Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

ByTrisidium

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

davidLowDavid Low

represents a highly significant component of the history of Celtic FC and consequently a highly significant component of how Scottish Football has panned out in the last 20 years.

As Fergus McCann’s Aide-de-Camp, Low was instrumental in helping him formulate and implement the plans which ultimately allowed control of the club to be wrested from the Kelly and White families. Low also helped McCann to rebuild and regenerate Celtic as a modern football club.

His views are unsurprisingly Celtic-centred, and this interview reveals his ambition for the club to ultimately leave Scottish Football behind. That may or may not be at odds with many of our readers, but the stark analysis of the realities facing football in this country may resonate.

Podcast LogoHe provides a window on the pragmatism of the likes of McCann, Celtic and many other clubs in respect of the demise of Rangers. He pours scorn on Dave King’s vision of a cash-rich Rangers future, and provides little comfort for those who seek succour for our failing national sport, believing that Scotland will find it impossible to emerge from the football backwater in an increasingly global industry.

Agree or not with Low’s prognosis, it is difficult to deny his compelling analysis of our place in the football world.

rss podcast feed   Subscribe to RSS Feed

iTunes podcast Feed  Subscribe to iTunes Feed

About the author

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

3,066 Comments so far

James ForrestPosted on4:59 pm - Apr 23, 2014


scottc:

Thanks for that mate. I wasn’t aware of that. As I said in the piece, that man cannot be allowed to just dance off with a pat on the back and a thank you. Restitution needs to be made before that happens.

We’ll see whether the clubs have the stomach for it, but the evidence the guys on this site have uncovered is shocking, and damning, and has to be answered.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on5:43 pm - Apr 23, 2014


scottc says:
April 23, 2014 at 4:49 pm

Nice, James. On Campbell Ogilvie, he won’t stand for re-election next year because he is only allowed to serve two terms, I believe. I’m sure that was mentioned prior to last years coronation.
============
Quite right, ScottC, the time to apply any “heat” to Ogilvie was at last year’s AGM, but not one single candidate was put forward by any of the 42 clubs. I do understand that the rules are restrictive as to who can be nominated, but Ogilvie was NOT the only qualified candidate. The fact that no other candidate was nominated is shameful, a national disgrace, and the reason I have turned my back on the game I have loved for 60 years.

Far from having the heat turned on him, Ogilvie is being lined up for a nice little number at UEFA.

James Forrest says- “that man cannot be allowed to just dance off with a pat on the back and a thank you. Restitution needs to be made before that happens.” I can assure you all, James Forrest and everyone else, there will be no “restitution” from “that man”. He will get much more than a pat on the back. If it can possibly be engineered, he will represent our proud little country at UEFA. If not, he will be very well looked after within Scottish football, be absolutely certain sure of that. That is the shameful truth, and each and every one of our senior clubs is complicit in this.

I would have loved to have heard David Low’s views on Ogilvie. I’m pretty sure we would have heard what a splendid, competent, decent chap he is, and how all us ignorant oiks of supporters just don’t get it. Celtic could easily have lanced this boil 12 months ago. They didn’t. I play snooker or golf at the weekend as a result.

I have no idea what the real game is between the SPFL and the SFA, but I do know two things absolutely for sure- It’s not about hanging Ogilvie out to dry, and quite frankly I no longer give a damn.

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on7:13 pm - Apr 23, 2014


scottc says:
April 23, 2014 at 2:31 pm

If SPFL broke away, would give Sevco a free run at CL!!

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on8:15 pm - Apr 23, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
April 22, 2014 at 4:26 pm

“I see that there have been a few tweets/posts discussing the possibility of ring fencing the proceeds of advance ticket sales.”
—————————————
One tweet I’ve encountered in this context states:

“Ring fencing ST cash now accelerates insolvency and makes liquidation more likely. I assume that is the desired effect.”

To my simple mind this implies that Kings ST trust is a way whereby season ticket income can be excluded from any insolvency event. However would this strategy not require comprehensive choreography to make it effective. If only a small portion of the ST money is pared off then the funds accrued may be insufficient to re-inflate the balloon.

Would Dave King need to be part of this ruse?

View Comment

scottcPosted on8:45 pm - Apr 23, 2014


paulsatim says:
April 23, 2014 at 7:13 pm
6 2 Rate This

scottc says:
April 23, 2014 at 2:31 pm

If SPFL broke away, would give Sevco a free run at CL!!

Yeah, but the other 41 SPFL clubs would be playing league football every week.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on9:03 pm - Apr 23, 2014


Castofthousands – there is a risk two things might be getting confused here (I don’t mean by you).

1 the Camp Ddavid plan; and
2 what responsible directors might consider doing in a near-insolvency situation where the business necessitates taking money in advance for sales that might never be performed because an insolvency intervenes (in this case before all games in a season ticket are played).

I was alluding to point 2 not to point 1. Point 2 can be achieved relatively easily by the incumbent board because it does not need the consent of the potential creditor (the fan). Point 1 is in my view probably unworkable (unless the board and fans agree to it).

However if the Camp David plan is put into place and there is an insolvency half way through a season, then what happens next is anyone’s guess (because we have no detail on what is intended). Would the GoughKing trust still hold half the cash at that point? Would it instead have paid over all of the cash and hold security over the properties?

In an insolvency, in the former case, presumably the fans get half their money back (as beneficiaries of what would now be a redundant trust) – in the latter case, the administrator sells the properties and out of the proceeds of sale, accounts to the trust for amount of its claim in the insolvency (half a season ticket per fan who paid into the trust in my example).

