Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

Avatar 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

Avatar

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

Tartanwulver

TartanwulverPosted on10:21 am - May 1, 2014


From FootballIsFixed on twitter

Surprisingly not reported in the English media, there has been a big conference addressing #matchfixing – http://uk.soccerway.com/news/2014/April/30/progress-being-made-in-tackling-match-fixing-claims-platini/n282701/

Ironically, when I opened it, immediately below the article there was a banner saying “Sign up to William Hill for a free £25 bet”

Targeted advertising I guess.

View Comment

Avatar

Jake CantonaPosted on10:22 am - May 1, 2014


pau1mart1n says:
May 1, 2014 at 9:48 am

prequel “apocalypse then”
sequel “apocalypse forever”

——————————–

Ally McKurtz

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on10:35 am - May 1, 2014


Sugar Daddy says:
May 1, 2014 at 10:05 am

Tend to agree. Have long said that you only have to watch on episode of the Dragon’s Den to grasp what ‘investors’ want. Its a share of the company and the profits and if getting a return looks dodgy its a case of ‘I’m out’. However occassionally they are willing to take a punt if they can see another angle to a deal. Often they will ask the picther if they have any other businesses or assets that can be thrown into the mix. The admission that there are property assests up for grabs usually sees the Dragon’s eyes light up.

I know that the Govan property market doesn’t look that attractive at the moment and that there are planning issues Murray Park but these can change over time. If you have property and land there is always someone on the market who may just be williing to take it off your hands.

As you say the club is running on fumes, however I see a few false dawns ahead before the real picture emerges and that will be painted by the shareholders and no one else. One thing for sure is that they will want their pound of flesh.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:46 am - May 1, 2014


Zilch says:
April 30, 2014 at 10:41 pm
ecobhoy says:
April 30, 2014 at 9:52 pm

You seem to forget that LNS didn’t make the decision on his own – there were three members of the tribunal – all eminently qualified who came to a unanimous decision. I have yet to see anyone advance a legally credible counter argument to that decision given the tribunal’s terms of reference and the evidence presented to it..
————————————————————————————————

Fair point about it being a three-member panel, but I am fairly sure I am not the first person to have focused on the learned judge’s role given his high profile background.

A) Chairmen of any tribunals invariably become the focus of attention, especially on controversial decisions, but the simple fact is that all three members have an equal ‘vote’ and in this case they all formed the same conclusion from the evidence presented and the law which applied.

That is not to say of course that they were correct in their decisions as judges and tribunals make mistakes. However the appeal process is there to correct/overturn mistakes but none of the parties appealed in this case and therefore have accepted the LNS Decision..

It is also difficult to make informed criticism of the LNS process and evidence because there isn’t a transcript of the proceedings so we are totally in the dark as to the detail of the vast majority of evidence given, the questions asked and the replies.

Those who wish to attack the LNS Decision conveniently tend to forget that factor which in reality reduces us to little more than crystal ball gazing when making pronouncements on the LNS process.

‘(a) I am questioning his (and his colleague’s) judgement in accepting such tightly defined terms of reference – such an experienced man (group of men) might have been concerned by the time limit and questioned the rationale?’

A) I am a bit too busy at the moment to go back and pick through what we know about the setting of the terms of reference. It should be remembered of course that there was obviously a wish, for various reasons by the footballing authorities, to involve oldco and newco in the proceedings. Therefore there was a lot of horse-trading about terms of reference.

Also you have to remember that the relevance and rationale of the time periods came late in the day mainly through the forensic detecting work of our very own Auldheid. LNS and his colleagues were led to believe that the DOS and EBT schemes were essentially the same and we now know that wasn’t the case.

I am certain the LNS tribunal didn’t know the critical difference between the schemes and therefore the time periods don’t have an apparent significance, at the time, which we now know attaches to them. Somewhere in my memory I seem to remember that the time periods split into different rule change periods of the SFA/SPL. I also don’t think there was any documentation in the couple of DOS cases that we now know applied presented and, indeed, much of the info came courtesy of the BBC.

Many barriers were erected to prevent the full story being disclosed and people are right to question why LNS didn’t overcome these barriers. However HMRC had spent almost a decade trying to get info and was thwarted at every turn and only a police raid on Ibrox turned-up some documentation that had escaped the shredder.

I’m afraid that football tribunals aren’t equipped or meant to carry out the kind of investigation that would unearth the whole truth about what was going on at Rangers and LNS process must be viewed in terms of the actual practicalities and restraints which applied to it. And I would say that any looseness in terms of reference would have created a bigger shambles than we actually ended-up with.

(b) The evidence provided was of such dubious quality in the case of e.g. Bryson, that one might have expected a more robust questioning of previous practise in the sport (e.g. expulsion from tournaments for missing signatures etc).

A) We know almost nothing about the evidence presented or whether it was questioned because we don’t have a transcript. of the proceedings so your comments about evidence by and large remain an assumption.

As to Bryson I think we have to be careful in labeling his evidence as ‘dubious’. He was a key witness being the SFA’s top man for rule interpretation which was accepted as valid by the SPL which brought the case against Rangers.

That IMO as far as the tribunal members are concerned means that his evidence has to be accepted at face value. Only if a case was made by the SPL through bringing other witnesses or evidence that Bryson’s understanding was incorrect or was just a personal musing having never been discussed and adopted as SFA policy would the three tribunal members have to had come to a decision on the quality of his evidence and they may well have dismissed it.

But the SPL decided not to go down that road and they have never ever been questioned on that by the SMSM which is just so gutless as to be nauseating. However given Bryson’s unchallenged interpretation of the relevant rules which was accepted by all parties before the tribunal then it isn’t for the LNS members to decide his evidence was wrong, ignore it and take another contrary opinion based on what they thought should be the case.

That just isn’t how the legal process works and if LNS had acted in this way it would provide automatic grounds for what I am convinced would have been a successful appeal.

View Comment

valentinesclown

valentinesclownPosted on11:02 am - May 1, 2014


Ally and the famous we do not do walking away comment has never really cut it with me. He has been handsomely paid and still is as far as I know. The real unknown money making individuals are in the background. They take money without been seen, they take money and nobody seems to know them, they take money without actually saying anything, they will probably kill the Govan club and keep taking money after it’s demise. So the comment we do not do walking away is admirable from the fans but the real issue is that it is their money (not Ally’s or any of the board/investors) that keeps walking away and it always will when unknown and somewhat dubious entities are allowed to run your club.

View Comment

Avatar

FisianiPosted on11:09 am - May 1, 2014


Are we nearly there yet?
The imminent demise of a Rangers has been on the horizon for over two years. They keep limping along and just when the last dregs are in the tank they get another top up , whether it is Ibrox semifinal hire fees, SPFL early payouts, or World Cup fees. As long as the spivs can extract money this gig will go on. A fair number will part with 400 pounds to buy a season ticket expecting to see a season’s worth of games. 10,000 doing so raises 4,000,000 pounds 30,000 doing so would raise 12,000,000. Why walk away when there money to siphon off. Main problem however is the phenomenal burn rate of 1,300,000 a month which shows little sign of abating. Add in a new share offer ( I know stop laughing but you can fool some people all of the time) and they might keep going till Christmas.

