie in the sky to be ranked alongside hoverpitches, 500 million fans, a million replica tops, Dallas Cowboys, etc, etc, etc. So why don’t our fearless journalists put a few obvious pertinent questions? Oh, pardon me, I forgot, when it comes to the Ibrox panto, no real questions are ever asked. Silly me.
It is very noticeable that McColl seems to be putting as much distance between himself and PM as possible in the shortest time that decency allows. They won’t be seeing a bent curdie out of him, that is nailed on certain. Sensible man.
neepheid says: (913)
December 4, 2013 at 11:20 am
As a qualified CA, you would also expect Mr Murray to be fully conversant with Insolvency Law
This appears not to be the case, as borne out by his comments last week, regarding Club & Company
I wonder what his Professional body would make of this
neepheid says: (913)
December 4, 2013 at 11:20 am
Agree that once again questions need to be asked as opposed to just prinitng the guff coming out of anyone remotely related to T’Rangers.
I am not on twitter but is it worth someone tweeting Doglas Fraser at the BBC to see if he has any opinion on what the implcations are of effectively removing the main property asset from the balance sheet? May get it in the open.
Same to Tom English who may be up for opening up the debate?
I know it ain’t the be all an end off of investing but in the Dragons Den the investors always want a degree of cover and very quickly home in on any property assests that may be available if their punt goes mammaries skyward.
Are banks and others offering credit facilites really going to part with cash on the basis that ‘the club’ has a net full of quality match balls and a few players who could easily break down at any time and be worthless.
If Ibrox is ringfenced by the constitution then does that mean that Murray Park up for grabs. If so what happens to the sustainable developent of young talent etc ?
Frankly I think the idea of a constituion for this or any football club as a means of oputlining its aims objectives and operating principles is a sound idea. However what has been produced by people we are supposed to believe are highly regarded professionals is just a piece of nonsense.
It’s very easy and convenient to blame the three Aunt Sallys (Doncaster Regan, Ogilvy) for everything, God know they do bear a lot of the responsibility. However, the inconvenient truth is, that, without the active support of their boards, and the wider support of the clubs, they simply wouldn’t b there.
It’s also easy to deride Mr Paul Murray as a powder puff director, easy because, there is more than a grain of truth in it. Holding to account without fear or favour, means applying the same standards to everyone, regardless of any other factors.
To do otherwise, is simply to engage in the sort of partizan hypocrisy that many Rangers types are accused of.
I know those who support the team playing at Ibrox don’t get much praise on here, and Clyde SSB even less.
But yesterday, mixed with the Keevins’ patronizing were some sincere fans who were very concerned about the present, and for the future. Starting at about 29min in there was a call from one of the founders of the Sons of Struth. Everything else aside, he came across as someone who was hurting enough to act, and to take aim at those who are actually hurting his club.
Interesting too that the ‘Sons’ number only about 1,000. The caller mentioned 5,000 likes on Facebook which might indicate a slightly larger following, but for those of us wondering where the decent fans are and what their numbers are, well, that just might be an indication. Pityfully few, but probably enough to start an alternate club.
The next two calls were also on similar-ish themes. So that middle 20 minutes of the podcast is worth a listen.
I know, I know, but it is difficult to monitor the media by boycotting it, even though it does induce nausea at times.
wottpi says: (1301)
December 4, 2013 at 11:49 am
MP is a difficult one, they have missed the opportunity to benefit from the planning gain. There may be an opportunity to offload/lease it to the SFA as a footballing academy, with Rangers youth development getting a percentage of the facility usage as part of the deal? Such a deal would probably not fall foul of the Sport Scotland charge?
Or are they confirming that Bomber was on to something?
I thought I’d write a short post on the kind of thing that gets me excited. When it comes to the team that plays in Rangers colours, I’m never short of a fantasy or two that normally involves something disastrous happening to the Ibrox club.
I don’t think that’s particularly out of the ordinary.