So fans might get money back and they can invest that in a TTRFC newco at that point if they want but for sure they will have hindered TRFC by starving it of cashflow.

(I have rather dashed this off so it may not be very clear – in which case I apologise in advance).

Anyway what comes to my mind about this nonsense is the chant “you don’t know what you’re doing”.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on9:15 pm - Apr 23, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
April 23, 2014 at 9:03 pm

Naw, the Camp David plan is just a load of Gough

View Comment

Gym TrainerPosted on10:17 pm - Apr 23, 2014


scapaflow says:
April 23, 2014 at 9:15 pm

Naw, the Camp David plan…

For some reason I now have a vision inspired by the late Larry Grayson

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on12:00 am - Apr 24, 2014


This new punter that Wallace has hired to feed the media. How is he being paid? Unless there has been cash found to make payroll in the next 24 hours, what on earth are they doing adding to the wage bill?
I assume there will be a stock exchange announcement tomorrow. Either a further loan has been agreed at ruinous rates, or the doors are closing in the big hoose. The AIM needs to know pronto in both cases.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on12:08 am - Apr 24, 2014


The twitterer called Keith Jackson (@tedermeatballs) is mentioning that a club may have been using ineligible players. Could affect the relegation outcome, in theory.

If true, what will dear old Sandy do to work that out?

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on12:14 am - Apr 24, 2014


DP, here’s back page of DR, http://t.co/Gq4qnEKNmx Kilmarnock forged some player’s signature

View Comment

wildwoodPosted on12:17 am - Apr 24, 2014


Probably just a Killie mistake

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on12:23 am - Apr 24, 2014


wonder how Bryson will spin this one, if at all

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on12:24 am - Apr 24, 2014


paulsatim says:
April 24, 2014 at 12:14 am
1 0 Rate This

DP, here’s back page of DR, http://t.co/Gq4qnEKNmx Kilmarnock forged some player’s signature
———-

Auch, it’s just a signature. No one knew it was forged at the time so the results must stand 🙂

Oh, there’s BBC employee Paul Tyrell. Another wage for Ibrox. As Phil was asking — boycott over? It’s pure Marx Brothers now.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on1:28 am - Apr 24, 2014


paulsatim says: April 24, 2014 at 12:14 am

DP, here’s back page of DR, http://t.co/Gq4qnEKNmx Kilmarnock forged some player’s signature
==========================
I’m afraid that, according to Sandy Bryson, the player’s registration was accepted by the SFA and remains valid until it is revoked. Killie have therefore not gained any sporting advantage from the incorrect registration despite the administrative error or forgery, so no sporting sanction will be applied.

That is according to the SFA Rules, sub section “Sevco” as endorsed by LNS.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on1:40 am - Apr 24, 2014


James Forrest
Neepheid

At the time of Ogilvie ‘ s election even if Celtic were suspicious of his role they had no proof that he had played a part in what has become much clearer since re UEFA licence and misleading of the LNS Commission, so they cannot be blamed for him being re-elected.

You can take that to the bank.

With regard to SFA reform and the need for a more professional governance machinery you can be sure that this has been an objective preceding Rangers demise but lacked the leverage the passage of time has provided.

View Comment

LurkPakPosted on4:24 am - Apr 24, 2014


Rangers fans, they don’t ask for much:-

“We expect to see full detail of who will be providing the £30-£50m required to take Rangers back to the level we should be operating at, in the absence of this board accepting the offer of investment from Dave King.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but King has not offered any investment whatsoever. He has encouraged others to do so yes, but he has not been forthcoming with a penny thus far and seems unlikely to ever do so.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:11 am - Apr 24, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
April 24, 2014 at 12:08 am
=========================
I noticed this last night Danish. However, following the Bryson testimony to LNS we are entitled to think there is no such thing as an illegible player now, once the registration has been accepted by the SFA. Of course, none of this will stop the SFA treating Kilmarnock differently if the allegations are correct, and neither will it stop the media saying it is okay for the SFA to treat Kilmarnock differently.

As a complete aside, which club would present a bigger obstacle to the club from Ibrox winning automatic promotion next season – Killie or Hearts?!!!!!!

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:04 am - Apr 24, 2014


upthehoops says:
April 24, 2014 at 7:11 am
3 1 Rate This
————

Or which derby might be worth retaining? :mrgreen:

With a proper-sized league the disappearing derby problems wouldn’t be so acute. I could imagine a twice-yearly Dundee derby would be a highlight not to mention Edinburgh, and a few others. Convinced that crowds would rise if you only played a team twice during the season. Even a self-confessed armchair fan such as masel has difficulty switching on for the the 3rd and 4th meetings of same teams.

Another aside, the Eurosport headline about Januzaj (sp.?) ‘declaring for Belgium’ while the back page of a Scottish rag has a young lad in the SPFL ‘snubbing Scotland for Canada’. Dearie me.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:39 am - Apr 24, 2014


LurkPak says:
April 24, 2014 at 4:24 am

Rangers fans, they don’t ask for much:-

“We expect to see full detail of who will be providing the £30-£50m required to take Rangers back to the level we should be operating at, in the absence of this board accepting the offer of investment from Dave King.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but King has not offered any investment whatsoever. He has encouraged others to do so yes, but he has not been forthcoming with a penny thus far and seems unlikely to ever do so.
————————————————–
IMO Rangers fans should have demanded a helluva lot more a lot earlier in this omnishambles.

