837 thoughts on “Questions, questions, questions”

1. 
   

   Paradisebhoy 4th March 2022 At 09:37
   re the Australian ‘friendly’:
   %%%
   I think I must write to Stewart Ayres, the Minister for Tourism and umpteen other things in the New South Wales government about his statement about the ‘ Sydney tournament’ and the way he has bought into the ‘Big Lie’, rabbiting on about the ‘Old firm’ .
   Either he was a supporter of Rangers of 1872 ( and is very Putinesque in respect of Truth] or he’s an asshole of an eejit politician.
   I have tried to email.
   His constituency email address refers me to his Ministerial address: and on that, you have to specify which Australian state you live in, and it seems, blocks you if you are not in Australia. [ But that might just be my incompetence and lack of patience]
   Snail mail to Australia takes an age! But I’ll write to him anyway.
   And give him the basic facts:
   that TRFC is not 150 years old,
   that there is no ‘old firm’ history with it,
   that Putin himself could not have any less regard for truth than our football governance bodies
   that the Scottish ‘Press’ peddles the Big Lie as willingly and knowingly as the Russian press peddles Putin’s pernicious lies
   that , sadly, the Celtic board have shamefully shown themselves to be ready to be the other cheek of a grafted-on ten year old transplant of a cheek!
   Oh, that it should come to this!
2. 
   

   Why didn’t the media pose a question to GVB today in regards to VAR. He is quite ready to hark on the virtues of VAR when calls apparently don’t suit him. Reports today indicate the winning goal may have been called back if VAR was available. Strange the silence that emulates from Ibrox when things fall in their favor. It’s easy to understand how Ibrox got themselves in the financial situation they are in if they believe that from 2012 to 2022 represents 150 years. What sham to put on a show celebrating a non existent anniversary.
3. 
   

   My post of 4th March 2022 At 23:37 refers
   I found an idle hour in which to try to find how to email the Minister for Tourism etc etc in New South Wales about the proposed Sydney Soccer Tournament. I found what I hope is his constituency address, in Penrith a suburb of Sydney.
   I fired this off to
   To:
   penrith@parliament.nsw.gov.au

   Sat, 5 Mar at 23:05

   Dear Constituency Secretary,

   For Minister Ayre’s information:
   The proposed Sydney Soccer Tournament about which Mr Ayres recently waxed eloquent will NOT feature the historic Glasgow Rangers, because that club ceased to exist in 2012.

   The present Rangers Football Club started life only in 2012 and therefore cannot legitimately claim to be 150 years old or to be the other cheek of the backside that historically constituted the ‘Old Firm’.

   A check with Companies House, London, will show that on 14 February 2012 Rangers Football Club plc , company number SC004276, entered Administration with huge debts outstanding.
   It shows further that the club changed its name to RFC 2012 plc on 31 July 2012, while still in Administration.

   The Administrators signally failed to find a buyer or to achieve a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement. They sold off the bulk of the remaining assets to a new company set up 29 May 2012 by one Charles Green- SevcoScotland, company number SC 425159, which changed its name on 31 July 2012 to ‘The Rangers Football Club Limited’.

   On 31 October 2012 the Court ordered that company number SC 004276 in Administration should be wound up, the Administrators to pass control of its affairs to the appointed Liquidators.

   On suffering this final Insolvency event, Rangers Football Club plc that had been founded in 1872 had to surrender its share in the then Scottish Premier League(‘SPL’). In consequence, it lost its entitlement to membership of the Scottish Football Association, and thereby ceased to exist as a professional football club participating in Scottish football.

   It is absolutely the case that the Rangers of 1872 was NOT brought out of Administration as a going concern, merely suffering another change in ownership, with all debts paid etc.

   The new ‘The Rangers Football Club’ ( company number SC 425159) had to apply for a share in a recognised League. It applied to the SPL. That application was categorically refused.
   It then applied for a share in the then Scottish Football League (‘SFL’). This was eventually granted this and it was accepted, as a new club, into the lowest division in that league.

   The old club ( company number SC 004276, RFC 2012 plc, formerly Rangers Football Club plc) is still in Liquidation, awaiting the finalisation of that process, at which stage it will be dissolved.