View Comment

Avatar

theoldcoursePosted on11:13 am - May 1, 2014


On the subject of closed door matches as a punishment. Would that not be open to legal argument from season ticket holders that they have a contract with the club to supply a set number of matches. Do the governing body have the right to effectively break the contract the club has with its season ticket holders. It would be fine for Cup matches where tickets are normally sold for each match but I think there might be issues with trying to impose it on a league match. Might we get into a situation where a club effectively has to refund season ticket holders for matches they were unable to attend through no fault of their own.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on11:22 am - May 1, 2014


rabtdog says:
May 1, 2014 at 9:53 am

=================
Rather than outright corruption, my accusation would be laziness and incompetence. Also, I would never confuse those brave people who risk their lives in dangerous places to try to get the true facts into the public domain (journalists, let’s call them), with people working on the Sports desks of the Scottish press.

Our sports hacks’ main tasks seem to be the regurgitation of press releases from the PR “industry”, and conducting interviews where no unwelcome questions are ever asked, and no awkward follow up questions are even contemplated. Plus writing up the interviews and press releases into puff pieces. (Let’s call those ones churnalists) .

No bribery is required, just let them bask in the company of great ones such as SDM. They find it very flattering to be in such exalted company. It makes them feel like insiders, whereas in reality they are just being played like a load of old violins.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on11:54 am - May 1, 2014


theoldcourse says:
May 1, 2014 at 11:13 am
1 0 Rate This

On the subject of closed door matches as a punishment. Would that not be open to legal argument from season ticket holders that they have a contract with the club to supply a set number of matches. Do the governing body have the right to effectively break the contract the club has with its season ticket holders. It would be fine for Cup matches where tickets are normally sold for each match but I think there might be issues with trying to impose it on a league match. Might we get into a situation where a club effectively has to refund season ticket holders for matches they were unable to attend through no fault of their own.

That was one of the reasons I mentioned ‘home fans only’ on the previous page.

View Comment

Avatar

ptd1978Posted on11:55 am - May 1, 2014


rabtdog says:
May 1, 2014 at 9:53 am
12 3 Rate This
____________
That’s a great point and one that’s worth making sure everyone thinks about when they deride the SMSM. Have the SMSM as a collective body failed to report the Rangers story without fear or favour? Undoubtedly. Is the reporting of the events at Ibrox even handed. Not in any way, but even in Scotland there are fine journalists who work hard and report even handed news. Mark Daly for example does a fantastic job. The Rangers piece he did was a trifle for him compared to some of the excellent work he does that exposes dangerous criminal behaviour in some cases saves lives. There are many others too who we are tarring with the same brush as a craven bunch of reporters and their self interested editors.
It’s probably no accident that the term SMSM has leaked out into general use. The likes of Young, Trainer, Spiers and Jackson want to see themselves as part of that body. If they are part of that body then at best they’re a nasty wart on the end of superfluous third nipple that no-one else would blink at removing in order to make what remained look much more appealing.

The other distinction is between what journalists do and what passes for the reporting of Scottish football. I can’t think of ANY journalists who make their living from Scottish football. I can name many reporters. They can call themselves journalists only because they have a card that they get for paying money to a union. The difference? Reporters only report. They witness events or wait for press releases and they write about it. That’s not really journalism. It’s a small part of what a journalist should do. It’s definitely not journalism when said reporters choose to misrepresent facts. Nor when they report as fact assertions that they haven’t verified or that they know aren’t really true. Nor when they conflate opinion with fact to distort or hide a truth.
Then there are the guys who aren’t even reporters, but who only comment on events. Again they have a wee card that says they are journalists, but in reality they sit on their behinds and do little more than put reported events into some kind of perspective. In the perverse world of Scottish sports media, this makes them the kingmakers. The 4-5 days in a week when there is usually no footballing news cannot mean no football news is printed or broadcast. So what these guys do is pretend to analyse. Some of them probably genuinely do try to analyse the situation, but Murray realised quickly that most will happily skew their opinions for a seat at the big table. As a result, news reported on a Monday that might mean nothing in reality, will be editorialised and analysed until by Friday, “reporters” are making it the story and are asking Rangers next opponents why they are under so much pressure, or whether the Celtic manager is going to quit or be fired.
None of this is journalism. It’s spin doctoring and propaganda. Designed to make their failing products sellable in a market where they have made truth a disposable commodity. A real journalist’s first responsibility is to the truth. He/She will print a story and not give a damn if they get banned from press conferences. It’ll make no difference because their primary resource is their contacts and not a press release. PMGB has shown it can be done. It’s to all our detriment that no major Scottish sports journalist is willing to work this way.

P.S.
I think I’ll try to talk about the SMSSM (Scottish Mainstream Sports Media) from now on. Less catchy, but it’s at least respectful to the many actual journalists in Scotland.

View Comment

Avatar

JimBhoyPosted on12:10 pm - May 1, 2014


We all assume DK has a serious dose of rangersitis, maybe he actually has an acute dose of jealousy. He sees the money dispersing thru the holes at Ibrox all set up by the spiverati and having done a bit of spivery pokery himself in the past he is covetous of the current arrangement especially at his beloved rangers. 💡

View Comment

Avatar

thirdmanrunningPosted on12:17 pm - May 1, 2014


Fisiani says: May 1, 2014 at 11:09 am

Are we nearly there yet?
_________________________

The short answer is no. But what I have learned is that it’s not a case of IF but WHEN we get there.

Running on fumes. Emergency Loans. Share offers. Dave King etc etc only serve to highlight one thing and that is how ‘Rangers’ were allowed to press reset and start again, but rather than re-establish themselves as a going concern, with a new financial model, what we’ve seen is enormous and on-going fraud that sees them on life support again.

This isn’t going to get better. There isn’t a plan. There is no way out. They still spend more than they bring in. Buried deep in the psyche of the Rangers fan is a sense of entitlement and that permeates the Club and is both an albatross and millstone round its neck.

If TRFC does get enough ST income it staggers on. If it doesn’t it goes into Administration. RIFC own some assets and what they want is a rental income from them. This will be paid by the next group to take over the running of the ‘Club/Team’. But the absence of soft loans, of overdrafts of any ability to maintain their perpetual over-spending means there can be no return to the old ways of the old Club.

So, we’re not there yet, there are more twists and turns, and somersaults by the SFA but this experiment, this omnishambles only ends one way. Sit back and watch it unfold, it won’t be too long now.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on12:33 pm - May 1, 2014


rabtdog says:
May 1, 2014 at 9:53 am

“Anyway, next time you say, ‘All journalists are corrupt,’ try to remember the dead ones”
————————————–
The leveling of your controversial remark has the desired effect of eliciting a response. I am a great admirer of controversy as an engine to cultivate debate so hope I do not mistake you by tackling the topic head on.

You make too light a comparison. Without even following the link I know the sacrifices that are so often made by journalists who are driven both by selfish and higher motives to uncover the truth. How you could possibly mistake these people for their namesakes that swell the ranks of the main stream media is far from beyond me. For the comparison could only be made in jest or as an absurdity to illustrate a parody. The general meanings of the terminology often employed on the blog will at times require clarification but I think you drive the controversy too far by suggesting a fine distinction requires to be drawn here. The distinction is quite clear.

It has been one of the great educations of this blog to see the extent to which the media are prepared to distort ‘the facts’ to service some underlying agenda. It has ever been thus but each generation must relearn this lesson if it is not to be seduced into ineffectiveness. At times this may lead to an over reaction but surely the suspicion concerning what appears in the press is well merited. If a few good journalists are tarred by the stigma of their unprincipled colleagues then that is unfortunate and in due course they will distinguish themselves by the quality of their observations. Over the last couple of days there have been press articles that many would recognise as being truly inquisitive but which others understandably might reserve judgement upon.