There’s many out there like me, and I don’t doubt for a minute that it wouldn’t be the same for any other supporter of any other club looking down upon the supporters of a club purporting to wear the badge and colours of what used to be their greatest rivals.
However the scenario I am about to impart to you may not be that fantastical at all.
Let’s assume, for instance, that the Spivs win the forthcoming AGM, and let’s also assume that Malcolm Murray turns out to be correct- that Rangers International enter administration around April, before the season is out.
What would the SPFL or SFA do, as per their new rules?
Do we think, for example, that they would impose a 15 point penalty for a club entering administration for the first time, eg acknowledging that Rangers International are indeed a new club- or would they deduct 25 points for a club having entered administration for the second time within 5 years, thus maintaining the widely held myth that Rangers International are one and the same thing as the now defunct Rangers?
What a quandary indeed for Messrs. Ogilvie, Regan and Doncaster!
Imagine the double- whammied, sickening blow it would be for the Bears if it was only 15 points. Imagine the anger, as they email the authorities en masse, and write to Alex Salmond, and phone the hotlines. Imagine the fury as they scream their outrage from their keyboards at the fact the authorities have bent to Peter Lawwell’s omnipotent and omnipresent will by not imposing a 25 point penalty for a second time offence.
Conversely, imagine the frustration and air of unreality as the authorities impose a 25 point penalty, potentially denying them a promotion place to the Championship. The poor wee souls will be able to tell themselves they are the “real thing”, but be besides themselves facing the prospect of having to languish in Scotland’s third tier for another season.
Now that is the stuff of Barty’s dreams! Sometimes dreams can come true…
Of course it may not come to that. Laxey Partners may simply agitate whoever is incumbent on the Rangers International board at the time to sell their assets, stop making new investments and be charged with handing back all of its capital to investors in order to maximise return for the shareholders in the face of a company that is performing poorly on the markets. The precedent for this is when Laxey Partners attempted to do just this with a company called 3i.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/9177386/Laxey-Partners-demands-3i-sells-assets-returns-cash-and-halts-investing.html
In the end, Laxey Partners called a truce on the 3i group, but not before the company agreed to make sweeping changes such as significant job cuts, in order to save costs.
Whatever happens, though, I just hope we get the chance to play them soon.
Why?
Simply because I want Celtic to be given the opportunity to equal or better the Hearts score before either the Ibrox club and it’s companies slip into obscurity entirely, or before they get stronger, to such a stage where a complete and utter humiliation on the park becomes less likely when they finally meet Scotland’s champions and Champions League representatives.
I’m hoping we get the chance for a scoreline similar PSV’s famous 10- 0 thrashing of Feyenoord before it’s too late.
I think, if I’m being honest with you, that you probably do too, if you’re a Celtic supporter.
They are after all, the same fans.
Of that there is no doubt!
andypandimonium says: (12)
December 4, 2013 at 10:10 am
blu says: (471)
December 4, 2013 at 10:51 am
===========================
Re the DUtd/ICT match. I’m not quite sure I follow your arguement andy, and agree with you Blu. There is video evidence (because I have seen it) of Ciftci “grabbing an opponent by the face” which when I saw it in slow motion I immediately thought looked more like an eye gouge. Yes it required the film slowed down and it helped that the BBC enhanced the section of the film that he did it in. I do not believe for a minute the other 21 players were acting like angels but fundamentally the guy was caught in real time, pure and simple.
The linesman thing is a bit more interesting. I understand it blew up basically because again it was caught on film, firstly BBC’s (or it may have been ICT’s own) confirming it happened presumably supporting what would have been in the ref’s report. I knew there was then a complication, which I take to be your bit Andy, that DUtd had their own camera which also caught the incident and proved it to be less serious, hence the charge downgrade from a throttling movement to a more general handbags kind of thing.
Again, he was caught though, so I don’t understand the ‘controversy.’