   It is a monstrous deceit, therefore, on the part of the new club to claim the record of sporting success that was held by the now dead club as belonging to the new club , when it did not exist even to compete over the 140 years when those successes were achieved.

   It is even more disgraceful that the SFA countenanced and permits such a lie in a matter of Sport!

   And I have to say to Mr Ayres that, by referring to the ‘Old Firm’ and to today’s ‘Rangers’ as being 150 years old, he is aligning himself with men as guilty of abuse of office and of the re-writing of history ( in a matter of Sport, for heaven’s sake!) as a certain Mr Putin is in much more grave and serious matters.

   I do not imagine that Mr Ayres has any more moral courage than the board of the SFA or of the Scottish Press, or any interest in proving me wrong.
   However, in fairness, I have to let him know that I will be posting this email tonight on a popular football blog here in Scotland; and, of course I would post any reply he might choose to make.

   Yours sincerely,
   John Clark
   Edinburgh,
   Scotland ‘

   Clearly, I send the email not in expectation that Truth , or the seeking of truth, is any more his bag than it is of any politico when acknowledging truth might be costly in votes or whatever. Just so that he knows the facts, as do the SMSM and the SFA.
4. 
   

   I saw the Livi manager’s interview after today’s game where he mentioned the ‘controversial’ corner decision that led to Celtic’s first goal. He claimed that both the linesman and the 4th official told him they told the referee at the time that it was a goal kick. Is that likely, that an official when challenged would grass the referee up like that? I feel the referee should have the final say on decisions anyway, but surely a colleague wouldn’t pile all the potential blame onto the referee like that?
5. 
   

   @Nawlite – I also found the comment odd, in particular with regard to the fourth official – who given his role would have been about 60 yards away with a not very clear view. The assistant referee is there to (in the words of the FA manual for refereeing) “assist not insist”. Clearly the wrong decision was made but not one that VAR would ordinarily get involved in methinks.
   I suspect that both officials were giving a view after seeing the incident on replay after the match that the wrong decision was made – I am sure the referee if asked would put his hand up and accept he got it wrong.
   But of course referees are not accountable to the public as they refuse to explain their decisions. My personal view is that this is an “own goal” from the refs as their silence let’s the pundits take centre stage with their dated interpretations of the rules. The phrase “that’s not a foul in my book” really gets my goat. It might not be a foul in the book of said ex pro who played when football was more thuggish, but it invariably is a foul is this day and age in the one book that matters – the Laws of the Game!
6. 
   

   Nawlite 6th March 2022 At 21:30
   ‘..surely a colleague wouldn’t pile all the potential blame onto the referee like that?’
   %%%%%%%%
   And surely, if either or both of the officials in question did in fact tell the manager that the referee got it wrong, they would be in breach of the disciplinary code?
   Presumably the linesman flagged for a goal kick, so HE should and would know that he had no need to explain himself in any way, post-match.
   And what business was it of the 4th Official, whose functions, as I understand things, do not relate to the on-field action [other than keeping the ref right about who was booked and such like] who ought to know NOT to discuss his personal view of the referee’s decisions.
   If they were unwise enough to speak ‘confidentially’ then they will have learned a lesson- not to!
   I think we need to hear something more about this, because never in all my puff have I heard of linesmen/fourth officials undermining the authority of the referee in such a way.
   Shurely shome mishtake!
7. 
   

   If the Livingstone manager’s comments on the officials are correct it places the SPFL in a difficult position. If you recall there was a similar situation in the NHL last year where a comment by a referee was picked up on a microphone about a call he made. He was fired the next day. Surely the SFPL and the SFA will have a long hard look at these allegations as it reflects poorly on the game, and, there has been more than enough moaning about the standard of officiating this year.
8. 
   

