Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

Avatar By

I can’t believe the amount of guff about TUPE, last …

Comment on Podcast Episode 3 – David Low by Flocculent Apoidea.

I can’t believe the amount of guff about TUPE, last night. It’s really simple. John Clarke was the trading form of the poster, who then changed it to John Clark. As a sole poster, there are no employees to protect, even if there was a change of business operator. All this nonsense about the ‘e’ acting independently is just smoke and mirrors. The more interesting point is the original, incorrect registration of John Clarke on RTC. If I remember rightly, John was challenged at the time and admitted the admin error due to an FFF (fat finger failure). Nothing further was done about this. Fair enough, you might think. John then moved across to here but blatantly continued with the erroneous nomenclature. Rather than facing action from TSFM, John was, only recently, assisted in correcting said error by the blog authorities. I think we all know why. Is it that ‘TSFM needs a strong John Clark’? Maybe so. Despite my suspicions, I don’t think we should hound John from the blog or demote him to Pie and Bovril. I’m prepared to accept that no posting advantage was gained from the error and, furthermore, John’s invaluable community service in Edinburgh a few weeks ago should be taken as penance and we should say no more about it. I certainly don’t want an oldJo/newJo debate.

And, Ryan, are you really surprised at a change in someone’s behaviour after they’ve dropped an ‘e’?

Flocculent Apoidea Also Commented

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
“And I believe they see King and myself as people they can trust.” That’s two literary steps away from stating you are actually trustworthy.

“King is a man with a plan. In fact, he is a man with a plan A, B, and C.” We know plan A is to borrow a pen, plan B is to borrow some paper but what’s plan C? Travel expenses?

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
I can imagine the Ibrox club putting out a warning about counterfeit merchandise and that the proceeds don’t go to the club! They wouldn’t, would they?


Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
Presumably those alternative kits can’t have the RFC logo or someone will threaten legal action. Mr Green bought that logo, as I’m sure manufacturers will know so they’ll need written permission from TRIFC/TRFCL (or is it owned by Rangers Retail Ltd?) Can’t imagine them being amenable to that loss of income/cash cow.

Recent Comments by Flocculent Apoidea

Look Back to Look Forward
Tony, that’s £25k for one player for one match!

Look Back to Look Forward
Thanks, again, JC.

Shocking performance from the boy Regan.  Surely he’ll be released from his contract after another nightmare display!  He just can’t cut it at this level and can’t even talk a good game.

He may also find it’s not just the West of Scotland that has a problem accepting corruption and fraud.

John Clark Meets “The SFA”
“There is no ‘club’ separate from Rangers Football Club limited and no other concept of a club.” 

My guess is that this was allowed to fly because the QC was assured by the SFA that it was legalese for “There’s not a team like the Glasgow Rangers; no, not one and there never shall be one” – I think that’s the SFA strap line but I could be wrong.

I was also amused at the QC’s suggestion that RFC should be waiting for the law to catch up with them, so to speak.

John Clark Meets “The SFA”
JC – thanks for your commitment to Scottish football.

Did Mr Broadfoot, at any point, attempt to drink a gottle of geer as Mr McRae spoke?  The other image I have is of an audience with Don Corleone (not that the SFA would mix with criminals, of course).  Mr Broadfoot’s bed will surely have a horse’s arse in it in the morning.  Interesting that this organisation seems only concerned about fans being lost to the game if they support a particular club. How very inclusive of them.

Allyjambo, your reference to a liar seems a bit harsh.  I distinctly recall him saying (on a Charlotte recording) that he never tells a lie.

Two wrongs and a right
John Clark 23rd January 2016 at 4:30 pm

I’m a little disappointed in you, John.  Mr Lindsay now knows at least one person has read his piece.  He’ll surely see that as a success.

About the author