As to DK I don’t think anyone other than the man himself will fully know what his plan is and even if it is put in place whether it will flop or not although just following the old ways doesn’t seem sensible to me but that’s up to investors and Rangers fans.

I would have thought that in view of DK’s possibly ‘delicate’ ongoing relations with SARS and investments abroad in his name then it’s obvious for him to state he won’t personally be investing. However he may well be able to persuade others and ‘prove’ he has no connection with any separate and distinct legal entities. It’s all in the language 😆

It’s worth remembering that you don’t need shares to control the Board of Rangers and with the exception of Easdale the other members afaik have tiny shareholdings and the Easdale camp doesn’t have that big a stake.

However: ‘What will be, will be’ although the PR war will certainly be heating-up with the internet being used by both camps to blacken the other and even here we will not be immune to the frenzied scrabbling to win the hearts and pockets of Ra Bears.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:49 am - Apr 24, 2014


easyJambo says:
April 24, 2014 at 1:28 am
paulsatim says:
April 24, 2014 at 12:14 am

DP, here’s back page of DR, http://t.co/Gq4qnEKNmx Kilmarnock forged some player’s signature
==========================
I’m afraid that, according to Sandy Bryson, the player’s registration was accepted by the SFA and remains valid until it is revoked. Killie have therefore not gained any sporting advantage from the incorrect registration despite the administrative error or forgery, so no sporting sanction will be applied.

That is according to the SFA Rules, sub section “Sevco” as endorsed by LNS.
————————————————-
Ah but the whole Bryson Definition wasn’t given at LNS and only that section which applied to the business in hand viz Rangers and EBTs.

I am certain that one of the numerous undisclosed sections waiting to be pulled like a white rabbit from the SFA hat is the one cancelling a registration if forgery is employed.

There’s another section that if an act is illegal then the Bryson Definition doesn’t apply but that won’t be used in case HMRC wins the UTT appeal against Rangers 🙄

View Comment

ShooperbPosted on8:53 am - Apr 24, 2014


upthehoops says:

April 24, 2014 at 7:11 am

18

1

Rate This

Danish Pastry says:
April 24, 2014 at 12:08 am
=========================
I noticed this last night Danish. However, following the Bryson testimony to LNS we are entitled to think there is no such thing as an illegible player now, once the registration has been accepted by the SFA. Of course, none of this will stop the SFA treating Kilmarnock differently if the allegations are correct, and neither will it stop the media saying it is okay for the SFA to treat Kilmarnock differently.

As a complete aside, which club would present a bigger obstacle to the club from Ibrox winning automatic promotion next season – Killie or Hearts?!!!!!!

I said this at the time of the LNS verdict (indulge me – the sweetest 3 words in the English language aren’t ‘I love you’, they are in fact ‘Told you so!’), that in their attempts to save Rangers from any sort of meaningful punishment, the SFA and SPL (as it was then), by ignoring rules on a whim and setting unfathomable precedents, had effectively made Scottish football ungovernable.

Thanks to Bryson’s law, it’s impossible to properly punish Killie in a footballing sense if they are found guilty. But more than that, as LNS established, Kilmarnock themselves can’t face any sort of non-footballing sanction, as apparently it’s the owners of football clubs that are personally responsible for any registration mishaps (i.e. The Rangers ‘oldco’ in LNS’s situation).

If Killie do face any sort of meaningful sanctions, be it footballing or financial, then they would be perfectly entitled to drag the football authorities through the courts. Afterall, that doesn’t appear to be an issue either….

View Comment

neepheidPosted on9:04 am - Apr 24, 2014


Auldheid says:
April 24, 2014 at 1:40 am
14 4 Rate This

James Forrest
Neepheid

At the time of Ogilvie ‘ s election even if Celtic were suspicious of his role they had no proof that he had played a part in what has become much clearer since re UEFA licence and misleading of the LNS Commission, so they cannot be blamed for him being re-elected.

You can take that to the bank.
============================
Celtic have exactly the same responsibility for the unopposed coronation of Ogilvie as every other senior club- total responsibility.

My point last night had nothing to do with the licensing issue. Here is the real point, which everyone seems to agree should simply be swept under the carpet.

At the time of the last AGM of the SFA, EVERY club in Scotland was aware that the President of their association had received a loan of £90,000 at the behest of a member club, and, so far as anyone knows, that sum is still outstanding. The CEO of the SFA, Regan, had publicly acknowledged a year before the AGM that Ogilvie was “conflicted”, and would therefore take nothing to do with certain matters relating to the member club in question (and the band played “believe it if you like” as my mother would have said at this point). The response of the clubs to this outrageous situation ? Re-election for two years, unopposed.

To this day, I have yet to hear a word of criticism from ANY of the 42 members clubs regarding a situation that would disgrace a governing body in the seediest of ramshackle banana republics. That is why Scottish football saw the last of me and my money on the day of last year’s AGM. I would happily have bought a season ticket with any club that had the decency to speak out. Not one has done so. So goodbye Celtic, and goodbye Scottish football. The game is clearly corrupt to the core, and that’s how, evidently, the clubs want to keep it.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on9:35 am - Apr 24, 2014


I don’t think it would be difficult for anyone to distinguish between what happened in the EBT registration saga and the deliberate forging of a signature on a document (if indeed that is what happened). Fraud means normal rules do not apply.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on9:49 am - Apr 24, 2014


Neepheid. Absolutely. I have continued to attend occasional games for the benefit of my son who is fitba daft (and the small matter of needing silver polish for the first time in 19 years, not sure if anyone mentioned it on here!!! 😀 ) but our attendance is on a sporadic basis whereas we would both have been stick on season books otherwise, with more mini smugas to follow I might add.

