A consortium led by David Low has been in talks with Sir Tom Farmer seeking to purchase Hibernian Football Club. The story has been embargoed for a few weeks, but David agreed to speak to TSFM to give us an exclusive interview and provide us with information about his intentions for the Edinburgh club.
Highlights of the interview include the similarities and differences between the Hibs situation and the one he found at Celtic Pak in 1994; how Scottish Football’s “new level playing field” as Low calls it has created an opportunity for a club like Hibs to be the main challenger to Celtic for honours; the contrast of his consortium’s approach to that of the recent debacle at Ibrox; the role of the fans at every level of the club; the future of Allan Stubbs and Leanne Dempster; and the journey back to the Premiership.
Low is frank about his reputation as a well-known Celtic fan, but highlights his Hibbee credentials and his affection for the club, eschewing the “I was always a Hibbee” line taken by so many people seeking to ingratiate themselves with the locals at various clubs.
Certainly, the experience and finance rolling around Low’s consortium is something that any club could do with, but the fans are crucial to their involvement and interest.
He says he won’t go ahead with the purchase unless the fans are behind them.
“Fans have never been so powerful as they are today, especially with the advent of social media like TSFM”
“We have seen in recent years what a body of fans are capable of when they re together”
“We want to have that togetherness at Hibs, because the only way forward is to have trust between the boardroom and the fans, you only have to look at the levels of distrust between board and fans at Rangers to see that it is a recipe for disaster”
jimmyczz says:
August 14, 2014 at 4:49 pm
0 0 Rate This
“Legia now fasttracking an appeal to CAS and hope to have a decision by Monday.”
Not a chance that can happen. Even fast track CAS takes weeks. Suarez case was heard under fast track rules.
——————–
That seems to be what most folk think.just going with what the LW owner said on Sky earlier.
Last night Celtic won 3-0 from a defensive mistake a soft penalty and a goalie nutmegged from 15 yards
Today the LW appeal was thrown out giving Celtic a real chance of qualifying for the CL
Which makes me wonder
Have Celtic just signed the luckiest Manager in football ?
100k sold at 25p
25.7K at just under 27p
warring factions?
http://www.scotzine.com/2014/08/the-sporting-integrity-of-polish-football-and-legia-warsaw/
Interesting background to Liega Warsaw and Polish Football – certainly doesn’t smell of roses 🙄
blu says:
August 14, 2014 at 4:14 pm
Big Pink, re the offer to Hibs – there’s obviously limited information in the public domain but what is there looks to me like a significant undervaluing of the assets. The public comments from David Low for the bidders also seem to want to play to unrest in the fanbase. This looks a bit like the Fergus approach with what was really a low-skilled and resourced board at Celtic Park at that time – any thoughts as to why there might be a belief that Tom Farmer could be swayed by such an approach?
_______________________________________________________
I don’t think David Low would accept the premise of your question about his valuation of the assets – or for that matter the inference that Fergus undervalued Celtic’s worth in 93/94.
Obviously I am not privy to the thought processes or strategy of the consortium, but the original story was leaked (not by Low according to him) by a third party, much to his chagrin. If you accept his version of events, then the fans would have been none the wiser had he been in charge of the information flow.
Consequently, I don’t think that is the approach through which Tom Farmer is being swayed. Of course if the Low consortium are using the fans as a big stick to hit the incumbents with, I would have to assume that they thought it a wise ploy.
I don’t think Farmer is the problem here anyway. I am sure he would like to be able to exit with a bit of dignity and his legacy intact. I do think that legacy is being harmed by the way the club has been steered recently. Ultimately, I think that what Low and his fiends need to do is convince Farmer that their plan for Hibs is a good one which protects that legacy.
Crucially though as David Low told me, the approval of the fans is as important to his consortium as Farmer’s.
Getting that message across is important, but calling that fomenting unrest – especially when there is already significant unrest over Rod Petrie’s management of the club – seems a tad unkind and perhaps partisan.
David Low is a businessman of some skill and stature. I have known him a long time and have seldom found him to be distracted from the main prize of the bottom line – except in matters of football. Despite his significant and crucial involvement in the McCann initiative at Celtic, he did not make spectacular sums of money. If I were a Hibs fan, I’d give him the benefit of the doubt for now and examine his proposals.
On ‘soft’ penalties and players going down under ‘contact’. When I was young and played football, it wasn’t a non-contact sport. I much preferred it that way. 🙁
ecobhoy says:
August 14, 2014 at 5:57 pm
Nothing more than the exact type of ‘Johnny Foreigner’ type article I referred to yesterday.
Wholly disappointed that the blog, and indeed Scotzine, is maybe heading in this direction as this type of thing would not be out of place in the Daily Mail.
If we are going to slate a club for the actions of its fans then it was not so long ago that some fans of a certain club were displaying banners that were none to complimentary about the European footballing body that have just given them the opportunity to have access to multi-millions by applying the rule without fear or favour. I might even whisper Amsterdam.
Regardless of what the official response of the club is to such matters it allows others to easily pick to bones of a clubs reputation, if you are of that mind.
Eco, like many other I greatly pleased to see you return to the blog. You are one of the blogs big hitters and your contributions have always been measured and informative.
Don’t want to offend but this type of thing is not up to your usual standard.
wottpi says:
August 14, 2014 at 6:40 pm
ecobhoy says:
August 14, 2014 at 5:57 pm
Nothing more than the exact type of ‘Johnny Foreigner’ type article I referred to yesterday.
———————————
100% Agree!
But don’t ruin the point by doing the exact same thing using examples of Celtic.
Big Pink says:
August 14, 2014 at 6:16 pm
Ultimately, I think that what Low and his fiends need to do is convince Farmer that their plan for Hibs is a good one which protects that legacy.
—————————————————–
Hmmm……a bit strong, Big Pink? What’s an ‘r’ amongst friends though? 👿
Scottish Football needs an edit facility….or a Freud detector!
On a more serious note, I did feel that the Low group’s response was less than conducive to an amicable negotiation. Perhaps the tone of the rejection upset them.
I’d perhaps have been more inclined to ask what more was required to make the offer into one that was in the best interests of Hibs.
If the response then was pretty much just rewarding the existing shareholders financially then that would be the time to issue such a strident comment.
Can they not ask to buy a substantial portion of Tom Farmer’s shares? Perhaps with an option on the balance?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
GoosyGoosy says:
August 14, 2014 at 5:47 pm
Last night Celtic won 3-0 from a defensive mistake a soft penalty and a goalie nutmegged from 15 yards
Have Celtic just signed the luckiest Manager in football ?
———————–
I think he might appear to be very lucky so far but just a little technical correction:
There was no nutmeg, it did not pass through the keeper’s legs.
Also, I don’t believe the defender made a mistake, he was placed in a very bad position due to bad play by his team mate. It was a perfectly timed and very effective tackle, Stokes then had to shoot from a very tight angle to score. You would think the defender passed it into his own goal the way everyone is talking.
HMRC to close Employee Benefit Trusts (EBT) settlement opportunity. Full story: http://ow.ly/AjPHz
If any employee of Oldco Rangers or MIM who were in receipt of an EBT and were hoping the tax thingy would blow over they had better think again. This may flush out anyone who may not be totally convinced of ultimate success in the HMRC appeal.
wottpi says:
August 14, 2014 at 6:40 pm
ecobhoy says:
August 14, 2014 at 5:57 pm
Nothing more than the exact type of ‘Johnny Foreigner’ type article I referred to yesterday.
Wholly disappointed that the blog, and indeed Scotzine, is maybe heading in this direction as this type of thing would not be out of place in the Daily Mail.