   My post of 5 March 23.28 refers.
   As I half-expected, the email address to which I sent my message to Minister Ayres in New South Wales was not the appropriate one.
   Nevertheless, I got this courteous reply:
   ” Dear Mr Clark
   You have forwarded your email to the Minister’s Penrith electorate office which deals with local constituent matters only and does not handle the Minister’s portfolio’s.
   The Ministerial office is a totally separate office and I forward your email onto the Ministerial office for their attention.
   Kind regards
   Rhonda
   Penrith Electorate Office of Stuart Ayres MP ”
   We’ll see if Mr Ayres’ staff will respond in substance. Odds, anyone?
9. 
   

   It’s well seen that we’re coming to the tickly bit of the season , given the differing coverage of the two cheeks on Sportscene .The host and panellists were very vocal about the legitimacy of decisions that they deemed had helped Celtic , but no mention of the fact that the ball clearly struck Aribo’s arm and deflected it off Roofe , who looked offside , for the goal . No mention either of Ferguson of Aberdeen being booked for preventing a quick free kick being taken , only to see Tavernier escape punishment for the same offence only minutes later , despite protestations to the referee PS the host and panellists had all previously played for one of the cheeks .
10. 
    

    Sorry , that should have been Roofe who escaped punishment .
11. 
    

    I don’t know what the role of the 4th official is in cases like the corner kick incident at Livi on Sunday, but I am pretty sure that the ref always has the final say. I am aware that officials speak to managers off the record during and after matches. Ordinarily those conversations are kept confidential, although occasionally I’ve heard managers break that accord. However there is no doubt that the ref got that one wrong. Quite how the 4th official is in a place to second guess the ref, I don’t know. I can also see how the linesman could have believed it was a corner (from his foreshortened viewpoint), and at the time, I assumed he had agreed with the ref for that reason.

    Perhaps it is my status as a Celtic supporter but it does seem to me that there is far greater scrutiny (and apportioning of blame on refs) when it is Celtic who benefit from decisions.
    My apologies if that is my own bias slipping through.

    I do think VAR is important and I really hope it is introduced, but I simply don’t trust the current regime to carry it out fairly and squarely. Along with VAR, there needs to be the appointment of of personnel who can carry the trust of all clubs. Otherwise, it will solve the square root of diddly-squat.
12. 
    

    @Big Pink – a fairly simple (and cost effective) way of implementing VAR would be to outsource the assessment element to the (English) team at Stockley Park who have a couple of years experience of using VAR. The infrastructure is all in place, the officials know what they are doing and (after a sticky start) have improved no end this season. I am sure that sharing the infrastructure costs would make it a cheaper option (for both parties – not that with the Sky largesse England need to save the pennies). What’s not to like?
    Oh wait I hear the Blazers saying it will threaten our right to compete at the Euros and World Cups (although they never explain how those wholly independent footballing nations San Marino and Andorra get to compete…). They couldn’t be afraid of the bright light of scrutiny on their competence could they?
13. 
    

    One thing I haven’t been able to check is how the linesman flagged at the ‘corner’. Haven’t seen a clip that shows whether he pointed for the corner or to the goal kick.
14. 
    

    One complaint I’ve seen about VAR is that there seems to be the ability to make the offside lines thicker or thinner, meaning you would be able to influence close decisions .
15. 
    

    Paddy Malarkey 7th March 2022 At 21:01
    ‘… the ability to make the offside lines thicker or thinner, meaning you would be able to influence close decisions .’
    %%%%%%%%%%
    Not sure about that, PM.
    Remember, the width of any pitch includes the width of the lines drawn.( That’s why the whole ball has to be over the line for a goal, and before it can be declared out of play for a throw-in.
    The same applies to the VAR line, thick or thin: if a player is in an off-side position some part of him must be further advanced over the Goal-Side-Edge of the line than the furthest advanced bit of the defender’s body.
    The width of the VAR line however thick or thin would always clearly show that
    a) no part of either player’s body was further advanced than the other player’s[ therefore no offside]
    or
    b) that some part of the defender’s body was further advanced than the attacker’s [again, no offside]
    or
    c) that some part of the attacker’s body was more advanced over the line than any part of the defender’s[ therefore offside]
    I think I’m right in that, but, as ever, I am open to correction.
16. 
    