Campbellsmoney

Notwithstanding the legal niceties in which you are clearly versed, it is the simple practicalities that make the Camp David tent fall down. They want the deeds in return for the money. They’re not going to get the deeds (one would assume – eyebrows raised if they do). One would equally have thought that in avoiding the deeds being passed the average bear would have the sense to then keep his haun in his pooch! Thus Camp David have to follow through on their threat and drip feed in the reduced sums on a game by game basis. Administration (or capital injection) then has to happen earlier and, assuming the trust is correctly configured, the pot is potentially returnable although, again, you would have assumed (notice how often that word ‘assumed’ is appearing), the intention would be to use the remaining (and hopefully unfrozen) funds to continue to drip feed into whatever phoenix variation next hits our screens the following Saturday.

They either have balls of steel and do indeed know what they’re doing (the board that is, the fans JUST want £50m and they’re sorted) or, as you say, this is car crash finance, with knobs on!

Eco. I agree this is a bloody good plan for the fans. 18 months ago!

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on10:00 am - Apr 24, 2014


Extracts from the LNS Commission ref Sandy Bryson

86) Evidence was given by Alexander Bryson, Head of Registrations at the SFA, who described the registration process. During the course of his evidence he explained that, once a player had been registered with the SFA, he remained registered unless and until his registration was revoked. Accordingly, even if there had been a breach of the SFA registration procedures, such as a breach of SFA Article 12.3, the registration of a player was not treated as being invalid from the outset, and stood unless and until it was revoked.

87) Mr McKenzie explained to us that SPL Rule D1.13 had hitherto been understood to mean that if, at the time of registration, a document was not lodged as required, the consequence was that a condition of registration was broken and the player automatically became ineligible to play in terms of SPL Rule D1.11. He accepted however that there was scope for a different construction of the rule, to the effect that, as the lodging of the document in question was a condition of registration, the registration of the player would be liable to revocation, with the consequence that the player would thereafter become ineligible to play. He accepted that no provision of the Rules enabled the Board of the SPL retrospectively to terminate the registration of the player. It became apparent from his submissions that Mr McKenzie was not pressing for a finding that Issue 3c, together with the concluding words of Issue 3b, had been proved.

88) In our opinion, this was a correct decision by Mr McKenzie. There is every reason why the rules of the SFA and the SPL relating to registration should be construed and applied consistently with each other. Mr Bryson’s evidence about the position of the SFA in this regard was clear. In our view, the Rules of the SPL, which admit of a construction consistent with those of the SFA, should be given that construction. All parties concerned – clubs, players and footballing authorities – should be able to proceed on the faith of an official register. This means that a player’s registration should generally be treated as standing unless and until revoked. There may be extreme cases in which there is such a fundamental defect that the registration of a player must be treated as having been invalid from the outset. But in the kind of situation that we are dealing with here we are satisfied that the registration of the Specified Players with the SPL was valid from the outset, and accordingly that they were eligible to play in official matches. There was therefore no breach of SPL Rule D1.11.
:
:
105) It seems appropriate in the first place to consider whether such breach by non-disclosure conferred any competitive advantage on Rangers FC. Given that we have held that Rangers FC did not breach Rule D1.11 by playing ineligible players, it did not secure any direct competitive advantage in that respect. If the breach of the rules by non-disclosure of the side-letters conferred any competitive advantage, that could only have been an indirect one. Although it is clear to us from Mr Odam’s evidence that Oldco’s failure to disclose the side-letters to the SPL and the SFA was at least partly motivated by a wish not to risk prejudicing the tax advantages of the EBT scheme, we are unable to reach the conclusion that this led to any competitive advantage.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on10:14 am - Apr 24, 2014


Interesting thresome twitter between Phil Mac, Angela Haggerty and STV’s Peter Smith re the possible appointment of Paul Tyrell as the new PR guru at Sevco

As far as I can see the ‘story’ was ‘broken’ by Con D Scend @ apocryphal5 in a tweet on 22 April @10:17.

Our own Danish Pastry picked up on it here yesterday morning but apparently you have to be a ‘offishul’ journo to fight about getting kudos for who ‘broke the story’ first.

It seems there is still a pecking or ‘trumping’ order of SMSM, an NUJ members blog, a fans web based forum and an anonymous twitter account when it comes to asking questions about rumours?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on10:20 am - Apr 24, 2014


The news regarding Kilmarnock’s alleged forgery has sickened me. Not just because it would appear one of our clubs has committed what in many circumstances would be a criminal offence, but because of the even greater turmoil it will throw Scottish football into. If ‘the law according to Bryson’ is adhered to, Kilmarnock will get off with a fine a fraction of the £250,000 RFC were fined, assuming it only concerns this season (as opposed to 10 or so). While Hearts might have no right to hold the authorities to task over this (more on that later) but surely the team that finishes in 11th place will, assuming it’s not Killie.

Clearly, forgery is a very serious offence, and could never be explained away as a mistake. It doesn’t matter who’s signature was forged, or how important that signature might be (though I can’t think how, on any contract, anybody’s signature wouldn’t be important). I think we can all be pretty certain, that without the RFC cheatery, Kilmarnock would, if proven culpable, be in for a very serious penalty with relegation a certainty. As has been stated on here, and elsewhere online, many times, the complicity of the football authorities in the RFC whitewash has led to an ungovernable league where justice is not on the agenda.