If we are going to slate a club for the actions of its fans then it was not so long ago that some fans of a certain club were displaying banners that were none to complimentary about the European footballing body that have just given them the opportunity to have access to multi-millions by applying the rule without fear or favour. I might even whisper Amsterdam.
Regardless of what the official response of the club is to such matters it allows others to easily pick to bones of a clubs reputation, if you are of that mind.
Eco, like many other I greatly pleased to see you return to the blog. You are one of the blogs big hitters and your contributions have always been measured and informative.
Don’t want to offend but this type of thing is not up to your usual standard.
===============================================================
I post many links to all sorts of articles – many of which I disagree with wholly or in part. The reason I post links is that I think they might interest other posters here or provide new/additional info which might assist with debate or understanding.
The ‘Johnny Foreigner’ tag leaves me baffled. When you play in international football competitions then you encounter foreign teams and fans. As long as what you write is factual there is no problem.
However writers are also allowed to comment and I think the Scotzine author had every right to raise the issue of the ‘sporting integrity’ of LW given the media attack launched on Celtic whose only crime was to abide by the rules and leave the decision to UEFA.
[]
The Scotzine article IMO is very well written and a lot of research has gone into it. Only a tiny part of the article deals with the behaviour of LW fans.
As I didn’t write the article I see no relevance as to what kind of poster I am – that comment leaves me puzzled. I simply posted a link that I thought might interest people – some might agree and some might not with the article but for me there is a lot of new material
The vast majority deals with serious issues that have involved LW as a club and also Polish Football in general.
I hadn’t realised that corruption is apparently rampant in Polish Football. For example:
I was unaware of the match fixing involving LW:
And then there is the racist behaviour of LW supporters:
There is a helluva lot more material and I really do think the Scotzine article is worth a read and obviously people can make their own mind up about it. Well worth a read: http://www.scotzine.com/2014/08/the-sporting-integrity-of-polish-football-and-legia-warsaw/
On 13 July I grew heartily sick of myself and others being ignored by the SFA, and decided to write to the Scottish Sports Minister, pleading the case that as the SFA recieved public money, they should be subject to regulation. The reply I received filled me with despair. I have included my original e-mail and the reply, with all names omitted. Basically the SFA can take taxpayers money and stick two fingers up at the taxpayer.
=================================
Dear XX XXXXXXX,
On a few occasions over recent years I have attempted to communicate with the Scottish Football Association regarding ongoing issues in Scottish Football and have never been given the courtesy of a reply. My communications have been polite and constructive and there is no justifiable reason whatsoever to ignore me, who has been a paying customer in Scottish football for four decades. I know many other people who have attempted to form communications with the SFA and have also been ignored.
It is my understanding the SFA receives a substantial sum of money each year from the public purse. I do not believe it is acceptable that an organisation which ignores its customers should receive public funding and not be subject to any form of regulation. It is fair to say if any other organisation was ignoring its customers to this extent there would be action taken and possibly even heavy fines, as we have witnessed in the past, e.g with energy suppliers. Can you please explain to me why the Government are so happy to hand over public money to the SFA without taking any interest in the service it provides to its customers. Recent years have of course been trying times for Scottish Football, but that is no reason to ignore paying customers politely seeking clarification on actions taken.
I look forward to your response.
XXX XXXXXXXX
============================================
Dear Mr XXXXXXXX
Thank you for your email of 13 July 2014 to the Cabinet Secretary for Commonwealth Games, Sport, Equalities and Pensioners’ Rights regarding your lack of response from the Scottish FA. I have been asked to reply.
As you may be aware, all funding for sport is routed through sportscotland, the national agency responsible for developing sport in Scotland. Through sportscotland, the Scottish
Government supports Scottish football in a number of initiatives, including support for the Women’s National Team and grass roots development.
However, the Scottish FA remains an independent governing body. As such, the Scottish Government recognises the SFA’s right as an independent governing body to structure itself and make decisions affecting its sport as it sees fit, without interference from Scottish Ministers. Therefore, responding to correspondence received is entirely a matter for the
Scottish FA themselves.
I am sorry you are having difficulty in getting a response, although I can only suggest you continue to raise issues of concern directly with the Scottish FA.
Yours sincerely,
XXXX XXXXXXX
So the referee’s are arguing that they should be paid Premiership wages for taking charge of games between Hibs, Hearts, and ‘The Rangers’ because they are ‘big clubs’.
That is a mind set based on history which means that Queens Park should also get top referees because they have won a lot. There are a good few other teams that used to be in the top league. What about Livingston?
There is also the flip side of this coin in that if the three teams mentioned above are not in the top league then it follows that there are teams in the Premiership which should not be there and therefore their games should not be worth £850 a game.
Give the referees the choice and tell them that there are six games in Scotland each weekend that attract a pay of £850. Let them choose which ones they are and get on with it.
This is the thin end of the wedge. When Hibs, Hearts, and ‘The Rangers’ (if they make it) get to the Premiership will the referees in the Championship slip back into obscurity and the accept £150 a game? Not on your life.
Meanwhile the usual media darlings carry a story and do not dare ask the type of questions laid out above meanwhile Stuart Dougal pops up talking the type of nonsense that, instead of supporting the referees argument, actually destroys it. He was a joke as a referee and even worse as an analyst of current events.
I dont agree with the referee stance, but when you see a big advertising board outside Supermarkets etc, with the 15 club crests from the “top” league 🙄 👿 , you can’t blame them for chancing their arm
upthehoops says:
August 14, 2014 at 7:52 pm
WRT SFA SILENCE
—————————
I wonder if the way to go here is in any future communication to the SFA to state that if no resposne is received in a defined period that copies will be sent to all Board Members viz Main, Professional and non-Professional Game Boards. Perhaps the distribution should be restricted to Main Board.
It might not work but I think it’s worth a try. Obviously very careful consideration would be required as it would be counter-productive and wrong to create even the slightest hint of harassment.
However if the admin side is just simply ignoring letters asking pertinent questions then other avenues to attract the attention of the decision-makers must be found.
I would also think that – in order to ensure that the this approach is used only in important issues – that it has to be centralised possibly using TSFM as the vehicle.
Others might have other thoughts but maybe we can figure out a way. Obviously if we are still ignored then we can then approach Board members with a ‘club’ connection and of course publish our progress or lack of it on here and on relevant club fan sites and by media releases.
Re The Stuart Dougal nonsense, how would refs feel if they were told that they were getting only £150 for eg Hamilton v Ross County (no offense intended) because it’s not a ‘traditional’ Premiership match?
The desperation to keep The Rangers as the be all and end all of Scottish football means that instead of generating a lot of interest in what will undoubtedly be a highly competitive league with far bigger crowds that normal for the second tier, they are creating animosity from everyone else.
If they qualified their talk by admitting that whilst these 3 clubs have large fan bases they are there for a good reason, sporting, financial or a bit of both.
I feel especially sorry for Hamilton who have made their way up the leagues in the right way all to be completely ignored by the SMSM.
Perspective please SMSM?
Re the ref’s claim for ‘full pay’ 😉 how much were they paid when they officiated rifc/trfc games for the last 2 seasons??? We will probably never know 😕
Scottc, you’ve touched on a subject that has always grated with me, not your fault at all.
In my younger years I was ‘pretty good’ at Karate, which is most definitely a contact sport.
Football never has been a contact sport, nor should it be, it’s a limited contact sport, which means you take the ball from your opponent with as little contact as possible.
http://ladyarse.co.uk/2012/02/despite-popular-belief-football-is-not-a-contact-sport/
Does that make Celtics penalty a limited contact penalty? Mibyz ayes!