We are being played like an old fiddle and to suggest that the minstrels involved bear any relation to individuals that risk their life for their profession is very disingenuous indeed in my opinion.

View Comment

Avatar

Screwtop ThompsonPosted on12:38 pm - May 1, 2014


thirdmanrunning says:
May 1, 2014 at 12:17 pm

This isn’t going to get better. There isn’t a plan. There is no way out. They still spend more than they bring in. Buried deep in the psyche of the Rangers fan is a sense of entitlement and that permeates the Club and is both an albatross and millstone round its neck.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As a long time lurker and infrequent poster on this blog I read a lot about this “sense of entitlement” and in the past haven’t paid too much attention to it. I usually think that it is the actions of those in control and not the mindset of supporters that guide events. However, I have come to the same conclusion as thirdmanrunning on this.

When the “sense of entitlement” mindset is complemented by total deference to leaders (any leaders!! Whyte, Green. SDM etc) it really can be a barrier to constructive and positive thinking. The SMSM play a major role in promoting this group think by supporting, at the drop of a hat, whoever is the next leader as the saviour and connecting all stories (real and invented) back to Rangers, Celtic, Premiership and so on.

Many commentators are of the opinion that the two clubs meeting again on the football field will lead to carnage off it but are willing for others (not them of course) to pay the price of that. Personally I hope they never meet again. Society has a problem but Scottish Football does not need to be the battle ground for its expression.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on12:42 pm - May 1, 2014


http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/next-seasons-glasgow-cup-final-3481244

Glasgow FA and Queen’s Park committee member Malky Mackay Senior admits a solution is being discussed to prevent the reputation of competition from being further damaged.

He said: “We need to look at the situation for future finals due to the behaviour we have seen. The price of policing these games doesn’t come cheap and our association doesn’t have the money that’s been needed to cope with what we have had to deal with in the past few years.

“Celtic and Rangers can’t be expected to control the actions of elements from within their support. This is a society issue.”

I disagree

View Comment

Avatar

Billy BoycePosted on12:48 pm - May 1, 2014


I see that the Vanguard Bears are telling the nation via Twitter, “Vanguard Bears purchased 25,542 Rangers shares today – and we will be buying more.” In addition to their timely investment they have issued the following statement, which includes important questions the SMSM decline to ask. I get the impression the VB think our Jo’burg Messiah is just a naughty boy after all.

Season Ticket Trust.
In a week that saw the board of Rangers conclude their 120 day review into the business, Season Ticket renewals across the country are in various stages of action, with Dave King and the “Union of Fans” encouraging Season Ticket holders to pay their season ticket monies in to an Escrow account that is intended to hold and release funds when Rangers sign over securities for the Albion Car Park and Edmiston House to Season Ticket holders.

With many of our members expressing concern that the “Season Ticket Trust” hasn’t been made clear to them, we believe it is appropriate to seek clarity by asking the following questions of Dave King, and the “Union of Fans”.

It should be noted that we also have concerns about the 120 Day Review, and how the club plan to bridge an apparent cash flow shortfall, with the club £1.5M down before next season has even started

Q – Has an Escrow account been set up yet?

Q – If so, who is hosting that Escrow account facility, i.e. which bank?

Q – Who are the Trustees of the account, other than Richard Gough?

Q – How do I pay in to it?

Q – If I pay in to it, what guarantees do I have over what seat I will be paying for, and that the seat will be in my name?

Q – What written assurances do I get that the money will be returned, in the event that the assurances the Trust are requesting from Rangers are not granted?

Q – What assurances, other than guarantees over Rangers owned assets have the Trust requested?

Q – 66.6% of the loan value, not including interest, is due to Rangers Supporters Trust board member George Letham. Don’t the Trust feel that withholding funds to Rangers runs the risk of Rangers defaulting on the loan to Mr Letham, and thereby Mr Letham theoretically stands to gain £1.075M worth of shares in Rangers International Football Club?

Q – Can George Letham confirm what his plans are regarding his holdings if that share value is transferred to him, namely, will he retain ownership and voting rights, or will he proxy votes to the Rangers Supporters Trust (RST)?

Q – For those who sign up for Away Tickets, how will they get tickets in future?

Q – Do current Travel Club members stand to lose travel club points by using this Trust?

Q – How will Richard Gough act as Guarantor as a resident of the USA?

Q – What are the Administration costs of the Escrow account, and how will they be funded?

Q – In the event that Rangers are willing to compromise over loan securities, with the agreement of Sandy Easdale and George Letham, who will become the signatory for these assets on behalf of Season Ticket holders

Q – Do shareholders that live abroad with a shareholding in value higher than the price of a season ticket get any security?

Q – Why was there no mention of the Season Ticket Trust, or any information about it in the UoF leaflet handed out last week?

Q – Will the Trust facilitate split payments like those offered by the club to pay for Season Tickets (through Zebra finance over 4 or 10 months)?

Q – Will Season Ticket Holders who have sat in their seat for a number of years be able to secure “their” seat at Ibrox, or will they stand to lose “their” seat?

Q – Will money deposited accrue any interest? If so, what will be done with that money?

Q – Where will the interest payments be shown?

Q – Who decides exactly when the money will be released to the club and in what form?

Q – Will the custodians of the account be separate and distinct from the organisations who wish only for the board’s removal?

Q – Will every member have a say in when the money should be released?

Q – What exactly does the board need to do (beyond what they have) to make the monies available?

Q – What lines of communication have been opened with the club to urgently discuss the aims of this project?

Q – Who exactly has the authority to negotiate with the club?

Q – How often will fans putting money into this scheme be updated of progress and by what medium?

Q – What other transparency is guaranteed by way of communicating to those who pay in to the scheme?

Q – Are other Rangers supporters’ organisations involved in this scheme?

Q – Are the Rangers supporters trust or any of their senior or high profile members involved at the core of this?

Q – Will there be a board of Trustees in the scheme, and if so, how will they be elected?

Q – How can supporters and contributors become involved to influence the decisions being made?

Q – Are any previous board members of any of Rangers corporate entities, other than Dave King, involved? If so, at what level?

Q – Are there any conditions attached to the Trust that require a nominee of the Trust to join the PLC board or the football club board of Rangers?

Q – If so, how will that nominee be chosen?

Q – Will the Trust be VAT Registered?

Q – If the board acquiesce to UOF demands who will then hold first charge/security on the stadium rights to our club?

Q – What IT problems could possibly delay implementation of the Trust?

We trust that the relevant people involved in the Trust will both answer these questions and make themselves known to Rangers supporters, who are understandably cautious about contributing their hard earned money to a scheme that appears to carry a high element of risk. We feel that supporters should seek clarity both from the PLC board of the club, over their plans for the future, and from those promoting the Season Ticket Trust.

View Comment

Avatar

JimBhoyPosted on12:59 pm - May 1, 2014


@BILLY BOYCE I saw the Questions on the bearsden but couldn’t be @rsed entertaining any notion of DK setting anything up other than a room with much smoke and mirrors..

However in reading your post I see the security required is the car park and EH.. I thought I read they wanted security over Ibrox and MP? Maybe they know that cannot be granted due to CW’s sevco5088 claim. However the other 2 assets have already some claim on them thru the loans shirley?

The more i read about DK’s fund the more i think that some bears are gonna get fleeced.. Fleeced if you buy an SB at ibrox (paper bag full of readies), in Admin before the season starts. Fleeced by the trustworthy SA gentleman (GASL).