    Big Pink 7th March 2022 At 18:25
    EDIT
    “..I do think VAR is important and I really hope it is introduced, but I simply don’t trust the current regime to carry it out fairly and squarely. ”
    ____________________________________________________

    As a trade unionist I have never been one to champion ‘outsourcing’ or Pfi. Seeing it as a way of abrogating responsibility and making it far more difficult for the general public( now referred to commonly as stakeholder ffs) to hold elected officials to account. In this instance however, I will advocate the capitalist approach of supposed value for money. Let the English/Italians/French monitor the game. Personally I don’t believe referees are anything but honestly incompetent ..at times. They are involved at a high level due to their love of the game and VAR will surely cut them some slack. The blazers will indubitably hide behind the refuge of patriotic duty.
17. 
    

    With the potential for VAR in the future why not go a step further. Give each team a manager’s challenge on questionable calls. That avenue is in use in most major sports in North America and has proved to be fairly effective. If the call is overturned there is no penalty, but, if the original call is correct that team that challenged, especially in hockey, is assessed a penalty with that team playing a man short for two minutes. It’s easy to kill two minutes in soccer but is the penalty was for a longer period it might rein in the complaints of the manager/referees on the sidelines. Also would it not be interesting to ask the reporters to answer a written quiz on the laws of the game, without benefit of a rule book at their side, to determine their alleged knowledge of the game.
18. 
    

    Big Pink 7th March 2022 At 18:25
    ‘..there needs to be the appointment of of personnel who can carry the trust of all clubs. ‘
    %%%%%%%%
    Sadly, we cannot look to the SFA for ‘governance’ that engenders Trust.

    In 2012, the SFA board sacrificed principle and honour and sold their very souls by adopting a policy of ‘appeasement’ (to use a word now being used again in the context of war,] to create the myth that TRFC is in fact Rangers of 1872.

    Rather than insist that TRFC be admitted into Scottish Football only on condition that it could not and would not claim to be RFC of 1872 and that the records would show that it had no sporting history prior to 2012, they sold Scottish Football by cobbling up the ‘5-Way Agreement’ with all kinds of specious nonsense about RFC of 1872’s share in the SPL simply being transferred to a new owner.
    And, most strikingly, they have never yet been able to explain how a club, as Liquidated as Third Lanark and Gretna, can be in existence 12 years after entering Liquidation?
    Doncaster and Regan always ducked the issue with weasel words, and the SMSM happily carry on propagating the lie, and asked and still ask no hard questions. ( they would slot in well in Moscow currently]
    Honest to God.
    And thank God it is only ( at the moment] ‘Sport’ that we are talking about. Because, n my view, if guys can lie about mere sport, what would they not be prepared to lie about to earn a few bob?
19. 
    

    Vernallen 7th March 2022 At 22:50
    ‘..would it not be interesting to ask the reporters to answer a written quiz on the laws of the game, without benefit of a rule book at their side, to determine their alleged knowledge of the game.’
    %%%%%%%%%
    It would indeed!
    Heaven knows, I’m no expert myself, but then I am not paid as an expert, and don’t have a privileged platform on BBC TV or BBC Radio Scotland to pose as if I were an expert!
    And I would say that, given that the majority of the SMSM football hacks do not tell the truth about TRFC etc, I would insist on a body search of those competing in such a quiz, to eliminate the possibility of cheating; because, by jingo, they sure as hell would cheat if it suited their barra.
    In my opinion.
20. 
    

    With regards to the laws of the game and the pundits I would like to see their fulminations in the following circumstance:
    Team A awarded a free kick due to a foul by team B in team A’s defensive third. Team A defender passes ball back to keeper who is out of position/misses the ball and ball ends up in back of the net. The referee correctly awards a corner to the attacking team. I think the ignorance in the commentary boxes and studios would be overwhelming (especially if a favoured team was considered to have been robbed of a goal!)
21. 
    

    You’ll need to explain that one for me WC. Unless the award was an indirect free kick I too would have presumed it was a goal.
22. 
    

    John Clark 7th March 2022 At 22:21
    Well seen that you’re one of the good guys ! They can adjudicate on gaps that are mere millimetres , but can expand the lines to centimetres . You can take something that was marginally offside to being inconclusive . Control of the medium !
23. 
    