The only question for me is the charge relative to others, such as the St Johnstone one mentioned above. IMHO the charge actually seems about right (2 games, none of this suspended nonsense) for the initial fracas where contact and especially contact to face is frowned upon, and what is basically a slap on the wrists for the Linesman bit which seems to be a bit of a toodo about nothing, assuming of course, he does nothing similar again. Every player should know you can’t raise your hands. To do it to a linesman was never going to end well but on this occasion I’ll accept a degree of leniency because of the differing versions on it and I’ll be entirely fair, because it was a foreign player to whom barging the ref was maybe perceived to be accetable.
Doesn’t change the fact that he was caught though.
EDIT: Sorry Andy, meant to add…I am aware that the actual charge made makes less sense since they withdrew the first and changed the second, when above I have supported exactly the opposite. I was more picking up on your comment “None of the allegations were upheld, yet they still found something with which to find him guilty.” Were they supposed to ignore something they found that indicated he was guilty, albeit of a lesser charge?
Danish Pastry says: (1758)
December 4, 2013 at 12:16 pm
Interesting too that the ‘Sons’ number only about 1,000. The caller mentioned 5,000 likes on Facebook which might indicate a slightly larger following, but for those of us wondering where the decent fans are and what their numbers are, well, that just might be an indication. Pityfully few, but probably enough to start an alternate club.
==============================================
The RST was quoted as having 5,000 members I think. I would be interested to know what the total membership of the various fan organisations are.
Before the Partick Thistle Supporters Trust (aka The Jags Trust) imploded, it had about 1000 members which represented almost 50% of the average Firhill gate at the time.
That a company with consistent gates of ~40k has less than 10% of its customers involved in a fans group is shocking, especially given that many supporters’ trusts exist to provide a means for fans to exercise their gums in relation to board room antics.
One reason could be that Supporters Direct seem to be completely ignoring the shennanigans, however, I would recommend joining your trust as you will have a vote and an opportunity to influence their agenda…
Para Handy says: (22)
December 4, 2013 at 1:06 pm
I’m not surprised at the low membership of the various fans groups. Historically, they have spent more time fighting each other than they have actually acting as advocates for the views of their members. I think most Rangers fans see the fan groups as vehicles for a select few individuals personal agendas, including pursuit of the fabled blue blazers.
Until that perception changes, the Rangers fans groups will be incapable of shaping events.
Neepheid – I asked the same question a couple of days ago. I think the investors in RIFC, the bulk of whom are not “fans” but institutional investors, who wholly own TRFC would have to sanction this. That ain’t going to happen.
Pre-IPO much was made of the property values as a rationale for buying in. Post-IPO valuations of property owned by…. well anyway, properties were revauled to £40M. Putting these assets “beyond reach” would I believe entail taking them off-balance sheet, f thathappened, the accounts would have to a record a £40m impairment to the balance sheet and that would clearly make them insolvent.
jockybhoy says: (285)
December 4, 2013 at 1:19 pm
its a giant squirrel aimed at the Rangers fans. It’s typical of the deeply cynical tactics, that both the current owners, and the many contenders have used in pursuit of their goals. This particular ruse has as much chance of coming to fruition, as I have of making the next 1st XV at Murrayfield.
Rangers consitution, point 8: “All non-executive Director fees are to be waived unless the Club is in Europe.”
Good wording – last time I checked, the Club were in Glasgow. Which is in Europe. So NED fees will be fine, unless they go on a pre-season tour of America or China. In which case the “Club” will be out of Europe. The Company will still be in Glasgow, in Europe, but I presume the ethereal “Club” entity travels with the team – so no NED fees payable during that time.
I should cut down on the coffee.
BartinMain says: (103)
December 4, 2013 at 12:49 pm
===
I asked the same question a couple of days ago.
In my opinion it will simply come down to how far The Rangers are ahead in League three.
One of the Irvine loyal (Bryce I think) stated that it would definetely be a 25 point deduction.