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on1:03 pm - May 1, 2014


ecobhoy says:
April 30, 2014 at 9:52 pm

“I have yet to see anyone advance a legally credible counter argument to that decision given the tribunal’s terms of reference and the evidence presented to it.”
—————————————
I should forward one exemplar argument that might illustrate the potential for fissures in the LNS decision.

The punishment levied by the Commission of Inquiry upon Rangers FC (now IL) for breach of registration procedures over a long period and on numerous occasions was a £250,000 fine.

The following two cases might suggest that such a fine was not proportionate to the offences committed:

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1848&newsID=2792

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1848&newsID=12672

If it can be accepted that the fine levied on RFC(IL) was highly disproportionate compared with similar offences carried out within the same jurisdiction then might this call into question the Commission’s legal judgement?

View Comment

Para Handy

Para HandyPosted on1:07 pm - May 1, 2014


Billy Boyce says:
May 1, 2014 at 12:48 pm
——————————–

Thanks for sharing this. It also begs a number of other questions.

– Given that setting up such Trusts takes time and from the sounds coming out of Ibrox, that is in as short supply as money, what are the timescales involved?
– If the Club/Company/Band of Brothers (delete as applicable) suffers an insolvency event between now and next season, how will the relationship between the Trust and the new Club/Company/Band of Brothers (delete as applicable) be set up and managed?

Probably more but a start…

Oh and while I am at it, I wonder if the SPFL/SFA will be having a wee word with the journalist of the year about wasting their time? Darryl might be Mr Unpopular around Hampden at the moment!

View Comment

Avatar

iamacantPosted on1:20 pm - May 1, 2014


Billy Boyce says:
May 1, 2014 at 12:48 pm

“I see that the Vanguard Bears are telling the nation via Twitter, “Vanguard Bears purchased 25,542 Rangers shares”
———————————————————————————————————-
25000 sold yesterday afternoon – co-incidence?

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on1:24 pm - May 1, 2014


Loving the Vanguard Bears, however they can add their questions to the ones asked by Phil Mac on the list of things that will never be answered.

King is vague about how the trust will work.
Wallace is vague about how Sevco will become Premiership champions in a few years time.

It really is all hogwash when you think of the plan that is being developed at Hearts.

Is it any wonder no one trusts anyone close to the action spouting forth about the way forward for T’Rangers.

View Comment

Avatar

iamacantPosted on1:38 pm - May 1, 2014


JimBhoy says:
May 1, 2014 at 1:32 pm

And 25000 sold 6 hours later lost £300 compared to price paid for 25000 purchased at 8.00am. Certainly looks like an IB bet 😀

View Comment

Avatar

ZilchPosted on1:49 pm - May 1, 2014


ecobhoy says:
May 1, 2014 at 10:46 am

However given Bryson’s unchallenged interpretation of the relevant rules which was accepted by all parties before the tribunal then it isn’t for the LNS members to decide his evidence was wrong, ignore it and take another contrary opinion based on what they thought should be the case.

That just isn’t how the legal process works and if LNS had acted in this way it would provide automatic grounds for what I am convinced would have been a successful appeal.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————

I would expect a tribunal to take account of previous practise and to perform some sort of test of the quality of evidence that is crucial to the case. This does not require significant resources. It requires someone to ask – what did you do in previous cases of player misregistration ?

The fact that the outcome of the tribunal strays so far from previous practise strongly suggests this did not happen.

As you rightly point out, we cannot be sure of very much in this case due to the lack of transparency in proceedings. I am not a judge sitting in a legal case, so I am not constrained by innocent unless proven guilty. I am free to give my opinion, based upon available (if limited) evidence, on the performance of those involved in hearing this tribunal. My opinion is that there appears to have been very little desire to rock the boat in anyway and that the predetermined outcome was preferred over any kind of stance that would be in keeping with previous practise. Whether the tribunal knew of this in advance or were guided there unknowingly (IMO probably the latter), there does not appear to have been much attempt to ensure independence or consistency with the previous norms of the organisation requesting the tribunal.

The fact that all parties were satisfied with the outcome and did not appeal is consistent with the suggestion that they were all party to the predetermined outomce in the first place.

Finally, presumably any appeal could ultimately have ended up in a court of law? I wonder if such a court would have taken such a relaxed view with respect to the view expressed by Bryson? I wonder if the extensive previous practise would have played a role then? Or perhaps it is correct that our system of law is so easily led by the nose. In that case it is an ass indeed.

We will, of course, never know. Which is also how it was always intended to be. Scottish fitba needs transparency…

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoia

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on2:01 pm - May 1, 2014


• HIGHFIBRE says:
April 30, 2014 at 7:55 am
I find it very strange that people think that in any way, shape or form the operations or identity of a company fielding a full time professional football team can be called a “club”.
It is just a bizarre anachronism lingering from the days when football teams were based in and built from a local community, and while we may wistfully remember those days there is not the slightest chance of them returning. Thankfully football in Scotland is not quite as bad as south of the border yet, but as far as I can see the “clubs” that turned into the money spinning machines with revenues based on merchandising, sponsorship, advertising, and TV for the gamblers all died quite some time ago, killed by the very creatures they became.
____________________________________

I switched on Sky Sports News this morning before heading for work and an item was aired about an Enterprise competition for schoolchildren run by Barclays and the Premier League. The aim was to come up with the best marketing plan to attract more international fans to a Premier League club of their choice. Specific areas mentioned were the USA, “Africa” and China. Graeme Le Saux and assorted other people associated with the scheme gave gushing interviews about how this is the future and how fantastic the EPL is but how it needs to expand and evolve blah blah. To me, this is basically everything that is wrong with modern day football. No doubt the schoolkids did a great job – the winning team’s submission was a plan for West Ham. Seems a bit unlikely though that any prospective American, “African” and Chinese would look beyond Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal i.e. whatever teams happen to be challenging for the title during any given season. I doubt West Ham will feature on the radar regardless of the slickest most professional marketing plans. This obsession with money and “international marketing” is sucking the soul out of the game and I acknowledge that Celtic have been guilty of this too with the token Asian signings over the last five years or so.

View Comment

Avatar

occamPosted on2:01 pm - May 1, 2014


“If … journalists are no longer able (freely) to document events, what about accountability in society?” – quote from a Swedish MP during a programme currently airing on Al Jazeera http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/witness/2014/04/big-boys-gone-bananas-201442111523783220.html

At first glance, the content of the film has little relevance to this blog – but with the title ‘Big boys gone bananas!’ and the insight it provides into the diminishing integrity of mainstream journalism in the face of corporate power, we could draw a few valid parallels with our own wee diddy hacks.

It’s beginning to look as though sites like TSFM and others where the truth is more important than profit, may become the main source of balanced, honest information.

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoia

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on2:06 pm - May 1, 2014


• WOTTPI says:
April 30, 2014 at 9:15 am
I note that McCoist (like many ‘football’ people) still has his head in the sands with regard to the need for current day managers to have a handle on the need for fiscal responsibility, especially with regard to what players he can bring in.
_______________________

I note that Mr “I don’t have anything to do with the finance you’ll have to ask someone else about that I just sign what’s put in front of me” McCoist was able to quote some very specific figures in relation to wage as % of turnover the other day. A truly Damascene enlightenment must have taken place. I guess that burns down those particular excuse bridges in future as surely even the most niave amnesiac of constituents could hardly fail to make the connection

View Comment

Avatar

FinlochPosted on2:08 pm - May 1, 2014


Radio Shortbread has been helping the SFA with Tufty McSquirrell today.
We’ve got headline news that the SFA are working on a Scotland V England match.
Not an announcement.
Just working on.
And to make it look like real news they have Pat Nevin and Terry Butcher to give us opinions.
Why are the SFA “leaking” non news to their BBC pals to air big time?
Are there maybe bigger things they are hoping not to be asked about – the kind of stuff Phil McG was tweeting yesterday.
That’s where real journalists would and should be going – especially public service ones.