For my sins I listened to Clyde SSB tonight,( I should have known better). When callers come on to ask questions on LW/Uefa rules, you would think that professional broadcasters like J.Delahunt and hacks like M.Guidi would take the time and effort to research the subject.Once again they displayed their ignorance on Uefa disciplinary rules.Callers quoting precedent on Uefa,s dealings with clubs such as Debrecen being fined 50,000 Swiss francs for fielding an’ineligible’ player and being allowed to continue in the competition, and asking the pundits for their view on why this did not happen with LW. They could not explain the difference between playing an ‘ineligible’ player and a ‘suspended’ player to the callers. A quick perusal of Uefa’s Disciplinary Codes would have shown the former breach can be dealt with a fine if the panel think this is sufficient. The latter case has no such leeway. If the imposition of a 3-0 score overturns the tie, as happened last week, removes the offending club,all well and good, If the 3-0 score does not overturn the tie, the offending club forfeits the tie, this is implicit in the rules. You cannot have a club running up a big score such as 5-0in the first leg and 3-0 being awarded against them in the second, and still go forward to the next round. this is why Uefa rules say you forfeit the tie. I guarantee that this my last word on the subject.
ecobhoy says:
August 14, 2014 at 8:23 pm
———————————–
When you actually stand back and look at the situation it is quite incredible. The customers of the SFA are ultimately the many football fans in Scotland. Yet the SFA clearly have a policy to completely ignore any correspondence from those customers. Meanwhile the Government are happy to take the hard earned cash from the same customers, hand it over to the SFA, and all without caring at all how the SFA treats its customers.
Would the Government adopt this stance with any other publicly funded organisation? I would also love to know if the policy of Government Ministers not getting involved in SFA business was the case in 2012.
A lateral thought
Ambrose was sent off in Warsaw
Was he correctly registered for the Murrayfield game and therebye has now served his one game suspension?
I ask because the mistake made by LW may have occurred because they hadn`t any recent ezperience in the UEFA procedures for documenting a suspension
This could happen to any club with sloppy procedures
ekt1m @ 8:54pm
“….you would think that professional broadcasters like J.Delahunt and hacks like M.Guidi would take the time and effort to research the subject.Once again they displayed their ignorance on Uefa disciplinary rules.”
I don’t believe for one second that they don’t by now understand these rules.
It is simply not in the interests of their commercial masters and therefore their own career prospects to act as if they do.
A soul-eating way to have to live but needs must, I guess.
(Don’t feel obliged to reply. Wouldn’t want to feel responsible for you breaking your guarantee! 😀 )
A bit off topic for the moment but I wanted to share a wee story with you. Once upon a time there was a exciting young company with an exciting new product that they claimed would put an end to animal cosmetic testing …
I follow the stock exchange and like a penny share punt. I followed one particular stock for some time as the share price jumped up and down regularly. The share I am talking about is Evocutis plc.
Evocutis were gearing up to be sold – or so shareholders were led to believe. The markets like a good acquisition, it was music to the ears:
http://www.stockmarketwire.com/article/4495848/Evocutis-starts-formal-sale-process.html
And who did they bring in to help them? “Evocutis has appointed consultants Growth Innovators Group and advisers Zeus Capital to assist in reviewing and evaluating a number of strategic options to maximise value for shareholders.”
Evocutis (EVO) share price rose handsomely on the good news, but it is what happened in the following months that was most curious. There were regular bull runs on good news stories, followed by serious short selling that would drive the share price down again. Someone could make a lot of money out of this share if they predicted the rises and falls. If you were the one creating the rises and falls then predicting would not be difficult.
We all know who Zeus Capital are. You can speculate who the short sellers were, I won’t. You don’t have to speculate who was feeding news stories about potential suitors though. Many small investors were left holding stocks at prices they would never see again, buying in on this taste of good news to be left high and dry.
Finally the penny dropped. There was to be no sale and the money had run out. It was game over. Zeus Capital did not help Evocutis. There was no “maximise value for shareholders”. Look at the 2yr chart, though it doesn’t begin to show what this share was doing on a weekly basis:
http://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChart.asp?sharechart=EVO&share=evocutis
The moral of the story? There are very few morals in this story. Some people made money, a lot of money, and many lost their shirt. When the company was no longer useful the assets were stripped and the remains cast adrift.
If you ever wondered how the new Rangers story is going to end – think of Evocutis. Same faces, no morals, big hands – same result.
I read a lot and post very seldom. But the LW saga has got me typing. My team was rubbish over two legs and deserved to lose. LW broke the rules and therefore face the well established sanction. It’s not in anyone’s interest to change the rules or penalties for breaches in mid competition. It is in everyone’s interest to revisit rules when situations arise that suggest the rules and penalties are unjust.
I would wager that I could perm any 5 or 6 posters from this site and get them to sit down and refresh the rules based on what has occurred over the past few weeks, and UEFA would have better regs. And Celtic should suggest a review following this debacle. Some points to start with:
1. The principle that both player and team suffer a penalty when a player is suspended (he is not available, the team need to include in 25 man list) is something I agree with. However why 25 when World Cup squads are 23 ?
2. I would reduce the list size – maybe to 19 or 20 – and a suspended player would need to be included to serve his time.
3. I believe that this would help to rebalance in favour of the smaller clubs as big clubs can currently include senior suspended players in the 19-25 group whereas smaller clubs struggle to fill these spots with inexperienced players. It might also help to reduce the tendency of the mega clubs to warehouse players.
4. It would also help clubs focus and eliminate any suspicion as to why players were or were not included in the squad list.
5. Finally I firmly believe that the clubs must be held fully accountable for compliance and rules followed to the letter. Someone recently posted and included reference to Alain Baxter, and his misfortune with nasal spray. Worth noting that Alain took full responsibility for his error and whilst everyone recognised that it was an innocent mistake, the penalty was still applied ( and accepted by Alain – he was more concerned with clearing his good name, which I believe his actions and honesty achieved).
ThomTheThim says:
August 14, 2014 at 4:00 pm
Has it been clarified that hadthe LW player remained on the bench for the duration of the match, would the sanction have still applied?
Personally, I think that being a listed sub is the equivalent of being named to play and the four minute appearance is irrelevent.
——
That’s a very good point and I think you’re right.
Suspended players are not allowed on the field.
Xavi Alonso was suspended for the Champions League Final and watched the match from the stands. However, he was unable to resist running onto the track to celebrate with his colleagues when Real Madrid scored. For that he received a further suspension and missed yesterday’s Super Cup final.
upthehoops says:
August 14, 2014 at 7:52 pm
‘.. decided to write to the Scottish Sports Minister, pleading the case that as the SFA recieved public money, .’
ecobhoy says:
August 14, 2014 at 8:23 pm
‘I wonder if the way to go here is in .’
——-
Just about this time last year I wrote to Sportscotland who are the agency through which the Scottish Government channels monies to many different sports in Scotland.
I did not seek proper advice and so wasted my time trying to ask questions under the FOI legislation. And because I did not frame my questions properly, they were able to brush my request aside as not being a ‘freedom of information’ enquiry.
They helpfully gave me the email address of one of their Football Partnership managers ( none other than the guy who was Chairman of the Comm. games body, Michael Cavanagh, if I wanted to discuss matters with him).
I did not avail myself of that opportunity.
Sportscotland is at arms-length from Government but is nevertheless answerable through Ministers to the Scottish Government.
And in this current ‘investment cycle’- year for football (Jan 2014 to March 2015) there is more than a million and a half quid in the grant budget for football.
The SFA has to be in there somewhere getting at least some of that money directly, to assist in youth and community and women’s football etc etc.
So,perhaps a more specifically targeted approach than my amateurish attempt last year might be a better first line of enquiry, to be followed if necessary by letters to MSPs …
This link is quite informative http://www.sportscotland.org.uk/about_us/investment_reporting/sgbinvestment/football/
immyczz says:
August 14, 2014 at 4:49 pm
13 0 Rate This
“Legia now fasttracking an appeal to CAS and hope to have a decision by Monday.”