    @Ballyargus – Law 13, you can’t score an own goal directly from a free kick whether direct or indirect (and you can’t score an own goal from your own throw-in either).
24. 
    

    In my inbox at 20.49 tonight

    “MEDIA RELEASE
    For further information related to the CAS activity and procedures in general, please contact either Matthieu Reeb, CAS Director General, or Katy Hogg,
    Communications Officer. Palais de Beaulieu, avenue de Bergières 10, 1004 Lausanne, Switzerland. media@tas-cas.org, http://www.tas-cas.org
    FOOTBALL
    THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS) REGISTERS THE APPEALS
    FILED BY THE FOOTBALL UNION OF RUSSIA AGAINST THE DECISIONS
    TAKEN BY FIFA AND UEFA TO SUSPEND RUSSIAN TEAMS AND CLUBS
    FROM THEIR COMPETITIONS
    Lausanne, 8 March 2022 – The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) registered earlier today the appeals
    filed by the Football Union of Russia (FUR) against the decisions taken on 28 February 2022 by the
    Bureau of the FIFA Council (the FIFA appeal) and the UEFA Executive Committee (the UEFA appeal)
    (collectively, the Challenged Decisions) to suspend all Russian teams and clubs from participation in
    their respective competitions until further notice.
    The FIFA appeal has been filed against Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), the
    Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), the Polish Football Association, the Swedish Football
    Association, the Czech Football Association, the Football Association of Montenegro and the Malta
    Football Association.
    The UEFA appeal has been filed against UEFA, the Hellenic Football Federation, the Belarus Football
    Federation, the Danish Football Association, the Luxembourgish Football Association, the Austrian
    Football Association, the Malta Football Association, the Portuguese Football Federation, the English
    Football Association, the Spanish Football Association, the Irish Football Association and the French
    Football Association.
    In its appeals, the FUR requests CAS to set aside the Challenged Decisions and to reinstate all Russian
    teams and clubs for participation in FIFA and UEFA competitions. Together with each statement of
    appeal, the FUR has also filed a request to stay the execution of each challenged decision.
    The CAS Court Office has initiated two separate arbitration procedures and, in accordance with the Code
    of Sports-related Arbitration (the arbitration rules governing CAS procedures), will seek the position of
    the respondent parties with respect to the FUR’s requests to stay the execution of the Challenged
    Decisions and as to the organization and planning of each arbitration procedure.
    The CAS anticipates being able to share further information on the proceedings through a media release
    in a few days’ time, once a decision has been issued with respect to the requests for a stay.”

    Interesting not to see the SFA involved?
25. 
    

    Thanks WC, that’s clear enough, pardon my ignorance.
    JC, maybe it’s because there are no Scottish teams involved in playing against ones from Russia including the nation team. Just a guess without looking into the fixture lists.
26. 
    

    WC
    Every day is a school day. Didn’t know that free kick/shy/own goal rule.
    John C
    I believe the thickness of the lines in VAR are predetermined at the start of the season. I think the English guys thickened the lines at the start of this season to avoid the millimetre offsides. Given that TV frame rate is 30fps, one frame could involve a distance the length of a school ruler.
    Technology/schmology
27. 
    

    Paddy Malarkey 8th March 2022 At 20:51
    ‘…but can expand the lines to centimetres . You can take something that was marginally offside to being inconclusive . Control of the medium !’
    Big Pink 9th March 2022 At 08:27
    ‘.. I think the English guys thickened the lines at the start of this season to avoid the millimetre offsides. ‘
    %%%%%%%%%%%
    Thank you for those observations.
    I suppose if there is an AGREEMENT that fractional ‘off-sides’ don’t count, that’s fair enough- provided always that the same measurement of what constitutes a ‘fractional’ offside is used in every match!
    One would hope that the SFA website will in due course explain in detail how they intend VAR to be operated in Scotland?
28. 
    

    There was much speculation on Nathan Patterson’s transfer to Everton with the media wildly guessing at the fee going to Ibrox. I believe someone posted at that time Everton’s financials were due out soon and that could possibly clarify the amount of money involved. Far be it from anyone in the Scottish media to follow up, but, perhaps someone who is a regular on here may have heard of seen something.
29. 
    