Scotland needs an honest BBC Shortbread and a totally new SFA

View Comment

Avatar

Kilgore TroutPosted on2:10 pm - May 1, 2014


Two trades yesterday totalling 25542 shares at significantly over the Offer Price.
Don’t know who the buyer was but if it had been me I’d be feeling a bit embarrassed.

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoia

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on2:11 pm - May 1, 2014


• AULDHEID says:
April 30, 2014 at 6:06 pm

43

1

Rate This

Neepheid
I think it will be the points deduction issue but I suspect that SFA will want to avoid another non punishment punishment by having it apply only to this season.
The moral hazard of doing so is writ so large that even the unethical cannot avoid it’s gaze.
There must be some discretionary power in their rules for doing the right thing rather than justify doing the wrong thing.
__________________________________
Their recent pathetic “we can’t withhold a licence because they’ve got no bank debt [because they don’t have a bank]” statement suggests precisely the opposite. They have no shame nor scruples

View Comment

Avatar

Madbhoy24941Posted on2:22 pm - May 1, 2014


SCOTTC says:
May 1, 2014 at 12:42 pm

“Celtic and Rangers can’t be expected to control the actions of elements from within their support. This is a society issue.”

I disagree

———————————————–

I disagree with your disagreement; there is enough evidence to show that young men see football as a vehicle for committing crimes without much chance of retribution. To state that this is not a society issue is in my opinion wrong, very wrong and ignoring all the evidence there is available to support the opposite view.

It is very easy to focus on the religious divide or the historical differences between the two; they are an easy target in that respect. I acknowledge fully that the problems exist and agree it is a cancer on our society, I am not religious so easy for me to say but I wish everyone would put their faith in science instead. Would that take the issue away? No, in my opinion, not! It would just transfer it to some other vehicle or subject matter, the evidence of that is available in almost every country in Europe including our closest neighbours down south.

If religion is the only cause of trouble (as I feel that is why you disagree, it is after all, only a west of Scotland thing…) between Celtic and Rangers then how do we explain the crimes and numbers of individuals involved not being much different to the other parts of the country and across many different eras.

I have not been to an away game (domestically) since leaving the country over 10 years ago so maybe and hopefully things have changed but I can honestly say I have been more scared and intimidated in Aberdeen in the 80’s and Edinburgh in the 90’s with the casual groups following the 3 teams there than I ever was going to Ibrox.

Let us be clear, most Celtic fans (or at least the ones I know) are just as disgusted at the behaviour of the element in question and would rather they take their disenchantment elsewhere, what is clear is that the clubs alone cannot change this behaviour.

View Comment

Avatar

DenPosted on2:27 pm - May 1, 2014


The Rangers are getting deeper and deeper into the financial mess of their own making. The woeful 120 day failed to show a semblance of a viable business plan:

I would expect the prudent action for a Board of Directors would be to consider Administration or Liquidation of the Company.

This Company is making massive annual losses and doing very little to stop them. This Company has no credit facilities and no one is willing to Capitalise it. It has resorted to expernsive short tem financing

I am quite sure that the company will be taking full advantage of payment terms offered by suppliers.and probably exceeding the allowed terms. I just hope that HMRC, The Police, Ambulance Service and other public funded bodies are monitoring their accounts with them, We tax payers lost enough last time.

The longer they hold out the bigger the collapse is going to be.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on2:30 pm - May 1, 2014


Castofthousands says:
May 1, 2014 at 1:03 pm
ecobhoy says:
April 30, 2014 at 9:52 pm

“I have yet to see anyone advance a legally credible counter argument to that decision given the tribunal’s terms of reference and the evidence presented to it.”
—————————————

I should forward one exemplar argument that might illustrate the potential for fissures in the LNS decision.

The punishment levied by the Commission of Inquiry upon Rangers FC (now IL) for breach of registration procedures over a long period and on numerous occasions was a £250,000 fine.

The following two cases might suggest that such a fine was not proportionate to the offences committed:

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1848&newsID=2792
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1848&newsID=12672

If it can be accepted that the fine levied on RFC(IL) was highly disproportionate compared with similar offences carried out within the same jurisdiction then might this call into question the Commission’s legal judgement?

I don’t think your examples can be taken as ‘examplar’ for a number of possible reasons. Firstly, they refer to ‘ineligible’ players which doesn’t apply to the LNS decision mainly on the basis of the Bryson Definition.

Further, one example is from 2007 – well before Bryson defined what an ‘ineligible’ player meant which I could well rule it out. And the other example comes from after Bryson but applies to Womens’ Football and I therefore have no idea whether the rules there are also covered by the Bryson interpretation.

Obviously after Bryson then any player ruled ‘ineligible’ could have good grounds for appealing the ruling. In both your cases the mistakes were admitted by the clubs involved and they accepted their punishment and the consequences.

That is the honest side of Scottish Football which should be applauded. Bryson’s Definition IMO is only of assistance to those who have no honour and whose sole aim isn’t just about beating other teams on the football field but by any means. Bryson IMO closed the doors of honesty and morality by his definition but at the moment is stands as the official SFA and presumably SPFL position on the question of elegibility.

As to the proportionality of the fine on oldco Rangers then LNS commented on the circumstances that the company was in administration which made any payment problematic in the extreme and indeed he could have imposed a fine of millions but to what point? All that would have happened is that it would have further reduced any minimal payment in the £ to the creditors.

So, in reality Rangers wouldn’t have paid anything but if any money is left in the pot then it would be their already financially bruised creditors. Personally I think LNS and his colleagues struck a sensible balance in the fine imposed considering that Rangers would never pay a penny of it whatever the amount.

I therefore don’t accept your proposition that the financial penalties imposed in the three cases were for ‘similar offences carried out within the same jurisdiction’ and it is too far a stretch to regard your examples as ‘examplar’ in all the circumstances.

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on2:33 pm - May 1, 2014


Castofthousands says:
May 1, 2014 at 1:03 pm

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1848&newsID=2792

Something strange about the QoS story. I’m maybe going to write a lot of mince but; according to Bryson in the LNS decision, if it isn’t noticed at the time of registration that there is an error in the registration, then, to all intents and purposes, the player is considered to be registered and so he is eligible to play until such times as the error is discovered (and presumably pointed out to the club involved). Now I know the QoS case was in the Cup, and that there was no problem with the registration (though maybe it is considered a registration matter), but it obviously wasn’t noticed at the time of the first cup tie, so, taking Brysonistics to it’s extreme, if his ineligibility to play in the cup wasn’t noticed until after the second game, then QoS had done nothing wrong in playing him, and so shouldn’t have suffered any penalty. This is quite different from the Spartan’s case where, apparently, the SFA had spotted the error prior to the match but were slow (used snail-mail) to advise the club.