Not a chance that can happen. Even fast track CAS takes weeks. Suarez case was heard under fast track rules.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Agreed
Both Parties need to request an urgent CAS decision
So it would require the support of UEFA to get a decision by Monday
As you say
Not a chance given the hassle it would cause UEFA if LW won a CAS appeal
GoosyGoosy says:
August 14, 2014 at 11:14 pm
Much will all depend on the basis of Legia’s appeal.
If it is on the process and rules as applied they have no chance.
It would have to be on the principle behind the rules and the effect on that principle if Legia’s appeal is upheld.
I read the CAS ruling on Malaga’s appeal against the UEFA decision to ban Malaga from Europe because of tax owed to the Spanish tax authority in 2012.
Very interesting how CAS went about looking at the intent of that particular set of rules and its application across the full European football spectrum and came out backing UEFA.
Then there was another case of overdue payables to a football club in Ukraine by another European club that did not pay by the deadline set under the FFP rules.
There was a “force majeure” clause in the rules and the club appealing successfully used it to win on the basis that the Ukraine government’s ban on currency transfers that stopped payments that the paying club had initiated, was indeed a force majeure and so the appeal was upheld.
In the Malaga case upholding Malaga’s appeal would have driven a coach and horses through the particular FFP rule in question, so the appeal was rejected.
In the force majeure case CAS were able to say that the reason for not paying was indeed a force majeure and so upheld the appeal but did not compromise the FFP rule as it contained that “fm” clause which UEFA had not given sufficient weigh to.
I cannot see how CAS (even if they convene in time) can uphold Legia’s appeal even on disproportionate punishment grounds as to do so would drive a coach and horses through the “forfeit for playing a suspended player” rule as it is currently written.
They might direct UEFA to have another look at the rule to see if it requires some form of discretionary clause (that does not reduce the deterrent effect of the rule ) but I doubt they have the power to say such a discretion should be in the rule and uphold Legia’s appeal on those grounds.
Simply put UEFA treat disciplining players of high importance for the integrity of the game and want to deter clubs from taking a risk and playing a suspended player by making the consequences so severe they would never contemplate it.
That those consequences were so severe in the context of not just a single match, but the score in that match (would the moral argument and the proportionality that is based on it have been so strong had it ended 1-0 to Legia after a hard fought match?) is very tough on Legia given the actual game, but how do you cater for what happened there without undermining the intent of the rule, which is to deter a club from cheating, even if that was not the provable intent?
PS Had the intent of the failure to register side letters been expressed so clearly as UEFA had done in their rules you would not have required an LNS fudgenquiry.
upthehoops says:
August 14, 2014 at 9:19 pm
25
1
Rate This
ecobhoy says:
August 14, 2014 at 8:23 pm
———————————–
When you actually stand back and look at the situation it is quite incredible. The customers of the SFA are ultimately the many football fans in Scotland. Yet the SFA clearly have a policy to completely ignore any correspondence from those customers. Meanwhile the Government are happy to take the hard earned cash from the same customers, hand it over to the SFA, and all without caring at all how the SFA treats its customers.
Would the Government adopt this stance with any other publicly funded organisation? I would also love to know if the policy of Government Ministers not getting involved in SFA business was the case in 2012.
==================
Well there was a meeting between Rangers and The First Ministers Team in December 2011 one outcome of which was a letter that gave the FM the right to speak to HMRC on Rangers behalf which he did on 11th January 2012.
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-administration-alex-salmond-knew-about-administration-threat-1-2146128
That was the same month Regan and Ogilvie met Rangers to discuss the UEFA 2011 Licence issue and other matters so ducks were being put in a row in 2011.
There was an attempt under FOI to establish what was discussed between the Sports Minister and HMRC that was refused.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/hmrc_and_the_first_minister_of_s
but not sure if anyone ever asked about discussion between the First Ministers team and Rangers in 2011.
A question for the House?
upthehoops says:
August 14, 2014 at 7:52 pm
A suggestion. Go to your MSP and ask him to table a debate in Parliament on SFA lack of accountability whilst taking money from the tax payer. Remind him the SFA has presided over huge losses to the tax payer as a result of failing to police their own rules properly.
This bit about governance non interference is a cop out. They found a way around it in England
Its all here
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/inquiries/parliament-2010/football-governance/football-governance-timeline/
and there is a Government response at
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/78395/Football_governance_15427_Cm_8207_2.pdf
I have not had time to read it but from a quick look it seems the English Parliament are not hiding behind any aprons.
I always find it amazing just how much a government that favours independence fails to recognise how much Scottish football that is independent of government is failing its community, its industry and its country.
Total cop out. Perhaps we should all ask our msps the same question.
How come the English FA can be scrutinised but not the Scottish FA?
johnnymanc says:
August 14, 2014 at 5:09 pm
I agree with your thinking re CAS powers based on their handling of the two cases I mention above.
Auldheid says:
August 15, 2014 at 1:13 am
==============================
Can we not petition the government to address this grievance?
Does the Scottish Parliament have this online service?
Auldheid says:
August 15, 2014 at 1:13 am
A suggestion. Go to your MSP and ask him to table a debate in Parliament on SFA lack of accountability whilst taking money from the tax payer.
============================================
Auldheid, my last contact with my MSP, on 13 February 2011, made me resolve never to ask him re these matters again. Original e-mail and reply below, with names omitted. As you can see, I never mentioned Celtic at all, while he chose instantly to bring Celtic into the discussion. An appalling answer in my view.
=================================
Dear Mr XXXXXX,
I was appalled to read a statement attributed to the Sports Minister on the BBC Website regarding the potential administration of Rangers FC, and the ongoing dispute with HMRC. The statement read:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17019291
“I understand that Rangers and HMRC are continuing dialogue and we obviously want to see an agreement which will protect jobs and enable the club to stay in business”. Rangers is a crucial part of Scotland’s national game, and our interest is ensuring that a resolution can be arrived at between HMRC and the club to deliver these vital objectives.”
Would it not have been better to stress that any unpaid taxes should be collected in full? Given that Rangers themselves have admitted their liability could be in excess of £50M, the only way an agreement with HMRC will be reached is if some of the amount is written off. It was, in my opinion, a crass statement sending out the completely wrong message, and I’m sure it will be viewed the same by those Scottish Football Clubs who actually pay their tax bills in full. Perhaps a message of support for those clubs rather than a plea on behalf of Rangers would have been more appropriate. Or are they not as crucial to the national game as Rangers are?
Yours sincerely,
XXX XXXXXXXX
================================================
Dear Mr XXXXXXXX,
Ms XXXXXXX would no doubt have made the same comments if Celtic had been in the same position as Rangers.
Indeed, if any business gets into difficulty the future of that company’s employees are of fundamental concern. Ensuring the company survives is obviously the best way to maximise the return to HMRC.
Rangers may not be crucial to the Scottish game. However, they are crucial to Celtic. That’s why the clubs are collectively known as the ‘Old Firm!’
Best wishes,
I read someone commending the merits of Hugh McDonald on here recently. He writes a decent article in today’s Herald re the Legia Warsaw case. I don’t think any reasonably minded person could disagree with it.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/mulgrew-none-of-this-is-our-fault-we-are-not-embarrassed-by-it.25050193
The Champions League reprieve for Celtic has condemned Legia Warsaw to the Europa League and sparked bitter outpourings from Poland that are understandable but misplaced.
A 6-1 aggregate victory normally leaves restricted scope for debate but Legia Warsaw’s fielding of an ineligible player had to incur a sanction and precedent suggested it would be a 3-0 victory to the Scottish champions in the second leg.