But if they win the Scottish cup or are runners up, I’d expect that to change.
Danish Pastry says: (1758)
December 4, 2013 at 12:16 pm
——————————–
Sorry, danish, the Sons are hurting now because they can see their tribute act club is about to go the way of their original club.
they have no remorse about what happened in the past, they are not prepared to change their ways and support their club on a level footing, they just want the spivs to stop taking money out of their club (not unreasonably) so that someone else can pump money into them to “get them back where they belong” and then they’ll show us all, all those who had fly kicks etc etc.
they are only acting now to prevent what happened before – they are not driving an agenda for long term, sustainable change.
Partizani Tirana says: (18)
December 4, 2013 at 1:29 pm
2 0 Rate This
BartinMain says: (103)
December 4, 2013 at 12:49 pm
===
I asked the same question a couple of days ago.
In my opinion it will simply come down to how far The Rangers are ahead in League three.
One of the Irvine loyal (Bryce I think) stated that it would definetely be a 25 point deduction.
But if they win the Scottish cup or are runners up, I’d expect that to change.
===============================
Serious point here.
If RIFC go into administration does it automatically follow that RFC similarly enter administration? No doubt Mr Bryson has a formula for working all this out that doesn’t involve any loss of points or league status.
p.s If Bryce is reading I don’t care how this would be/has been dealt with in England. Our guys in charge follow a rulebook that is world’s apart from anything that is used in the rest of footieland.
The whole Shiftygate episode reeks.
The back pages were full of 16 match bans, who said this to the press pack? Whose report accused Shifty of strangling an official? Why did the charge change? Could it be anything to do with the fact Dundee United had video footage of the entire incident? Whose face is being saved, I suspect it is not the player! I smell a fudge…………
arabest1 says: (411)
December 4, 2013 at 1:47 pm
There is a pungent aroma about this case, but it ain’t fudge… Maybe Shifty and the club should take a leaf out of the Fergus McCann playbook, and appeal this all the way?
Exiled Celt says: (831)
December 4, 2013 at 2:04 am
86
0
Rate Down
Quantcast
To be honest, I really don’t care anymore how much money will be fleeced and taken off to BVI in a swag bag. I have felt sorry for my friends who lost their debentures, but let down by their unwillingness to do anything about it. Same with the folks who bought the IPO last year – its not as is anyone never warned them. Its not my fault they continue to lose money – its down to people (ahem!) who are willing to peddle any nonsense from Jack Irvine to maintain the myth that is the “then, now and forever” fairytale to keep the Bears believing in the rainbow – only the pot of gold has been taken by the spivs!
The real culprits who I care about that allowed this all to happen were Neil Doncaster and Regan along with the puppet master CO (Serious question – under what criteria is someone measured to become the worlds best administrator and who decided he met that criteria? Jack Irvine?)
Neil was the first to fantasize about clubs shedding debts and staying afloat – at the same time Walter, Charles, Traynor and their ilk were all wishing the new club good fortune.
So let’s focus on the miscreants – the ones who tried to bully Sir Turnbull of Hutton and his fellow chairmen into accepting what they were told was good for them along with promises of enrichment if they went along with SFL1 plans for Sevco. The same ones who preached Armagedon and Social Unrest and have not been seen or heard of since, while all their predictions go awry.
So my only concern is that if or when there is an event such as Barca’s good post indicates is feasible or Goosy’s long range forecasting turns out to be on the mark, we need to ensure that there are no special cases anymore with SFA and SPFL. Each member must all be treated the same – no favours, no special considerations and no rule bending. And moreover no more back room deals – everything explained to the hard of thinking exactly why/what/where etc.
What has been done over the last 18 months needs to be understood for the good of the game. Without this warts and all analysis backed up with documentation and resignations of the culprits, there can be no cleansing of the game and coming together. The 5 way (note Bryce09 not 4 Way) agreement MUST be published. The Pinsett report given to the SFA MUST be published. The transparency promised MUST be adhered to. The WTC MUST be explained by SFA why it was excluded from LNS and the implications surrounding the UEFA license.