On Hearts and the effect this revelation might have on them. Hearts received a 15 point penalty for falling into administration and are now relegated. This is justice. My club have done wrong and are being punished for it. I’d actually be very disappointed if Hearts manage to avoid relegation because another member club has carried out a, perhaps, more serious offence (in this case possibly a crime). Hearts have received a lot of respect, and perhaps some level of forgiveness, for the way they have approached the situation they find themselves in, including relegation. I’d hate to see this diluted because they ‘get away with’ relegation. If, in the face of all the signing embargoes and points penalty handed out to them, Hearts had avoided relegation ‘on the pitch’, then they would have deserved to stay up. But not like this, certainly not in my opinion.

If Kilmarnock are found guilty of this offence (and it’s just a story so far, I believe) then both Hearts and Kilmarnock should be relegated with no play-off involving the Premiership club.

We are all not Rangers!

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on10:37 am - Apr 24, 2014


From the LNS verdict, this stands out as to why the Tractor Driver ( 😯 ) issue is more clear cut IMHO.

“There may be extreme cases in which there is such a fundamental defect that the registration of a player must be treated as having been invalid from the outset.”

I would say that forgery of a signature would render the registration invalid.

However, this doesn’t mean to say that LNS was correct and that Killie couldn’t appeal any punishment, indeed, it may be that the threat of such appeal being taken into the public courts may have a bearing on said punishment…

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on10:49 am - Apr 24, 2014


Just read the Daily Rag piece, and it doesn’t suggest any points deduction would be enough to ‘save’ Hearts. It does, however, completely ignore the ‘law according to Bryson’ making no reference to the fact that RFC got away with the deliberate falsifying of contract registrations over many seasons. That part of their history, at least, appears to have been consigned to…well history! Maybe we’re seeing a situation being created where Kilmarnock can be punished in line with justice by ignoring a well known, and oft discussed (other than in the SMSM) precedent. Oh how the SFA and SPFL could have done without this piece of whistle blowing 😳

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/kilmarnock-scottish-professional-football-league-3449000

View Comment

tomtomPosted on11:03 am - Apr 24, 2014


In a strange way I would like to see Kilmarnock face the severest of punishments for this (if it is proved to be true). Misplaced or missing signatures can be explained but a forged signature cannot. Now I don’t harbour any bad feelings against Kilmarnock but maybe, just maybe, something like this could be the catalyst for revisiting the ludicrous LNS verdict. At the very least it would expose to a wider audience the culpability of the SFA/SPL in their decision making regarding the EBT saga.

It would be extremely ironic (and perhaps fitting) if Kilmarnock, being the only club that supported the proposal to allow Rangers back into the SPL, were the ones who brought the whole edifice down.

As was pointed out earlier the whole and totally absurd “Bryson Interpretation” is a noose hanging round the necks of the authorities and the sooner it is used to good effect the better.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on11:13 am - Apr 24, 2014


In these days of fancy dancy technology why the blinking hell are folks in the professional game still farting about with signatures on paper documents?

Surely the solution is for professional footballers to be tagged like dogs and the ref can scan them, ala Tesco checkouts, before each game to ensure they are properly registered.

OK tagging is a bit far but in this day mucking about with last minute signatures and copies in triplicate just shows how our backward our game is.

As discussed the other week the SFA are requiring young boys who can hardly write to sign registration documents.

Total joke.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on11:17 am - Apr 24, 2014


Neepheid
Smugas

According to Turnbull Hutton no one was prepared to stand against Ogilvie because of the situation prevailing.

Let’s accept that as a fact given the source and look at the position it put any club in. Do they make a song and dance about something on their own, there bye painting a target in their rear end or do they accept that there is no point making a song and dance if the end result is the same?

In principle they still should have but in practical and political terms I can understand why they did not.
The whole Ogilvie thing is a mystery and there may be other factors yet to emerge to explain why he continued in post.
It is a sad fact of life that in Scotland matters cannot be handled in a much more transparent matter because good intent can be torpedoed by msm before it gets a chance to float. Look at Gordon Waddles’ s report on the SPFL resolutions for change as an example.

It is also a sad fact that threats and intimidation against anyone wishing to challenge the status quo are also a feature.
No matter how sensible the message might be, as in the SPFL resolutions, had that message came from one club only it would have been still born because of its provenance regardless of how much sense it made.

However I understand your position. I have my own line in the sand which is what happens to Res12, but so far I have seen no need to draw it.

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on11:30 am - Apr 24, 2014


There are enough precedents to make a points deduction unlikely.
Did Livi not field an ineligible player? I’m sure Rangers fielded a quite a few and lied about it to the SFA…
The trick for the SFA isn’t going to be pretending to find a nuance in the rules that they can hit Killie with that didn’t apply to Rangers, it’s going to be making sure any punishment is not sufficient to make any kind of legal challenge worth it. With the self serving precedents they’ve set, the SFA would get monstered in any courtroom challenge.
Finally, how strong is this charge? Anything coming from Squirrel-spotter-in-chief-Keef can’t be trusted unless we know he stole it from a reputable journalist. If it’s here-say, or an uncorroborated accusation from a disgruntled former employee, this will never get beyond tomorrow’s chipper wrappings.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on11:32 am - Apr 24, 2014


In Kingy we trust!!! Can DK legally be a director after his fraudulent behaviour? If so the law really is an @ss…

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on11:33 am - Apr 24, 2014


Wonder if Ally has sat down with Waldo for a cuppa tea and a warchest chat yet… You can’t make this up, well MSM can obviously…

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on11:40 am - Apr 24, 2014


Ally turned down for Manyoo job they couldn’t afford him… 😉

Killie forging signatures, Bryson says no sporting advantage, wrist slap.