The pain incurred by Legia may seem disproportionate to the crime but it is in line with UEFA disciplinary procedures.
It has left Celtic in the qualifying round of the Champions League but also at the centre of a storm that may have started in Nyon but gained strength in Warsaw. This was an administrative error by Legia but there has been a campaign to make it Celtic’s problem. It is not. The club did not bring the matter to UEFA’s attention, did not appeal, did not complain.
Of course, the club has benefited. A Champions League play-off tie has landed in Celtic’s lap but any suggestion that they should brush it off is ludicrous.
Charlie Mulgrew, the club captain, addressed the matter simply but correctly last night. “None of this is our fault,” he said. “We know we can play a lot better than we did in those qualifiers and Legia were a decent side but what’s happened since isn’t down to us. The fixture is there [against Maribor] so we can’t go out there feeling sorry for ourselves or embarrassed feeling that we shouldn’t be there.”
He also pointed out the immediate reality. “The fans will expect us to put on better performances and we’ll expect that from ourselves as well so we just need to get up and get on with it, do our best and hopefully be involved in the Champions League. There’s a long way to go though, we’ve still got to qualify by beating Maribor and that will be difficult.”
The home tie against a highly competent Slovenian side will be played at Celtic Park.
“Playing in your natural surroundings and your home pitch has to help. I know Murrayfield was called our home tie but it wasn’t really home for us. Being used to the surroundings at Celtic Park and everything that goes with it on a match day will hopefully help a wee bit,” he said. “I’m not making any excuses for the games at Murrayfield because everything was great there. The staff were brilliant and the pitch was great but there’s nothing like playing at Celtic Park.”
As he was speaking, the fallout from Poland was hurtling through social media. It is impossible not to sympathise for Legia although their strategy of trying to draw Celtic into the melee was doomed to failure.
Henning Berg, the Legia manager, admitted he had telephoned his Celtic counterpart, Ronny Deila, after the initial decision was made. Berg said: “It was a powerful conversation between us. I was disappointed that people in Celtic could not answer emails or phone calls from our club.
“All they had to do was speak to us – they didn’t change their opinion, so why should they hide it? Celtic surprised me that they could not settle the matter in a different way.”
Surprised? If so, he would be shocked by there being a murder in Taggart. Celtic’s reaction to the Legia saga was the only one open to a public limited company and a member club of UEFA.
Talk to Legia? To say what precisely? Commiserate or patronise?
Offer to withdraw? That would be an excellent board meeting and one that might just draw the ire of the shareholders. A public limited company agrees to dismiss the possibility of about £15m in revenues because they are uncomfortable with a ruling made by the authorities that is in their favour. Good luck explaining that one to the auditors when the accounts are signed off.
Then there was possibility of contesting a play-off. This falls very snugly into the category of “making it up as one goes along”.
The reason there is a UEFA is so that rules can be made and enforced. These rules can be debated and punishments challenged, even ridiculed. But the alternative is to indulge in anarchy. The prospect of a play-off match, arranged by aggrieved party and sympathetic Celtic, does not survive scrutiny.
First, both clubs would be saying they did not agree with UEFA’s ruling and wanted to find a way around it. This would bring to the fore one salient inquiry: what is UEFA for? A body that guards its powers assiduously would not be pleased by such independent action.
The truth is that it was Legia’s right, even duty, to challenge a ruling that saw them thrown out of a competition so cruelly.
It was Celtic’s fate to be the beneficiaries of that decision but it was also the club’s responsibility to adhere to professional practice.
Everything else is sound and fury.
wokingcelt says:
August 14, 2014 at 10:33 pm
———————————–
I believe that the squad size is set at 25 because for the group stages that 25 can not be changed. Given that is 6 matches over almost 3 months in which players may also be injured in domestic competition and international matches then that is why there are more than the World Cup when if you are lucky you get to play 6 matches in under a month with no other matches to be involved in.
Manchester City have had their Champions League squad reduced this season as part of the punishment of the overspending that left them in breach of the FFP. A bit ironic that the rest of the punishment saw them spending money on a fine 😉
upthehoops says:
August 15, 2014 at 6:56 am
———————————-
I actually find the response you received from your MSP as downright ‘scary’.
Obviously a heavily-conflicted and biased individual who doesn’t care a fig about Scottish Football in general.
If this attitude is typical of Scottish Government thinking no wonder the SFA knows it can ignore the paying customers with impunity and carry-on with its rule-bending and secrecy.
tykebhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 9:05 am
As opposed to people making it up as they go along 😀 here is a link to the CL Regulations for the 2012- to 2015 cycle.
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/competitions/Regulations/01/79/68/69/1796869_DOWNLOAD.pdf
My interpretation is that the 25 players on list A can be changed for each qualifying round as long as a list is submitted by each deadline date for each round. If that were not the case then teams would not be able to field new summer signings acquired between rounds?
Once into the group stages then it looks like the list submitted before the first game then becomes fixed for the rest of the competition, presumably the thought being that teams will not change too much after the summer transfer windows shut.
Thus as you rightly say Man City can be punished this season by having a reduced squad in the group stages.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
List A has to be submitted by the following fixed deadlines:
a) 25 June 2012 (24.00 CET) for all matches in the first qualifying round;
b) 12 July 2012 (24.00 CET) for all matches in the second qualifying round;
c) 26 July 2012 (24.00 CET) for all matches in the third qualifying round;
d) 13 August 2012 (24.00 CET) for all matches in the play-offs;
e) 3 September 2012 (24.00 CET) for all further matches from the first match in the group stage up to and including the final.
Big Pink says:
August 14, 2014 at 6:16 pm
BP, thanks for the response which helped my understanding. No partisanship from me on this matter though – just an interested observer. I agree that Hibs have under-achieved on the pitch in recent years and to have made a number of bad decisions in managerial appointments, including losing John Collins because they undermined his authority. Mr Petrie has been central to all of that.
Apologies if I missed it.
Did we get clarification if Lows offer to repay Hibs debt was convert it to new equity, or simply replacing repayable debt with Lloyds (or whoever) with repayable debt from a Low derivative, a bit like Wavetower with Wyte?
justshatered says:
August 14, 2014 at 8:00 pm
60 0 Rate This
So the referee’s are arguing that they should be paid Premiership wages for taking charge of games between Hibs, Hearts, and ‘The Rangers’ because they are ‘big clubs’
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
A whimsical thought
For years Referees in the top league have been guilty of “honest mistakes” in these games that no doubt caused them grief off the park.
Now we have the prospect of the same Referees being paid less despite having to make the same “honest mistakes” in the same games, with the same grief off the park
No wonder they are angry
Apologies if posted before.
An interesting article about potential, future use of additional technology to assist referees;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/11027184/Rise-of-robo-referee-awaits-Premier-League.html
upthehoops says:
August 15, 2014 at 6:56 am
‘. An appalling answer in my view.’
——–
And in mine. Just in case your MSP might also be mine ( he will certainly be the MSP for at least some other posters), would you give me his(her) name? Preferably on the blog, but a PM will do.We cannot have poltroons like that not getting pulled up for their crass ineptitude as ‘politicians’-even I can occasionally be diplomatic: your MSP has shown not only no interest in truth, but an appalling stupidity.
tykebhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 9:05 am
wokingcelt says:
August 14, 2014 at 10:33 pm
UEFA squad size
—————————-
Maybe worth noting that no team can have more than 25 players on the List A squad during the UEFA season.
However in the qualifying rounds one new name can be added to List A but another player has to be deleted so the total number is kept to 25. This change has to be notified by the dates laid-down in UEFA Regulations.
Then from the round of 16 a total of 3 new names can be added with three also dropping out to maintain a 25-strong A List squad.