Ally and Mini Murray want TRFC to be cleansed – and hopefully BDO are also “cleansing” the old club RFC-NIL and putting SDM under the microscope – so while they are all doing that, how about the SFA and SPFL all getting a similar high pressure hose to get rid of the muck that has accumulated at Hampden. I would hope that it would be easier to cleanse Hampden than Ibrokes!
With impending UTT decisions, possible UEFA places being allocated if TRFC do indeed make the final and issues with clubs in financial difficulties (not Raith Rovers!), then all of these upcoming issues and decisions need to be shown/explained and communicated in order to ensure that all the members are happy with the decisions. This information also needs to be disseminated to the customers – the fans. Without this, this sore is going to fester – and we will see 2013 as only the beginning of the deep divides and division in Scottish football. If we don’t get it sorted now, it never will be! Only then will the game be able to regain the respect and confidence of its customers. Without this being achieved there is no hope!
The we can progress onto better topics like revenue sharing, grass roots coaching and betterment of our game to get us to a WC in my lifetime hopefully.
The title for a mundane Hollywood blockbuster sums up what The Three Stooges did – We Know What You Did Last Summer! Now let’s deal with the consequences and then lets go from there…………
Just stop asking me to move on in the current scenario!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For me change of personnel and culture at the SFA is a key issue and I believe Campbell Ogilvie is incredibly vulnerable as a result of his role in the LNS Commission not only by his policy of silence (but using Bryson as his ventriloquist dummy) but what he did not volunteer to LNS under testimony which in turn prejudiced the LNS decision.
If correct this has huge ramifications for the LNS Commission and its findings, which I think the SP(F)L and the SFA would rather remain buried.
I was asked by a poster a few weeks back to articulate a narrative setting out the issues. This I have done, but because the evidence of deception is of doubtful provenance, not that the evidence itself is in doubt, there is no question of that, it cannot be published.
However if any poster wishes to read it then send me a PM with their e mail address. I would like to hear from supporters of Aberdeen (who have already made contact) , Dundee Utd, Hamilton, Alloa and Stenhousemuir , who all have representatives on the SPFL Board, but also from all clubs now that the leagues fall under one umbrella,( although top tier clubs at the time LNS was commissioned will have a particular interest)
I am thinking those supporters can either individually or more effectively through their supporter trusts or associations, approach their clubs and ask them to approach the SPFL to get verification of the narrative and, if true, what the implications are for the LNS Commission, the Campbell Ogilvie testimony and whether he and Craig Bryson spoke of the registration issue and agreed on the interpretation whilst Campbell Ogilvie knew some ebts were irregular.
(I know Celtic have Eric Reilly on the SFA Board, but if any change is to be made it must come from the other clubs because they think it is right and proper, not because Celtic think so).
So if you really want an opportunity to change things send me a PM and say what club you support.
Regarding a future insolvency event down Ibrox way, I believe it is Section E of the SPFL rules that is relevant. However (and I apologise for repeating this), my reading is that the rules refer to Insolvency Events further to an initial insolvency event in terms of these rules . As such an Insolvency Event would be the first in terms of the SPFL rules, it would attract a penalty of 15 points (and the New Club/Old Club debate would be body-swerved).
Perhaps Hirsute (or Bryce??) or anyone legally qualified would care to comment?
1. wottpi says: (1301)
December 4, 2013 at 11:49 am
Frankly I think the idea of a constitution for this or any football club as a means of outlining its aims objectives and operating principles is a sound idea. However what has been produced by people we are supposed to believe are highly regarded professionals is just a piece of nonsense.
————————–
I think we can agree that this is not a constitution built around ensuring Rangers as a club, organisation or institution survives any type of future ownership model, for me, it’s simply a mechanism for calling the bluff of the present board and attempting to get the fans onside.