Waldo’s 120 month review about ready what are the odds on a delay there, Ian Black?

Rangers new spin doctor to work the 120 year review to the advantage of the board, so they hired someone to write it and now someone to publish it, wtf..!!! Spiv-Central

Wages being paid tomorrow? Whose paying the Leccie bill this month?

View Comment

fara1968Posted on11:58 am - Apr 24, 2014


Been out of wifi area last few days. Entered pub and got wifi. The Smiths, some girls are bigger than others was on the duke box. Not heard that song in ages and I kinda get it now, just what the song is about. And it fits perfectly with our very own omnishambles.
Off topic bit. If George Harrison was the epitome of understated lead guitar did Johnny Marr not become a contender for the title? Watch the live video on YouTube.
Muchos plentius TDs pls

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on12:03 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Forget the question of who signed what and on behalf of whom, not relevant!

Ask yourself only this: Why did this alleged act of stupidity occur? How was it noticed by a 2nd party? And why was it subsequently reported? Oh, more importantly, why at this moment in time?

Everything in this pantomine has been choreographed, I have a strange feeling this is just another part of it…..

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:18 pm - Apr 24, 2014


The straw men of the SFA are but poor reflections of Mons. Platini and the UEFA gutless wonders..

“PARIS (AP) — Clubs won’t be excluded from next season’s Champions League for breaking “Financial Fair Play” rules, according to UEFA President Michel Platini

“There will be some tough things … but if you’re expecting blood and tears, you’ll be disappointed,” Platini told French daily Le Parisien in an interview published Thursday.

UEFA will announce the first sanctions in early-May, and more serious cases will be judged in June.

A UEFA panel is currently negotiating settlements with clubs which have breached rules designed to curb huge investments by owners and excessive spending on transfers and wages since 2011.”

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on12:23 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Season ticket sales slow, finances are fragile, Rangers wouldn’t survive Admin 2 according to Mr Easdale

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27142340

View Comment

SmugasPosted on12:25 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Auldheid.

Don’t disagree with anything you say. I don’t believe however that it was impossible to AT LEAST place a story at the time along the lines of “We understand a number of clubs were surprised/dismayed/disappointed/relieved 😯 that either another eligible candidate couldn’t be found nor that the present incumbent made no mention of recent potentially damaging revelations (ongoing) at his re-appointment”

Every fan would have attached ‘their’ club as being one of “a number of clubs” and then, as you say, the end result would still have been the same – utterly disgraceful though that sad fact remains.

You’re telling me no-one, not one of 41 clubs in the room (I forget, were sevco allowed to vote by then?) thought privately to themselves I tell you what, this sucks and will come back and bite us at some point if not handled properly.

And since I’m on my soap box any way 👿 I’m interested to hear from our resident contributor/club sponsor(?) who shared his letter that he’d sent to the authorities (apologies, your on screen ID escapes me) I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on the most recent scandal (until Killiegate) – that we’re being asked to believe that exclusive national product placement via sponsorship of all of the four divisions is utterly impossible at the moment? Utter hogwash – IMHO!

Its being held back as we await their return, at which point a “better inventory based value deal” will be trumpeted – but of course it absolutely required their return and to hell with the rest of us in the interim. And its not as though they’re not going to come straight back, is it……

View Comment

TartanwulverPosted on12:26 pm - Apr 24, 2014


LurkPak says:
April 24, 2014 at 4:24 am

“We expect to see full detail of who will be providing the £30-£50m required to take Rangers back to the level we should be operating at, in the absence of this board accepting the offer of investment from Dave King.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but King has not offered any investment whatsoever. He has encouraged others to do so yes, but he has not been forthcoming with a penny thus far and seems unlikely to ever do so.
———————————————————
Did King not say something that he was ready with his money as “the last resort guy”? The board should put in their review that their searches not turned up someone willing to cough up £30-50 million on the promise of jam tomorrow, and so regretfully admit that Mr King is the last resort, and ask him to pony up accordingly.

View Comment

andygraham.66Posted on12:29 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Easdale: Again, I would say that in 140 years, the club’s gone into administration once; I don’t think it would survive a second one.

It didn’t, please keep up

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on12:31 pm - Apr 24, 2014


scapaflow says:
April 24, 2014 at 12:23 pm

Season ticket sales slow, finances are fragile, Rangers wouldn’t survive Admin 2 according to Mr Easdale

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27142340
======================================
They didn’t survive Admin 1.

There’s the begging bowl out.Emotional blackmail.Would love to say more but Stock Exchange rules don’t allow,etc.
It’s up to you though.Could go either way.Gie’s yer dosh or we’re deid(again).
hope the new PR guy’s good.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on12:37 pm - Apr 24, 2014


To be fair to Sandy Easdale he didn’t go for the company,not the club nonsense,although I suppose if he’d said that the company couldn’t survive another administration but the club’ll be OK his appeal would fall on deaf ears.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on12:42 pm - Apr 24, 2014


On what basis would they not survive Mr Lamont? If they can survive liquidation anyway 😈 then the only scenario that you can be describing is basically no-one of a blue persuasion turning up of a saturday at all – the proverbial (ethereal? – jeez here we go again) 11-men-in-blue becoming the 11-men-in-blue-going-to-the-golf-instead. Now, to their eternal credit that is the one thing that the true Rangers fans would never allow, they’d play on glasgow green if they had to so what on earth is all this survival talk?