There must be 2 named goalkeepers in the 25 strong squad and at any time if one suffers a long-term injury they can be replaced with a fresh substitute.
Other ‘youth’ players from List B can be played and I don’t actually think there is a limit on the List B size but it’s probably rare that any players would come from that list except in unusual circumstances.
Inevitably we end-up back at the Celtic scenario because I am still unclear when Bereszynski was added to List A.
UEFA Art 18.13
I assume Bereszynski wasn’t on List A for the first qualifying round involving St Pats. If this is correct then under UEFA regs only 1 change could be made to List A until the round of 16. This meant that he would have been unable to play in any matches against Celtic – as he was serving a 3 match ban – and indeed would still be suspended for 1 further match in the 3rd qualifier.
However by slipping him on in the last couple of minutes against Celtic he is ‘free’ to play in the next round unless UEFA pick-up that he didn’t actually serve his ban against St Pats.
Call me cynical and I am ❗ We know he raised the issue with his club before the game and even the goalie knew there was a problem. Probably the whole team knew there was a problem.
Perhaps we might hear from the admin person – who has been advised by LW to flee her Warsaw home because of death threats – which throws more light on what happened.
At the end of the day there is one EUFA rule that LW didn’t mention – I wonder why 😳
John Clark says:
August 15, 2014 at 10:14 am
upthehoops says:
August 15, 2014 at 6:56 am
‘. An appalling answer in my view.’
——–
And in mine. Just in case your MSP might also be mine ( he will certainly be the MSP for at least some other posters), would you give me his(her) name? Preferably on the blog, but a PM will do.We cannot have poltroons like that not getting pulled up for their crass ineptitude as ‘politicians’-even I can occasionally be diplomatic: your MSP has shown not only no interest in truth, but an appalling stupidity.
=========================================
If I was upthehoops I wouldn’t release the name publicly because the MSP concerned knows his identity and tbh a tit-for-tat response could well be carried out as the MSP seems more than a little conflicted on the subject.
Who knows where his loyalties lie ❓
ecobhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 10:22 am
‘.. the MSP concerned knows his identity and tbh a tit-for-tat response could well be carried out as the MSP seems more than a little conflicted on the subject.’
——
Indeed, with an MSP as stupid as the one in question, one could not at all rely on his discretion or understanding of msp/constituent confidentiality, or underplay the possibility of black-hearted malice in one so stupid.
And I used to be such a trusting wee soul as well!
Upthehoops
Good article.
Could not help thinking if UEFA’s purpose is to uphold the rules (“what is UEFA for?” what exactly is the SFA’S?
Upthehoops
Sad but there are other MSPs and it’s not about Rangers tax evasion/avoidance it’s about the SFA who have rules in place to deter such for UEFA competition applicants but failed to apply them probably for the same reasons. To save jobs but at expense of other clubs.
ecobhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 10:14 am
=================================
Eco, it doesn’t change the jist of your argument but Legia didn’t play in the first qualifying round only the true minnows like the Faroes and Gibraltan champions did.
The Legia deadlines were therefore
b) 12 July 2012 (24.00 CET) for all matches in the second qualifying round; St Pats
c) 26 July 2012 (24.00 CET) for all matches in the third qualifying round; Celtic
The suspended player would also have missed the first play-off match (effectively a 4th qualifying round but not named as that by UEFA)
BTW I also suspect Celtic had a List B player on the field for all 4 qualifiers in young McGregor
tykebhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 11:52 am
You’re quite correct 🙂 I had forgotten the name change for the play-off round 🙁
However, as you say, I think the point I am making was unaffected.
Auldheid says:
August 15, 2014 at 11:00 am
0 0 Rate This
Upthehoops
Good article.
Could not help thinking if UEFA’s purpose is to uphold the rules (“what is UEFA for?” what exactly is the SFA’S?
=======
To make money, to allow it’s members to make money
StevieBC says:
August 15, 2014 at 10:01 am
An interesting article about potential, future use of additional technology to assist referees;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/11027184/Rise-of-robo-referee-awaits-Premier-League.html
————————————–
Good article but I laughed when I initially read the link and saw ‘robo-referee’ mentioned as I had a vision of McCoist stating: ‘We demand to know who programmed the robo-ref’.
I also assumed that robo-ref’s memory banks would be automatically deleted when the final whistle blew to retain silence about explaining decisions 😉
Hey lads and lassies
Excellent work over the last couple of days, chasing down the Sevco share stories. A lot of good analysis as ever going on.
Here’s our latest take on the swirling shambles.
http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/the-gathering-dark/
Auldheid, you don’t fancy doing another piece for us on the current status of the Resolution do you? Also … if some of the non Celtic fans on the site fancy doing something for us, you can get me at james@lbmpublishing.com
I’d like to hear from some of you about a separate project anyway.
This site continues to amaze me, and inspire me. Brilliant analysis as ever.
@James Forrest
Had a little Blackadder flashback as I read that (thank goodness there is some humour to be found in all of this). It was the bit about rumblings of discontent and fans revolt that made me come over all Elton & Curtis.
Something about how the ‘top eschelons suffered from horrendous uprisings from the bottom’ — if only ‘Sevco Rangers’ troubles could be traced to ‘a shipment of garlic eclairs’, all would be well 🙂
You can’t help thinking that Gen. Melchett would fit the bill as one of the bonkers loyal — repeating the same plan over and over. Our Captain Blackadder would probably suggest that instead of running a football club and a stadium they could just as well burn a couple million quid in fresh banknotes every month.
You can’t help thinking that Gen. Melchett would fit the bill as one of the bonkers loyal — repeating the same plan over and over
Its precisely because they’re expecting it Blackadder, is why we’ll catch them off guard meh
The DR hacks must be really hurting as they scramble to find yet another anti Celtic angle to put on the LW story
The latest is to “expose” a “furious row” between good friends Henning Berg and Ronnie Deila in which Ronnie was alleged to have sympathised with Hennings idea of a match to settle the matter. Its as if a dispute between UEFA and LW somehow had morphed into a Celtic – LW fallout that could be settled inmdependently
They then go on to hint that the CAS are willing to decide the appeal by Monday if both parties agree They ignore the obvious reasons why UEFA would be unlikely to cooperate in any fast track that could potentially screw up next weeks fixture list
( as they confirmed later today)
But most of all they make no comment on the fact that the stance taken by Celtic was exactly the position they are obliged to take as interested onlookers to a dispute that was not of their making
GoosyGoosy says:
August 15, 2014 at 4:17 pm
—————————————————-
It’s amazing that none of our useless hacks have given any thought apparently wrt the possible consequences if Celtic had agreed with LW that they should stand aside or agreed to an unauthorised game to decide who should go through.
UEFA Article 4.01 – Duties of Clubs is quite clear:
If Celtic had stood aside or played a game outwith UEFA Regulations I have absolutely no doubt we would have been immediately out of Europe this season and at least next season as well for failing to observe UEFA Rules. Small consolation that LW would probably have ended-up with the same penalties.
Perhaps the SMSM stance is driven by pure desperation to arrest their catastrophic plunge in circulation by wooing the expanding Scottish Polish population. I’m sure that will work 😯
[]
ecobhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 5:45 pm
0 0 Rate This
——–
This quoting of chapter and verse is becoming a bit too much eco. Remember, for a few hours CFC were out and were lucky not to have lost by a Hibs v Malmø aggregate scoreline
The possibility of Celtic and Legia independently arranging a square go at playtime was never on. Has anyone even suggested that? The whole idea of arranging a gent’s re-match, without UEFA’s blessing, was just impossible.