Now the idea itself is fantastic and should be rolled out across all clubs, an efficient and effective controlling organisation (like The SFA) could see this as an ideal opportunity to align itself with the fans and promote the implementation of this initiative for the coming seasons.
Here’s my take on the eight pledges as proposed by the “Ibrox 4”:
1. Ring-fence stadium
I can see why that might be important, a club and fans need a place they can associate with. Spiritual or traditional or whatever, the stadium can be important and I can see why it might be nice to secure it but the fact is that building does not belong to future fans, it belongs to whoever owns the club and they can sell whenever they wish to do so. This is one of the key oldco/newco debating points as without the asset of the “big hoose”, a huge part of that identity disappears and that is the only reason it is on this list.
2. No directors allowed financial interest in club contracts
100% agree!
3. Non-executive director fees waived unless club plays in European competition
Rubbish, people should get paid for doing a job; the relevant point is how much. It could be low (depending on the time spent doing the job and bonus could be paid depending on how well the club is run or how the team performs on the field.
4. Fan representation on board
I am not a fan of this idea, never have been. I could pick out any 3 fans at random and I would bet my next salary that they could not find agreement on how to solve some of the basic issues involving a football club, they are intelligent enough but trying to balance expectations with reality should not be left to the fans. What I would rather see is trust based on actions, more fan interaction and a better way of communicating major decisions. Fans can be part of the decision making process without being another shirt and tie.
5. Executive director salaries/bonuses are subject to market benchmarking
100% agree
6. Total transparency in all club affairs
Transparency is a must but that has to be defined and restricted so that any contracts and other important confidential information do not compromise the business or individuals.
7. No long-term debt
How do you build a new stadium without long term debt? This has to be defined, how much? What type? Aside from large costs such as refurbishment of properties or new builds like training grounds then I would agree, stay clear of long term loans and live within means.
8. All shareholders treated equally
Again, how does that work? Rules exist for voting rights etc… but what does “equally” actually mean, let’s insist on some definitions rather than just banding nice sounding words around.
As a fan, here is the type of things I would like to see from a club constitution:
1. A fixed percentage of profits given to local community projects
2. A mission statement that clearly sets out the club ethos and identity
3. No directors allowed financial interest in club contracts
4. A minimum number of home grown players in every squad and a clearly defined strategy on nurturing or buying required talent to enhance the team and progress the club
5. All salaries of all employees are subject to benchmarking, no employee paid below the living wage and no player above an agreed cap based on total squad budget
6. Clearly defined transparency rules in all club affairs as agreed between board and fans groups
7. No long-term debt.
8. All individuals treated equally
9. A clearly defined strategy on merchandising, no more 6th choice, reserve team, long sleeved, kick about shirts.
10. A kids section in the stadium where a minimum amount of seats are not sold but given to different schools around the city to ensure those kids who cannot afford to attend can experience a match at least once.
This list is off the cuff so they will need to be polished up a little and of course does not have to be limited only to these 10, it is just a flavour of the type of thing I would like to see my club adopt and promote.
I would go further and list the standards expected of my players, something that the club and the managers and coaches endorse, for instance:
1. No diving
2. No leg breakers
3. No claiming fouls, throw-ins or corners that are clearly for the other team
4. No abusing or trying to cheat the referee or players from the other teams
Again, not a limited list, just some of the things I hate to see players doing and would like my club to take the lead on implementing.
This has got to be a joke
• We will never sell the stadium. We will ring-fence the assets to ensure this can never happen again. This is our home and will always remain our home.
• We are committed to fan representation on the board
• No director (including his/her family members or close business associates) shall have any financial interest in any contract involving the club.