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on12:42 pm - Apr 24, 2014


‘FARA1968 The Smiths rock, I wish someone could explain that song to me…
Back on Football matters interesting to hear Strachan say he wasn’t upset about not getting nominated for manager of the year..Wonder when the last Scotland manager (if any) got that award?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on12:52 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Sorry – hit the post button too quick.

To cut to the chase – the SFA are about to ‘licence’ (sorry HP and others) a situation where they have two pieces of paper in front of them – a business plan that doesn’t work without yet to be confirmed or even identified additional finance, and todays report that says the fans HAVE to buy in to keep them going. Crucially the red figure on paper 1 (the shortfall) is WAY bigger than the credit on paper two (the ST income). They can pony up if they like, it doesn’t get them past November. The fans are damned if they do and damned if they don’t, but the smart money is screaming at them “don’t” at least not yet.

Blaming the fans for crashing the bus and losing the stadium. Its just brilliant in its method and its creator deserves everything that’s coming to him/her!

View Comment

ulyanovaPosted on12:53 pm - Apr 24, 2014


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
April 24, 2014 at 12:37 pm
0 0 Rate This

To be fair to Sandy Easdale he didn’t go for the company,not the club nonsense,although I suppose if he’d said that the company couldn’t survive another administration but the club’ll be OK his appeal would fall on deaf ears.

———————————————————————————————–
But it would appear that the company are talking to the BBC whereas the club ….

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on12:57 pm - Apr 24, 2014


“Daily Record Sport ‏@Record_Sport 2m
Stewart Regan on Rangers 120 day review: No contact with Graham Wallace, review is a club matter. Unaware if club has submitted accounts”

View Comment

LurkPakPosted on12:58 pm - Apr 24, 2014


I would love to see the board ask King to pony up. As far as I can tell, the man has no wealth he can use in this country. I could be wrong mind you. This lot could teach Severus Snape a thing or two about the Dark Arts so it wouldn’t surprise me.

Whose paying the Leccie bill this month? 😆

I can’t stop imagining the Ibrox dressing room and Ally handing the fob to Moshni – “It’s your turn big man, go put £20 in the meter.” 😛

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on1:07 pm - Apr 24, 2014


TheTributeAct ‏@TheTributeAct 10m

@Record_Sport @RetroScot What? Accounts for 2nd biggest budget in Scottish football were due 31/3/14 and SFA chief exec doesn’t know?

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:08 pm - Apr 24, 2014


@SCAPAFLOW Regards Easdale’s comments of course the club would survive another administration the SFA would make sure of it. Is that not the business plan, Admin during close season, shed debt, no sanctions, same club etc etc?

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:09 pm - Apr 24, 2014


@Torrejohnbhoy WTF does he know?

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on1:10 pm - Apr 24, 2014


JimBhoy says:
April 24, 2014 at 1:08 pm

Admin during close season means starting next season on -ve points, isn’t Mr McCoist a big enough pair of concrete boots?

View Comment

JackBauerPosted on1:16 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Here’s a newsflash Sandy the club didn’t survive admin 1. Dust off your buisness dictionary and look for the meaning of Liquidation. Shame on the BBC for reporting this rubbish. It is a sorry day when the nations publicly funded national broadcaster is passing off lies as a worthy story without one word of challenge

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on1:16 pm - Apr 24, 2014


James Forrests latest.

http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/respect-for-the-law/

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on1:17 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Probably not connected, but…

The day before the abridged version of the 120 day report is to be published, Keith Jackson breaks a story of forged documents and registration wrongdoing! I wonder how long he’s been sitting on the story and is it big enough to deflect our attentions from the report? Or is it, in fact, being broken today so it gets lost in tomorrow’s puff pieces, and the MSM forget to ask questions regarding how the LNS decision affects any investigation into Killie?

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:20 pm - Apr 24, 2014


@SCAPAFLOW That rule may exist but at the discretion of the Armageddon monkeys.. Ally needs 15 new players to cope with the jambos in Div 1, a 45 man squad just aint enough, albeit after the Utd capitulation he said he had a squad that could compete at the highest level…Anyone who analysed what Ally has come out with this season would be in the nut house.. He is the riddler.

View Comment

hamemadesoupPosted on1:25 pm - Apr 24, 2014


andygraham.66 says:
April 24, 2014 at 12:29 pm
28 0 Rate This

Easdale: Again, I would say that in 140 years, the club’s gone into administration once; I don’t think it would survive a second one.

It didn’t, please keep up

———————————–
Shouldn’t that be 142 years ? Would saying ‘142 years’ incur the wrath of HMRC ?