I’ve no idea if this has happened, but what if Celtic had approached UEFA and (i) discussed LW’s overtures (ii) expressed public embarrassment about winning the tie in this ‘unsporting manner’ (iii) asked UEFA to make known Celtic’s stance, and its willingness to resolve the issue ‘according to and within the rules’ and (iv) expressed public sympathy with LW because of the unusual circumstances, out with Celtic’s control, especially since such a huge financial prize is at stake — and this not just by the manager, who has been refreshingly honest throughout, but from the club.
UEFA were never going to break/bend their rules for Legia. It was probably a complete non-starter. Might it not have been in Celtic’s interest to be a little bit more communicative about this whole circus. Yes, I know, huge amounts of cash at stake in the lucky midgie, but honestly, to me something’s missing in all this corporate/legal sport speak.
Danish Pastry says:
August 15, 2014 at 6:24 pm
ecobhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 5:45 pm
——–
This quoting of chapter and verse is becoming a bit too much eco.
===================
Perhaps if LW had read the rule books the whole issue would never have arisen and LW would have deservedly gone through to the next round on superior sporting ability.
Also – after the event – if LW had again taken time to read the rule books then they would have seen it was impossible to suggest that Celtic stand down or that something more akin to a ‘bounce game’ was arranged to decide who went through.
And the attempt to ‘blackmail’ Celtic by a smear on its reputation from LW doesn’t sit well considering their own previous involvement in match fixing.
My post was a response to that of another poster regarding the SMSM manufacturing stories over the issue and I really feel my post – which centred on the media – was perfectly legitimate in that context.
Whether the LW situation was simply down to admin error or not they have paid a high price for playing a banned player. Celtic got lucky, got a reprieve and are still in the CL.
I make absolutely no apology for that and neither should Celtic and I see no reason for the club to be ‘publicly embarassed’ and apologise for a combination of LW screwing-up and Celtic winning a watch. That’s football for you.
As to the Maribor game then I have serious doubts about progressing although let’s see how they do on Saturday. I’ve got my bunnet and will be there to cheer-on my team and wee Fergus.
I would have been doing exactly the same if we had been knocked-out of the CL.
@ecobhoy
Of course, Celtic are through. It’s over. How much chapter and verse do we need? I can almost quote the sections backwards.
No one here begrudges Celtic that bit of luck. No need to circle the wagons on this.
Danish Pastry says:
August 15, 2014 at 6:49 pm
@ecobhoy
Of course, Celtic are through. It’s over. How much chapter and verse do we need? I can almost quote the sections backwards.
No one here begrudges Celtic that bit of luck. No need to circle the wagons on this.
=========================================
I don’t need to circle any wagons and have been confident since the UEFA delegate reported the matter that it was impossible for LW to go through.
Whether anyone begrudges Celtic getting a reprieve is neither here nor there IMO as under rule they were always going to go through. I think the whole exercise in examining the UEFA Rules and the subsequent process has been very valuable in Scottish Football terms to see how a football authority should actually carry out its business and follow and enforce its rule book. It shows just what a sorry creature the SFA actually is.
I will repeat that my post was centred on the SMSM and their usual muck-raking sensationalism rather than reporting the facts by giving chapter and verse on the rules.
It’s obvious that the SMSM media either can’t quote the UEFA Article either forwards or backwards or haven’t even bothered to read them.
And just for the record the section of UEFA rules I quoted was the first time I have quoted it and I actually haven’t seen anyone else quote it. I did so because it was particularly relevant IMO to the post I was responding to.
However – not that I’m suggesting what anyone should do – if I have no interest in a subject I don’t read the posts on it but I have no problems in anyone else posting on the subject as often as they want.
ecobhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 7:16 pm
…the subsequent process has been very valuable in Scottish Football terms to see how a football authority should actually carry out its business and follow and enforce its rule book. It shows just what a sorry creature the SFA actually is.’
——-
And this, I agree, is really where we all came in : the failure of the Scottish authorities to deal with what they in a panic thought ( or tried to falsely pretend) was a disaster.
And the corresponding failure of cheap-jack tabloid journos and their more sophisticated broadsheet hacks to harry and chase them to get to the true story behind the secret wheeling and dealing and rule bending and breaking.
I keep saying, this blog is about the fundamental wrongdoing of those in charge in this country ( which related to the wrong-doing of one club) and the concerted attempt by the SMSM to ignore, deny,or minimise that wrongdoing.
And it is very right and proper that the SFA in particular should be pointed to the readiness of UEFA to exercise its proper disciplinary powers and be asked to consider its own shameful/shameless dereliction of duty and their complicity in a huge affront to the Integrity of our game.
Good Evening
I turned on SSB and around 7.16 Hugh Keevins said that we live in an age where two of our biggest clubs, Hearts and Rangers “ALMOST WENT TO THE WALL”
This is precisely what is wrong with the Media.
What part of Liquidation does not take you over the wall Mr. K?
The sooner the media and the delusional sevco accept the fact that Rangers went into liquidation the sooner we can move on.
They had the chance to accept and apologise for cheating football, society and the revenue but did nothing.
ecobhoy says:
August 15, 2014 at 7:16 pm
I think the whole exercise in examining the UEFA Rules and the subsequent process has been very valuable in Scottish Football terms to see how a football authority should actually carry out its business and follow and enforce its rule book. It shows just what a sorry creature the SFA actually is.
——————–
John Clark says:
August 15, 2014 at 8:21 pm
And it is very right and proper that the SFA in particular should be pointed to the readiness of UEFA to exercise its proper disciplinary powers
———————————
It will be interesting to see if UEFA continue this without fear or favour adherence to their rulebook when dealing with the Russian Football Union (FUR). Earlier this week FUR allowed 3 Crimean clubs located in the Ukraine to play in the Russian Cup in clear contravention of UEFA Statutes 2014.
Article 51 – Prohibited Relations Pt. 2 states “A Member Association, or its affiliated leagues and clubs, may neither play nor organise matches outside its own territory without the permission of the relevant Member Associations.”
The Football Federation of Ukraine (FFU) have asked both UEFA and FIFA to sanction the FUR.
UEFA have a number of sanctions available to it and could apply any of them. However, a Craigski Whytov character taped the July FUR meeting, held to decide on whether the 3 Crimean clubs should be admitted to the league and cup. It was stated by those present that Champions League (& Europa) expulsion and removal of the 2018 World Cup were likely sanctions if they went through with it. As they were scared to take such a decision upon themselves they decided to ask Putin what to do (direct government interference for FIFA to look into there).
Let’s wait and see whether UEFA dish out what the Russians expect before putting them on a pedestal.
weeman says:
August 15, 2014 at 8:49 pm
‘..Let’s wait and see whether UEFA dish out what the Russians expect before putting them on a pedestal.’
——
That is a fair point, but only up to a point.UEFA ( and FIFA, for that matter) are scarcely able to influence geopolitics in so far as their powers to make rules about football competitions go. If , for example, Russia’s de facto annexation ( as some would see it) of the territory of another state is recognised by other states, it makes things difficult for football authorities to decide which clubs may be in which country, or even which country is in which country!
There is, I think it has already been mentioned, such a thing as ‘force majeure’provided for in the rule books.
Hoopy7
I ask the same question but different. If it isn’t liquidation, how exactly does a club go to the wall? How can you be rescued from oblivion per Jim Ballatyne, if liquidation isn’t oblivion? If you go down that route then oblivion can never ever happen as long as the proverbial and indeed literal 11 men in blue turn up with a ball and demand to play.
But if you accept that view, then why not sign Messi on an IOU and win the CL?