• We will undertake to ensure that all executive directors’ salaries and bonuses are approved by the renumeration committee and subject to market benchmarking
• We will undertake to ensure that all shareholders are treated equally
• We will undertake to ensure that there is total transparency in all club affairs
• There will be no long-term debt
• All non-executive director fees are to be waived unless the club is in Europe
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/gang-of-four-rangers-rebels-issue-charter-1-3220011
Angus1983 says: (1274)
December 4, 2013 at 1:25 pm
” I should cut down on the coffee.”
=====================
No the coffee is fine, cut down the Bryceee.
Madbhoy24941 says: (331)
December 4, 2013 at 1:56 pm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Violently disagree with your comments about fan representation. Part of the reason Rangers are where they are is because of the distorted information fed to them over the years and their unquestioning loyalty to their elders and betters. Fans on the Board would give them half a chance.
You say basically that fans are not smart enough to run a club – most people are they just need to learn how to in the same way we all learned our jobs.
In the event of The Rangers suffering an administration event, the only sure thing is that the ‘consequence’ will be something they can handle, and the blame will be on Peter Liewell.
scapaflow says: (1242)
December 4, 2013 at 1:53 pm
2 0 Rate This
arabest1 says: (411)
December 4, 2013 at 1:47 pm
There is a pungent aroma about this case, but it ain’t fudge… Maybe Shifty and the club should take a leaf out of the Fergus McCann playbook, and appeal this all the way?
——————————————————————————————-
😆 😆 ….you may well be right about the scent! I wonder if all in all, United felt the 2 match ban was ‘reasonable’ all things considered, and agreed to draw a veil over this incident rather than pursue the officials for their sensationalism/mendacity. The SFA are now a lame duck, still find it hard to believe they could reformat the leagues, after everything they have botched, emerge into a new era, having trousered massive bonuses? Astonishing!
McCaig`s Tower says: (13)
December 4, 2013 at 1:55 pm
If there is a way to minimise the penalty you can be sure attempts will be made to find it but I have a feeling that to all intents and purposes the SPL and SPFL follow the same rules unless the SPFL have specifically changed any.
My memory is vague on it but I thought I read that this is covered in the changeover from SPL to SPFL general rules.
McCaig`s Tower says: (13)
Neither competent nor legally qualified, but its never stopped me before. Rules I suspect were designed to deal with the following. Member (he says carefully avoiding the words club and/or company) goes into administration for the first time. Member gets docked 15 points. Member emerges from administration but cannot sustain it so its admin 2. Member gets docked 25 points. (I recall a change last year that the actual charge is percentage of points won or some such, but the principle, of a more draconian penalty the 2nd time around, is the same). What is the charge on a member that is emerging from liquidation? I’m guessing they never asked themselves that question before. Or even if they did immediately came up against either a lawyer or someone with a dictionary saying why would you need to know?. I could not hazard a guess on this thread why that would be case.
Agree with Angus. Someone mentioned the cup conundrum. Cup aside, I suspect there will still be a conundrum, a campbells quandary if you will, if there isn’t 25 points to spare. Disappointingly I think there will be.
arabest1 says: (412)
December 4, 2013 at 2:09 pm
Probably, but if these feckwits are going to be removed, then the clubs need to be vigorously challenging each idiocy as it appears.
It would be interesting to know who briefed the press, if it was me, I would be raging with whatever source made me look a complete idiot, sadly, our journos are so inured to it, I doubt they have even noticed.
55. Auldheid says: (1074)
If there is a way to minimise the penalty you can be sure attempts will be made to find it
——————-
What I expect to happen is a wooly SFA statement no doubt from the man himself saying “look we’ve, oops slip of the tongue, they’ve won the league by 28 pts so does it really matter when you’re considering an entity with 142 yearsumptitittleytypompooo.” Then cue Regan saying something definitive and to the point like it is up to the fans to decide…. and can’t we all just move on, then trackside to Chick Young waffling some nonsense about good of the game and……..you get the drift.
Was there really 38745 at the team that plays in blue game last night??? Well the DR says it so it must be true!!!!!! 😉