😉

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on1:26 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Madbhoy24941 says:
April 24, 2014 at 12:03 pm

Apologies, Madbhoy, my granddaughter arrived just as I was about to post my above post. Went to shop for something for our lunch, got her sorted with lunch etc and came back on and pressed ‘post comment’, only to find a minute or so later you’d already introduced the question of timing! Which just shows my questionable timing 🙄

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on1:31 pm - Apr 24, 2014


The Sevco board have played this well.
The reporting on the 120 day review will be a huge dollop of free advertising for them. Maybe for an additional public offering as well as SBs.
Anyone not convinced by the plan tomorrow (anyone with a shred of sense) doesn’t have time now to cancel their payment agreement with TRFC unless they have it already written and they want to drive to Ibrox and hand it in within about 2 hours of the announcement. Delaying any further will see the cash taken out of their accounts and god knows if they’re even entitled to a refund.
Sandy E is banging the begging bowl pretty loud today too. Tugging at the loyal heart strings while guiltin them and feeding them the same old same club fraud that sold SBs in the first two years.
Now we need some puff pieces in tomorrow morning’s rags using some old timers that aren’t allied to King or Allyed to their bank account and we’re all set.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:33 pm - Apr 24, 2014


@SCAPAFLOW
“Daily Record Sport ‏@Record_Sport 2m
Stewart Regan on Rangers 120 day review: No contact with Graham Wallace, review is a club matter. Unaware if club has submitted accounts”
=================================================================
Stewart Regan on Rangers, “Graham Who?”

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on1:34 pm - Apr 24, 2014


The new company set up by Dave King to receive ST monies is called Ibrox 1972 Ltd

Company Details.
Name & Registered Office:
IBROX 1972 LIMITED
1 GEORGE SQUARE
GLASGOW
G2 1AL
Company No. SC473553

Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 26/03/2014

Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: Private Limited Company
Nature of Business (SIC):
None Supplied
Accounting Reference Date: 31/03
Last Accounts Made Up To: (NO ACCOUNTS FILED)
Next Accounts Due: 26/12/2015
Last Return Made Up To:
Next Return Due: 23/04/2015

TM01 16/04/2014 APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR CHRISTINE TRUESDALE
AP01 16/04/2014 DIRECTOR APPOINTED DAVID CUNNINGHAM KING
CERTNM 16/04/2014 COMPANY NAME CHANGED MM&S (5820) LIMITED CERTIFICATE ISSUED ON 16/04/14
CONNOT 16/04/2014 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF NAME NM01 – RESOLUTION
RES15 16/04/2014 CHANGE OF NAME 16/04/2014
NEWINC 26/03/2014 CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
GENERAL COMPANY DETAILS & STATEMENTS OF; OFFICERS, CAPITAL & SHAREHOLDINGS, GUARANTEE, COMPLIANCE, MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION, ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
LATEST SOC 26/03/2014 26/03/14 STATEMENT OF CAPITAL;GBP 2

View Comment

chancer67Posted on1:36 pm - Apr 24, 2014


State aiders can any of you make sense of this,the land bears think they have the Council and Celtic bang to rights with this..

http://billmcmurdo.wordpress.com/2014/04/23/the-heart-of-the-matter/#comment-63093

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:40 pm - Apr 24, 2014


@PTD1978 Sandy Squirrel you mean.. Setting up stall for the 120 word review tomorrow, worded so as tug on the heart strings of the fans, veiled references to admin so that the SFA can skim over that without triggering alarms..It’s all in the phraseology…

Should be an interesting weekend IF this is published, DK response, Sally in fresh warning about meeting Hearts next season with an empty warchest, no Boydy etc…Various old players pitching in with their usual inane nonsense, the Beeb reporting it as it is (OK too far now)..

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:44 pm - Apr 24, 2014


@EASYJAMBO What about Goughie thought he was gonna be a Dir also? Maybe he has had second thoughts..

View Comment

PW1874Posted on1:46 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Since the Insolvency Act would apply to any Directorship of Dave King’s involving the name Rangers – Ibrox 1972 Ltd should be enough Rangerness to persuade the fans to trust their cash to him.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on1:49 pm - Apr 24, 2014


JimBhoy says: April 24, 2014 at 1:44 pm
======================
It may just be that Gough’s appointment is still in the ether or they have used snail mail.

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on1:59 pm - Apr 24, 2014


JimBhoy says:
April 24, 2014 at 1:20 pm
7 0 i
Rate This

@SCAPAFLOW That rule may exist but at the discretion of the Armageddon monkeys.. Ally needs 15 new players to cope with the jambos in Div 1, a 45 man squad just aint enough, albeit after the Utd capitulation he said he had a squad that could compete at the highest level…Anyone who analysed what Ally has come out with this season would be in the nut house.. He is the riddler.

——————————–

To be fair, The Riddler’s riddles actually make sense once you know the answer

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on1:59 pm - Apr 24, 2014


easyJambo says:
April 24, 2014 at 1:34 pm
1 0 Rate This
———

I wonder if this will be the company that ultimately runs TRFC?

Imagine club and ‘history’ (all two years of it, plus a trophy room) sold to Ibrox 1972 and they in turn reach an agreement with RIFC to play at and pay for a certain upkeep of the stadium.

RIFC use their many in-house companies/friends for repair, upkeep and security. Fans get what they pay for on the stadium, manager and player front. RIFC issues bills for services rendered. New share issue in the ‘club’, this time shares or bonds in the ethereal entity — of LNS judgement fame — gets another dollop of cash ready for the chateau-hungry brethren

All made possible by the SFA.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on2:00 pm - Apr 24, 2014


Interesting that the things @apocryphal5 said yesterday have today been confirmed – the Tyrell chap’s appointment and slow ST sales (by S Easdale). Another Charlotte?

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on2:00 pm - Apr 24, 2014


@EASYJAMBO Who are these postmen!!!!

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on2:03 pm - Apr 24, 2014


@EASYJAMBO Regards DK’s newco just googled the addie…

Browns Glasgow
1 George Square,
Glasgow
G2 1DY

View Comment

Comments are closed.