Not being very clued up on competition laws and rules, I must say I have found the discussion and dissection of the LW fiasco very enlightening. From the outset, I have taken the view that fundamental norms of sporting behaviour require that if you break the rules, on or off the field, you stand up and accept the consequences. If a side feels it has been dealt with unfairly it has the option of appealing through the appropriate channels. The LW emotionally blackmailing approach to CFC was, from my neutral standpoint, outrageous and very unsporting. The “chapter and verse” contributions in this topic have been most informative as have been the wider discussions.
Lots of attention from the AIM chaps this week for the beleaguered RIFC NOMAD.
6:47pm – 15 Aug 14
sickofitall says:
August 15, 2014 at 9:58 pm
0
0
Rate This
Lots of attention from the AIM chaps this week for the beleaguered RIFC NOMAD.
6:47pm – 15 Aug 14
==================================
Intrigued
What’s this about?
sickofitall says:
August 15, 2014 at 9:58 pm
‘..Lots of attention from the AIM chaps this week for the beleaguered RIFC NOMAD.
ianagain says:
August 15, 2014 at 10:41 pm
‘..Intrigued
What’s this about?’
——
It’s a bit too cryptic for me, too, sickofitall!’ Give us a step for a hint?
According to the BBC LW have asked the CAS to arbitrate on whether a fast track appeal can be heard on Monday
The CAS have responded by inviting a response from UEFA and Celtic
This sounds like UEFA have told LW informally that they will not support a fast track appeal but haven`t formally told the CAS
Why Celtic have been asked to comment is puzzling since the dispute is between LW and UEFA
Either way it sounds like LW have accepted they are out and are simply going through the motions because they said they would
also because
Until they formally accept they have lost and abandon the appeal process they cannot participate in the Europa League tie next Thursday without looking foolish
As we await the revelation viz RFC nomad. I’ll fill in with some Legia Warsaw good news.
They loaned Henrik back to the ‘Well.
And to be a wee bit incendiary he’s said they, LW, are hard done by. Hardly surprising. The Sheriffs back.
Im just reprinting this. Sorry everyone who has read back 2 pages but this for me is the best post for a long long time. And if you think its about the Dons think again. it could be your club. My club.
Thanks to the lad who wrote it.
Amazingless says:
August 13, 2014 at 6:57 pm
124
1
Rate This
oddjob says:
August 11, 2014 at 2:46 pm
I see Stuart Milne…hopes to have Aberdeen playing out of a new stadium by 2017. What do the Dons fans think of giving up Pittodrie?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
Ach. Stewart Milne has been talking about having Aberdeen playing out of a new stadium since, roughly, 412 AD. (I think that was the season Constantius finally drove Alaric and the Visigoths from Italy into Gaul. And he wasn’t giving them a lift. Shocking defending by the Visigoths, though. Mind how their fans immediately started consoling themselves with the security blanket of their wretched “378 AD: The Battle of Adrianople” DVD? Zoomers.) It’s been a long time, anyway.
Stewart the Inert of Pittodrieshire, to give him his full non-working title, is always on the look out for ways to achieve and do nothing. If an opportunity for inaction presents itself, he’s right in there (leading the moribund shuffle to a rousing standstill).
Getting away with doing nothing is surprisingly hard work, though, and Milne appears to have come to the conclusion that inertia may be cynically transfigured by “vision” – and that “vision” itself is a useful (and proactive-sounding) peg to hang on the nebulous concept of “progress”.
And so the fans may ask: “Stewarty, min? Under your watch Pittodrie has been neglected to the point of decrepitude, the atmosphere is often desperate, and the catering staff appears to wish great harm, perhaps even death, upon us. Fits ‘at a’ aboot?”
The implicit and catch-all negation of these (and similar) gripes is “vision”. The vision of a gleaming new stadium; the vision of an achingly vibrant modernity, always just round the next corner. It would be a form of madness, we are slyly finessed to believe, to tackle or fix the present problems when we’ve so much to tackle and fix and look forward to at some unspecified point in eternity.
This isn’t to say that it won’t ever happen (it very well might) or that Stewart Milne has no redeeming features (he has many, many of those), merely that we’ve heard it all before.
But how does it feel, you asked? It’s difficult to answer that question without coming across as some maudlin crybaby stuck in the (idealised, soft-focus) past – the kind of person, in fact, that should normally provoke a gag reflex in all well-rounded citizens. But still, needs must. (Warning: The following paragraphs are likely to contain scenes of extreme partiality and unreasonableness that some readers may find distressing.)
How does it feel? It feels like shite, that’s how it feels. And it feels like shite for a number of reasons, not least because it feels like part of something much bigger and seemingly all-consuming: Greed.
I remember reading a wee while back that Pittodrie, amongst other things, failed to satisfy the requirements of German TV. Whether this assertion is true or not is probably beside the point; the guy was forwarding it as one of the reasons we needed to move stadium and accepted the rationale of his own way of thinking.
But that’s alright, buddypal, I don’t watch German TV, and I’m not sure that many Aberdeen fans will – so where’s your problem? (Even when I lived in Germany, I made a point of not watching German TV, which is maybe a different thing, true, although I recommend this course of action to any would-be visitors to the country and, indeed, to all Germans themselves.)
The requirements of German TV must be a consideration for a team playing in the north east of Scotland? Get stuffed. The requirements of German TV should barely even be a consideration for a team playing in the north east of Germany.
But then I’m not one of those people whose Sundays have ever been made “super” by throwing a Hull versus Wigan match into the mix. The very thought that there may be people out there who actually buy into this terrible bullshit is enough to lay waste to the soul. It rips into me. The more they chirrup and bray of Super Sundays and the like, the less special it all begins to feel, if it ever felt special at all. Saturated? Bank on it.
What on earth have we allowed come to pass that the TV companies are calling all the shots? Mental. I abjure that our clubs and associations genuflect before them, but they can’t help themselves, it seems. They’ve bought into it. The TV dealers came to the playgrounds…
“Hey meester, you want for to try a Soooper Sunday? Shhh. Good stuff, no? Take home. Try on couch.”
…and after a few imperiously re-arranged kick-off times we’re all suddenly hooked on the “Champions” League. Except we’re not. Or I’m not. Not now. The spectacle is beyond gruesome.
Glossy new stadium? You’re alright, thanks. It’s all a bit Super Sunday, a bit Glasgow, a bit Champions League, a bit Qatar, a bit flash, a bit 6.15pm kick-off on a Thursday or whenever, a bit corporate, a bit pricey, a bit wages that seem shameful, a bit soulless and definitely a bit sad. (And the word “sad” is not being used in its more sneering modern incarnation. I mean to say there is a real sadness here, a sense of loss and longing.)
And we should aim for this? That’s not progress, Stewart, that’s madness.
But if we can’t give the Germans any credit for their TV – and we really can’t, I must insist – we can certainly give them credit for their habit of making up spectacularly enjoyable words by randomly cobbling all sorts together. For example: Torschlusspanik.
“Torschlusspanik is a combination of three German words, and literally translated means “gate-shut-panic.” Apparently the term dates back to the Middle Ages in reference to the panic medieval peasants might have experienced as they rushed to make it back inside the city gates before they closed at nightfall. Being left outside the protective walls would have meant being exposed to the cold, wild animals and perhaps robbers.”
Magic.
If there is a better word to describe the condition of those feeling left out of the whole Champions League “I worship TV money, me” clanjamfry, I’m yet to hear it.
But they have it the wrong way round; they’re running in the wrong direction. Behind the protective walls of the Champions League is exactly where the wild animals and robbers do their business these days. We’re better off out in the cold.
But, but, but…if we don’t try to keep up we’ll get left behind, surely? Precisely. Seize your destiny, Mr Milne: do nothing. It’s what you’re best at. And this time, it might just work.
Re sickofitall’s post above on AIM/RIFC’s NOMAD this is actually a tweet from Phil.
No further info from that source so far.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.