Even I’m not certain I’m making any sense here, but it just feels like there is a contradiction with Bryson’s claims at LNS. There are others here who are very adept at analysis of this kind of thing and I’d welcome anyone’s input, even if it ‘s just to say, Ally, you’re talking a load of…

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on2:43 pm - May 1, 2014


ecobhoy says:
May 1, 2014 at 2:30 pm

I tried to add in my previous post but the edit facility was closed by another post that the SPL decided not to recommend any penalties which should be levied on Rangers if they were found guilty on any of the charges.

This meant LNS were left ‘blind’ and I can only assume that previous ‘penalties’ weren’t disclosed to them. However as I pointed out in my post that as the fine would never be paid by a Rangers in admin and soon to be in liquidation then the actual level of fine was pretty academic in any case.

I have seen the odd mention that the fine should be regarded as a ‘football debt’ but I see no possibility of that and believe Green would have laughed in the faces of the SPL and SFA had they made that suggestion no matter what was contained in the 5-Way Agreement.

View Comment

Avatar

iamacantPosted on2:49 pm - May 1, 2014


http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-investor-urges-dave-king-3482599

In the red corner we have Alan McKenzie and in the blue corner we have the great white hope from SA

Fight, fight 😀

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on2:50 pm - May 1, 2014


Allyjambo says:
May 1, 2014 at 2:33 pm

Even I’m not certain I’m making any sense here, but it just feels like there is a contradiction with Bryson’s claims at LNS
—————————————-
Ally you’re talking a load of sense and of course that’s the ludicrous destination which the Bryson Definition would ultimately take us.

But as I mentioned in my earlier post the QoS incident was in 2007 – long before Bryson’d pontification. Of course we don’t know when his definition became SFA policy ot indeed if it actually is SFA policy.

And the SMSM has never ever asked a couple of simple questions to clear the matter up. Or is there some reason that the Bryson Definition is left floating in limbo with an unclear status?

Is it because if it was rejected by the SFA or SPFL then there would be no cover from a fig leaf should HMRC win the UTT. Is that why Bryson’s musings can’t be kicked into touch just yet ❓

View Comment

scapaflow

scapaflowPosted on2:52 pm - May 1, 2014


Can i suggest that the board members of the SFA, SPFL, RIFC. TRFC and all employees of these august organisations immediately enroll on the OU course below. Who knows, the feckless feckwits may actually learn something :mrgreen:

http://www.open.edu/openlearn/money-management/the-business-football/content-section-overview?utm_source=OpenLearn+newsletter&utm_campaign=db5e0cb4a1-OpenLearn_newsletter_April_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_260c5edc30-db5e0cb4a1-9795969

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on3:04 pm - May 1, 2014


ecobhoy says:
May 1, 2014 at 2:50 pm

Cheers, eco, glad you see what I was getting at 🙂 makes me feel a little less like a teapot. If nothing else, it probably would have sufficed as an indicator, if requested at the enquiry, as to how the SFA previously viewed such errors which went un-noticed until they were noticed 😯 , which, in the very likely absence of anything that matched the RFC shenanigans historically, could well have been the nearest example.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on3:09 pm - May 1, 2014


iamacant says:
May 1, 2014 at 2:49 pm
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-investor-urges-dave-king-3482599

In the red corner we have Alan McKenzie and in the blue corner we have the great white hope from SA. Fight, fight 😀

Now I may have missed it as I only skimmed the acres of words in the Record Story. But if my memory serves me correctly is this not the same Alan Mckenzie who was pressurising Malcolm Murray for a refund on his shares which he had paid £1 each for. It’s all in the CF emails released last year.

He was putting a lot of pressure on any director who would listen is my memory of the disclosures in those emails and I’m sure there was some mention of possibly ‘preferential’ treatment for Laxeys who had also paid £1 a share but apparently got a 30p a share ‘refund’ through a transfer of shares from Green to match the 70p flotation price.

Strange that he doesn’t appear to mention that in his Record article unless I have missed it. Still if he didn’t get a refund then I think he deserves one given his sterling continuing commitment to the club.

View Comment

Avatar

ScotsExpatPosted on3:16 pm - May 1, 2014


Being in the US, I am limited to the amount of SMSM I can get hold of. Up till now, I have made do with podcasts from BBC Scot, but recently started dl’ing the Clyde SSB…

I was amazed at the way that Clyde, no matter the presenter/pundit mix, manage to put forward a history of events that is so disconnected from reality..

One point, however ,from the analysis I have listened to so far, has been bouncing around in my head, and I am lost as to why no-one on any form of analysis show has asked the question..

The lack of credit facilities could be the final nail in the ST coffin for TRFC. Based on the assumption that the spivs actually WANT a team playing at Ibrox next season, and, more likely, WANT the monies flowing in, WHY was Ibrox not offered as security?

I can understand them ignoring DK and the UoF, but, if they actually own the stadium outright, why not give them the security, in the knowledge that it is their best chance to fleece the fans some more?

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on3:35 pm - May 1, 2014


iamacant says:
May 1, 2014 at 2:49 pm
4 0 Rate This

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-investor-urges-dave-king-3482599

In the red corner we have Alan McKenzie and in the blue corner we have the great white hope from SA
=========================
Seems that Alan wants King to cover his huge loss, and King has told him to dream on-
According to MacKenzie, he was told by King: “”Why should any new investor bail out existing investors because they made mistakes in overpaying for their shares. The club needs money not complaining shareholders.”
I agree with every word that King says there, but isn’t he supposed to be on some PR offensive with the fans at the moment? Those who bought shares are going to love that comment- talk about getting your nose rubbed in it!

View Comment

Avatar

Resin_lab_dogPosted on3:36 pm - May 1, 2014


pau1mart1n says:
May 1, 2014 at 9:48 am

41

1

Rate This

prequel “apocalypse then”
sequel “apocalypse forever”…

_______________________________________-
We have our title:
Apocalypse Then, Apocalypse Now, Apocalypse forever 😆

View Comment

Avatar

Hoopy 7Posted on3:41 pm - May 1, 2014


scapaflow says:

May 1, 2014 at 2:52 pm

Well said, of course they could do no worse than read the words of Mr. Micawber in David Copperfield.

“Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.” Charles Dickens-David Copperfield

Of course that assumes they have that basic ability.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on4:00 pm - May 1, 2014


Madbhoy24941 says:
May 1, 2014 at 2:22 pm
2 5 Rate This

SCOTTC says:
May 1, 2014 at 12:42 pm

“Celtic and Rangers can’t be expected to control the actions of elements from within their support. This is a society issue.”

I disagree

———————————————–

I disagree with your disagreement;

If religion is the only cause of trouble (as I feel that is why you disagree, it is after all, only a west of Scotland thing…) between Celtic and Rangers

It is your right, MB, to disagree with me, but you are wrong to imply that I see religion as being the cause of the trouble. I don’t think it really has anything to do with it and is used as an excuse by a*holes who probably only see the inside of a church when someone dies or gets married.

What I disagree with is that the teams (and not just Celtic and Rangers) “can’t be expected to control … their support”.

I believe that is EXACTLY what they should be expected to do. Identify, prosecute and remove completely and forever from the game anyone who tarnishes the name of their club.

View Comment

Avatar

thirdmanrunningPosted on5:03 pm - May 1, 2014


ScotsExpat says:
May 1, 2014 at 3:16 pm

“but, if they actually own the stadium outright, why not give them the security”
_________________________

And there you have it… the word IF tells you all you might need to know.

Many observers have long held the view that they don’t own it, that it might have a floating charge over it, or that pesky Mr Whyte might have created a contingent liability, that they can’t discharge.

As I recall the Share Prospectus side-stepped the matter of looking into matters of ownership of the Big Hoose, or Murray Park.

