Podcast Episode 3 – David Low


No, can’t let this go. Why would the SFA be frantic? 1/ …

Comment on Podcast Episode 3 – David Low by Smugas.

No, can’t let this go.

Why would the SFA be frantic?

1/ The league apparently is unsponsorable, so no sponsors to lose. They’re not in a cup and the ground isn’t being used for the final.
2/ As said many times (and relative to where they currently are) I can only see a quick and clean admin as a good thing for a genuine RFC since they can absorb the points deduction and still go up (wrong in principle though that absolutely is). Need to be quick though.
3/ Regarding the promotion issue – it was put to the clubs in January and they baulked – for whatever reason, genuine or not.
3/ Admin is inevitable if you lose more than you, erm, find. Surely the SFA didn’t buy the King coming over the hill crap?
4/ Why would King now come over the hill anyway. Like the old bull in the joke, why not wait on the other side and wait for the SFA to come to him.
5/ Tell me “frantic” is not simply a response to fear of having to tell the blue hordes (who’s anger this time will have my full support – to a point) some home truths.
6/ Alternatively, Please, please, please tell me its due to fear of the response to some home truths about the SFA possibly emerging coming the other way, if an ‘event’ is experienced.

Smugas Also Commented

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

McCoist was told to get them back to full time football in the first instance. He was told not to worry about the medium term (him foolishly thinking because a/ everything was rosy, b/ King was coming and c/ money doesn’t matter anyway) because the spivs weren’t worried about the medium term anyway (insert appropriate reason here).

Had he set up a scouting network, youth policy and appointed a director of Football who’s name wasn’t Walter and in so doing meant they weren’t cuffing guys off the nightshift on a regular basis then the illusion (mask) would not have been created and his employers wouldn’t have looked on him too kindly, never mind history. But to do so they needed cash, pots of it and someone else’s obviously. And now they need more IF the footballing illusion is to continue and IF the spivs require the footballing illusion to continue.

I do take on board to be fair, that McCoist could have done the things you say and built genuine legend status for himself almost in spite of the spivs. But he didn’t, and now, without cash, he can’t. Option 1 – McCoists plan – was risk free with a minor hiccup right at the end if someone didn’t time the admin right Ooops. Option 2 – what the bears now wish they had (keep me right here Ryan) was fraught with two immediate risks – fan rebellion because the kids weren’t winning in the Rangers way a bit like Hearts mid season (AJ, EJ?), and god forbid if he was too successful a la Walter, do you really think the spivs would have kept him about the place?

I am no defender of the Ally faith. He had a quick, lazy, relatively risk free option available to him and he took it.

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
Sugar Daddy/Jim Bhoy

Same point but different. Not that McCoist is deserving of any sympathy but what was he supposed to do? The instruction to him (and several others, eh Campbell 😉 ) was firstly get us back to full time football whatever the cost. He has done that with aplomb. Unnecessary aplomb but then whilst the bears might have enjoyed a bit more edge of the seat stuff the money men certainly wouldn’t have – plus the fans poneyed up for the ‘irresistables’ so it doesn’t really matter if they came to actually watch it and enjoyed it or not, does it?

It would take a very brave manager just now to be handed a 7 figure budget and say right I’m going to blow it all on youth development, just see the team we have in five years time. Alan Hansen kids comment anyone? Admittedly it takes a manager with galling crassness (at best) to blow an 8 figure budget on journeymen, and an incredibly stupid one not to have said when they were 10 points clear still with money in the bank say around AGM time not to say “em, just a wee query about next year boss? According to these bampots…..”

So whilst I’ve no sympathy for the situation he now finds himself in – potless with massive expectations re the championship and possibly a points deduction on top, I can understand how, seemingly unrestrained as he was, he has gotten to this point but a realisation has now kicked in – as demonstrated by his sudden understanding of everyone’s wages to turnover ratios.

Lastly, I absolutely take on board JB’s point – that a glorious team/club cruising to victory on a drammatic and exciting journey was nothing more than a front for a massive scam. (that’s a scam in Ibrox/Daily Record language by the way, normal people call in Return on Investment) A winning team was simply a byproduct. It’ll be interesting to see how they view it going forward.

Oh and finally finally

Sugar Daddy says:
May 5, 2014 at 12:15 pm

The squad, Wallace aside, is worth next to nothing.

In that case can we have Templeton for “next to nothing.” Ta.

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
Mad bhoy

You forgot the personal expense, time and wasted emotional effort of following a Diddy side which didn’t involve playing the rest of the league where 80% of the teams were little more than a taxi ride away. Factor that in and you’re halfway to understanding our disgust not to mention surprise that our in built hatred for two big teams ( just because they’re big) could have been extended by the knowledge that one cheek was cheating, that it was assisted and supported by the powers that be and that somewhere in there even our own clubs at the very least looked the other way. Factor all of that in and you’re at least in the foothills of understanding our chip engorged shoulders!

Recent Comments by Smugas

Fergus McCann v David Murray

reasonablechap 5th November 2020 at 08:24

I think that certainly in recent years, it would be much more accurate for it to read…

"When you pull on that jersey you are not just playing for a football club, you're playing for a PLC"

Sorry, me no understandy…

I thought the separation was an accepted given now no…?

Fergus McCann v David Murray
You have to remember Menace the “being out” and the positive test are not necessarily related.  As I understand it, Players 1-4 can be out and player 5, who is within just one of 1-4’s training bubble can test positive for the fan to struggle. 

Fergus McCann v David Murray
Agreed wottpi.  Aberdeen in a way actually called their bluff and said ok we’ll play.  The approach now seems to be that we’ll all simply avoid there being a repeat rather than address what I personally think is inevitable at some point.

and FWIW I still wouldn’t agree with giving “them upstairs“ executive powers to do what they deem fair.  They negated that possibility a long time ago.

Fergus McCann v David Murray
The issue would have been (I think) how does the SPFL order a game to be forfeit if “the offending side” is standing there ready to play? 

What will happen if for instance in the hypothetical match City versus Utd, 4 of City’s players and families are pictured in Dobbies having lunch in close proximity and the pictures hit the Rags websites?  Or, as is perfectly possible, 2 from each side?

i assume that’s the purpose of tomorrow’s zoom call with managers and captains.

Similarly I’m not sure on what grounds the SG could act.  They can order the postponement, as they did, not the forfeit.

and of course, if City happen to be top 5 premiership and Utd are part time, is it even fair to apply the play or forfeit rule?

Fergus McCann v David Murray
Absolutely Homunculus, particularly the last line. Which is what I suspect will make it completely unworkable.

About the author