View Comment

Avatar

sickofitallPosted on5:08 pm - May 1, 2014


Hoops For Me All The Way
1 May 2014, 02:59 PM
FCT
1 May 2014, 01:44 PM
Record story from above.I’ll take the hit so you don’t have to. Lengthier than King’s charges this though…

Spoiler: click to toggle
That guy was trying to get some/ all of his cash back from Green. He has an agenda as his hands were burned.

Check google- Alan MacKenzie, Stockbridge, Eurovestech. To do with return of share capital payments, Stockbridge denied anything illegal had occurred. I think there was a leaked email from CF from Green to his crew.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/rangers-will-be-down-to-last-1m-by-april.22406951

Spoiler: click to toggle
I guess this is what is being referred to in this tweet…

Con D Scend þ@apocryphal5 · 2h
Alan MacKenzie crying about his investment. Remind everyone, what was it you tried to get Stockbridge to do for you? Careful now Alan.

Who is Alan MacKenzie anway?

The ex pat/ Australian pictured in his back garden with his kids next to a barbeque, proudly holding a large cardboard cheque for £1m who was done over by Mr Charle’s paying £1 a share pre issue. He wanted a salaried post on the board and invested £0.5m. He was part of the reason Green went over there so often.

He was chasing the past boards for money back.
Edited by Hoops For Me All The Way, 2 minutes ago.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on5:20 pm - May 1, 2014


iamacant says:
May 1, 2014 at 2:49 pm
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-investor-urges-dave-king-3482599

I can’t be the only one thinking where did I go wrong when some folk appear to be so dumb but have somehow managed to gain enough wealth to pyss half a million up against a wall.

I’m in the wrong game. 🙁

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on5:39 pm - May 1, 2014


That story`s softening up the bears for the 5m [prob more now] they put in.IMO
PR rotten games more like
Can`t trust much in the MSM

View Comment

Famous song

Famous songPosted on5:56 pm - May 1, 2014


57,000 block traded at 23p, a little after four. There really is one born every minute.
While I’m here, does anybody have a link to the IPO prospectus? My documents got cleared by a virus, and the section on Champions League revenues can cheer up the darkest day.

View Comment

Avatar

iamacantPosted on6:16 pm - May 1, 2014


Famous song says:
May 1, 2014 at 5:56 pm

http://scotslawthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/rifc-prospectus.pdf

View Comment

Avatar

ptd1978Posted on6:36 pm - May 1, 2014


Grant Russell’s had an aggressive couple of days on Twitter.
Yesterday he came under fire for not reporting on Ally’s nod to his question about whether his pay cut had been actioned. Instead of reporting this, which was easily more newsworthy than anything Ally actually said in the presser, Grant went with “news” that wouldn’t get him added to the Ibrox sh*t list.
When probed about this by followers, he responded with “I’m frankly amazed this isn’t a country full of journalists”.
Well you certainly ain’t one mate.

View Comment

Avatar

pau1mart1nPosted on6:42 pm - May 1, 2014


such a shame jim traynor isn’t around to put him straight on what a real journo does when there’s a nod given as an answer.
was chic there ? you’d think he would’ve remembered jim’s clear instructions.

View Comment

Avatar

Madbhoy24941Posted on6:46 pm - May 1, 2014


SCOTTC says:
May 1, 2014 at 4:00 pm

It is your right, MB, to disagree with me, but you are wrong to imply that I see religion as being the cause of the trouble. I don’t think it really has anything to do with it and is used as an excuse by a*holes who probably only see the inside of a church when someone dies or gets married.
What I disagree with is that the teams (and not just Celtic and Rangers) “can’t be expected to control … their support”.
I believe that is EXACTLY what they should be expected to do. Identify, prosecute and remove completely and forever from the game anyone who tarnishes the name of their club.
—————————————————

Well that clarification, I agree with. The Clubs could do more to remove fans but I think they need more help from the police.

Sorry for misjudging your intentions.

View Comment

Avatar

rougvielovesthejunglePosted on7:03 pm - May 1, 2014


A bit off topic but rather than listening to Radio Shortbread MW or digital, we should really have FM on tonight.

The theme tonight is songs you associate with football teams.
They kicked off with Don’t You Want Me Baby for Aberdeen followed by Love Is in The Air for Dundee United.

How many could TSFM come up with for the team playing out of Govan?
I’ll get us going with a couple;

Deacon Blue – Dignity
Simply Red – Money’s Too Tight To Mention.

I’m sure if Bryan Burnett is a reader of TSFM , we could have a fair list for him by the end of his show!

View Comment

Avatar

indy14Posted on7:19 pm - May 1, 2014


rougvielovesthejungle says:
May 1, 2014 at 7:03 pm

TRFC/RIFC – “If you don’t know me by nooooow, you eill never , never, never, know me” – in homage to the season ticket renewers from the board….
Beyonce “If you like it then you shoulda bought a season ticket”
Celtic – “Dancing in the streets” Mick Jagger and David Bowie

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on7:32 pm - May 1, 2014


ScotsExpat says:
May 1, 2014 at 3:16 pm

Being in the US, I am limited to the amount of SMSM I can get hold of. Up till now, I have made do with podcasts from BBC Scot, but recently started dl’ing the Clyde SSB…

Not that I’m recommending you take more SMSM, but if you install a VPN extension into your browser such as Hola on Chrome, you can fool the internet into thinking you’re in the UK.

This is very useful for something like Netflix, which has quite different content in UK & US versions, but is accessible via the same user account with Hola installed.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on8:13 pm - May 1, 2014


Evening all. I’m still trying to locate a link to the SFA Article 10 (fit & proper person). I can’t find it on their website. Does anyone have a link to it?

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:17 pm - May 1, 2014


upthehoops says:

May 1, 2014 at 8:13 pm
From what i remember Regan said “There was no such rule”

View Comment

Campbellsmoney

CampbellsmoneyPosted on8:19 pm - May 1, 2014


Thirdmanrunning

For there to be a floating charge that secured the stadium, it would have to be registered at Companies House. There is no floating charge. Floating charges are not like fixed charges (such as standard securities). A floating charge granted by a previous owner cannot survive the insolvency of that previous owner.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:32 pm - May 1, 2014


upthehoops says:

May 1, 2014 at 8:13 pm
Evening all. I’m still trying to locate a link to the SFA Article 10 (fit & proper person). I can’t find it on their website. Does anyone have a link to it?

“We need to understand this idea of a “fit and proper person test” said Regan. It’s a myth. There is no test. People don’t have to come in and pass an exam.
Regan insists the SFA cannot reasonably be expected to devote time and money to assessing the background of every new director or owner to emerge at a club

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on8:35 pm - May 1, 2014


HirsutePursuit says:
April 29, 2014 at 8:48 pm

“In your hurry to put them back one has gone in the wrong place and dozens of other news items have disappeared. Good work though to act so quickly.”
——————————————–
At times in this saga it’s difficult to know what sensitivity setting the paranoid meter should be set at.

HP, that was a remarkable illustration of how you can never be too careful. The website concerned is obviously under the editorial control of the SFA so the doctoring was being orchestrated at the very heart of the Scottish football establishment. The fact that your find was immediately alerted to SFA suggests that there is a watching brief on TSFM by the SFA.

There is a watching brief on TSFM by the SFA.

Not to take the temperature of the Scottish public’s sporting opinion mind you. Oh no. This site and I suppose some others, is being constantly monitored in case we upset the machinations of some clandestine plan of which we must not know the constitution.

How paranoid do I need to be to believe that such a thing would be happening?

Significantly less paranoid than an organisation that would indulge itself in such activities!

HirsutePursuit, you’ve made some great contributions to this discussion over the piece and that brief exchange with burghbhoy ranks right up there. Whilst I fully took on board the previous points you have made about rule changes, their timing and significance, I had probably always left a wee margin for error in play to cover for the failings we all possess as humans. However that wee episode has just tipped the balance for me.

Even for a cynic of my aptitude this truly is a diabolical state we find ourselves in.

View Comment

Avatar

iamacantPosted on8:36 pm - May 1, 2014


rougvielovesthejungle says:
May 1, 2014 at 7:03 pm

Living in the past – Jethro Tull
Dont let me be misunderstood – Animals
Out of time – Chris Farlowe
Silence is golden – Tremeloes
Running bear – Johnny Preston
Let the heartaches begin – Long John Baldry
Liquidator – Harry J and the allstars
Give me just a little more time – Chairman of the board 😀

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on8:42 pm - May 1, 2014


upthehoops says:
May 1, 2014 at 8:13 pm
1 0 Rate This

Evening all. I’m still trying to locate a link to the SFA Article 10 (fit & proper person). I can’t find it on their website. Does anyone have a link to it?
==========================
This article contains the wording, and a link to the rules:

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/03/11/the-sfas-fit-and-proper-test-self-certification-for-football-clubs-a-farce-part-1-craig-whyte/

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on8:49 pm - May 1, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
May 1, 2014 at 8:19 pm

“A floating charge granted by a previous owner cannot survive the insolvency of that previous owner.”
————————————–
Is there any kind of financial instrument, such as a debenture, that could be crafted to maintain an interest in the assets of a company that suffered an insolvency event? You had recently mentioned ring fencing arrangements in a different context.

View Comment

Avatar

parttimearabPosted on8:50 pm - May 1, 2014


Apologies if covered before – still it’s nice to copy a good news story for a change 🙂
The last paragraph is particularly worth a read 😀 😀 😀

“A Dundee United charity has set up a campaign to help less fortunate supporters to the cup final — and even fans of city rivals Dundee are contributing.
United for All wants to raise £2,000 to pay for tickets for those who can’t afford the £35 asking price.
There have been complaints about the relatively low number of concession tickets available for the final.
Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson is among those who have criticised the SFA for not issuing more concessionary tickets for the match against St Johnstone.
Now fans have taken matters into their own hands.
The online Just Giving page, set up by organiser David Mulholland, was flooded with more than £1,300 within only a few hours of going live.
In his appeal, David said: “We at United for All are raising funds to assist those who are unable to afford to attend the Scottish Cup final…..Please give what you can and we will ensure that as many deserving families and OAPs as possible are given assistance to attend the game.”

And in an impressive show of unity, a Dundee FC fan donated and posted: “As a Dee I am proud to go along with my fellow Dundonians to the final — as I was at Ibrox and I will be at Dens this Saturday. Best city in Scotland!”

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/local/dundee/best-city-in-scotland-dundee-united-fans-set-up-fund-to-help-less-fortunate-go-to-scottish-cup-final-and-dundee-fans-are-helping-1.346815?

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on8:53 pm - May 1, 2014


upthehoops says:
May 1, 2014 at 8:13 pm

Evening all. I’m still trying to locate a link to the SFA Article 10 (fit & proper person). I can’t find it on their website. Does anyone have a link to it?

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/SFAHandbook/09Articles.pdf

Page 96

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on8:57 pm - May 1, 2014


Castofthousands says:
May 1, 2014 at 8:49 pm
0 0 Rate This

Campbellsmoney says:
May 1, 2014 at 8:19 pm

“A floating charge granted by a previous owner cannot survive the insolvency of that previous owner.”
————————————–
Is there any kind of financial instrument, such as a debenture, that could be crafted to maintain an interest in the assets of a company that suffered an insolvency event? You had recently mentioned ring fencing arrangements in a different context.

Presumably a FIXED charge would survive as it is attached to specific assets

View Comment

Campbellsmoney

CampbellsmoneyPosted on9:20 pm - May 1, 2014


Castofthousands

oh lordy what a question. The simplified concise answer in respect of land in Scotland is – not unless it is registered in the Land Register (and so would be apparent).

Scottc – that is right and the only form of fixed security permissible in Scotland over land is a standard security and that requires to be registered in order to be effective in an insolvency.

View Comment

Avatar

y4rmyPosted on9:22 pm - May 1, 2014


Living in the past – Jethro Tull
Dont let me be misunderstood – Animals
Out of time – Chris Farlowe
Silence is golden – Tremeloes
Running bear – Johnny Preston
Let the heartaches begin – Long John Baldry
Liquidator – Harry J and the allstars
Give me just a little more time – Chairman of the board

Everything’s Gone (to) Green – New Order

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on9:22 pm - May 1, 2014


rougvielovesthejungle says:
May 1, 2014 at 7:03 pm
‘..They kicked off with Don’t You Want Me Baby for Aberdeen followed by Love Is in The Air for Dundee United.’
——-
Ah, that explains it. I was listening on digital, and the first they played on that wave-length was ” Simply the best” followed immediately by ‘Chelsea Dagger’! Burnett’s a slightly enigmatic figure-didn’t know whether he was having a laugh, and if so, in what direction!

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on9:59 pm - May 1, 2014


scottc says:
May 1, 2014 at 8:53 pm
============================
Thank you Sir, this is most helpful.

View Comment

Avatar

burghbhoyPosted on10:08 pm - May 1, 2014


A question regarding the bizarre narrative surrounding that Brechin game in 2012 (for HirsutePursuit in particular but any boffin may step up!…)

If Sevco were already (as the rulebook seems to suggest) SFA registered members from July 13th when accepted into the SFL, why the need for the “conditional membership” fudge, urgently cooked up to cover the Brechin game?

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on10:24 pm - May 1, 2014


BURGHBHOY says: May 1, 2014 at 10:08 pm

A question regarding the bizarre narrative surrounding that Brechin game in 2012 (for HirsutePursuit in particular but any boffin may step up!…)…
======================================
‘Burghbhoy’ are you able to shed any light on my wee hobby horse of a question about the Brechin game?
I want to know the exact team name as quoted on the ‘Rangers’ teamsheet for that one game.

I did write to Brechin but got no response.
I didn’t bother to write to the Govan club or the SFL.
Any elucidation from anyone would be appreciated.

View Comment

Avatar

Lord WobblyPosted on10:26 pm - May 1, 2014


A The Rangers fan lament

I’m dazed and confused, is it stay is it go?
am I being choosed? well I’d just like to know
give me a clue as to where I am at
feel like a mouse and you act like a cat

I’m dazed and confused, hanging on be a thread
I’m being abused, I’d be better off dead
I can’t stand this teasing, I’m starting to crack
you’re out to get me, you’re on the right track

yeah, I’m dazed and confused and it’s all upside down
am I being choosed? do you want me around?
secrets are fun to a certain degree
but this one’s no fun ’cause the secret’s on me

(acknowledgement and should be copyright, Jake Holmes)

View Comment

Avatar

LarkietimPosted on10:28 pm - May 1, 2014


Just subscribed after lurking in the background since RTC days and remain in awe at the knowledge and insight the posters bring to bear in making (for me) complicated issues not only easy to understand but also funny and entertaining…it’s a joy…

View Comment

Comments are closed.