    Vernallen 11th March 2022 At 19:06
    ‘.. I believe someone posted at that time Everton’s financials were due out soon..’
    %%%%%%%
    yes, Companies House page for Everton show “Next accounts made up to 30 June 2021 are due by 31 March 2022”
    So they have another couple of weeks.
    But since the financial year to be reported on is the year 2020/June 2021 and the transfer was in January2022 (ie. in financial year ending June 2022) there might not be any way to assess from the accounts what the transfer fee was, until we see the accounts for 2021/22?
    I’m no accountant, of course, and may be hopelessly mistaken!
30. 
    

    A Court of Session judgment in an Appeal hearing was published today.
    On one level I found it an entertaining read for anyone: I could hardly believe what was reported as having been said and written by the appellant about the people who had brought the initial action against him.
    The case was not at all about a football matter and I was going to post a link to it merely to share the fun of it with readers of SFM.
    But I thought for a minute, and realised that in fact, the judgment touches on the very heart and substance of why I bang on with my repetitive denunciations of the SFA and the Big Lie.
    How so?
    Well, the judgment slaps the face of the Statutory body against whose decision the appellant was appealing.
    Why so?
    Well, the Court of Session concluded that the Standards Commission for Scotland abused its powers by including an element of punishment in its decision, when it does not have the legal power to do so.

    And what did the SFA do by cobbling up the 5-Way Agreement?
    What else but abuse their authority, by ignoring their own Rules , by manufacturing without authority new ones, and by presuming to use powers that they did NOT have to declare that a football club that they themselves had newly admitted into the SFA was the very same club that had, under the SFA’s own rules, ceased to exist as a football club entitled to membership of the SFA!

    Oh, Lord: how I wish I had the financial resources to take the SFA to Court.

    The link to the judgment is
    https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2022csih15.pdf?sfvrsn=56e29906_1

    The case number is
    [2022] CSIH 15
    XA63/21
31. 
    

    JC I think you may be confusing public and statutory bodies with private ones.

    Of course the SFA can be subject to judicial review or what ever we call it in Scotland.

    In essence you would be suing a private company. That’s a very narrow path and highly unlikely to succeed.
32. 
    

    Dom16 12th March 2022 At 17:25
    ‘…In essence you would be suing a private company..’
    %%%%%%
    Yes, Dom16, I appreciate the difference: but I’d love to be able to have the whole question explored of whether RIFC plc’s ‘prospectus’ [which I think made misleading claims] might have been by nod and wink ‘supported’ by the fact that the ‘football authorities’ were ready to allow a brand new club to claim the sporting history of the still existing entity ( now in liquidation’] that was the football club that created that history!
    If I were ever to win the lottery, I’d be happy to throw few million at the question!
33. 
    

    I’ve been fiddling about on the web trying to get to grips with the Chelsea FC situation.
    It seems that the ‘special licence’ has been amended :
    “Under section 4.7 of the licence imposed on the club, Chelsea will be permitted to spend up to £900,000 when hosting games at Stamford Bridge. Previously, that had been set at £500,000.
    A limit of £20,000 to spend on away fixtures, however, remains and that raises serious questions as to whether or not Chelsea will be able to fulfill their Champions League round-of-16 fixture away at Lille later this month…”
    https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/chelsea-fc-uk-goverment-licence-roman-abramovich-sanctions-premier-league-2022-b987681.html

    Now, as you might imagine, my interest in the matter is in the question of what the FA will do if Chelsea goes into Administration and if toss-pot Administrators fail to find a Candy-striped buyer to bring them out of Administration, but instead sell off the assets dirt cheap.. and liquidate the club
    Would the FA behave as the SFA did?
    Allow the purchaser of the ‘ assets’ [who did not pay all the debts] to claim to be the owner of the historic Chelsea FC?
    I hold my breath!
34. 
    

    Followed the Ranger game today on the DR’s update to reports. I cam across one item that seemed to show the bias of the DR. It involved the half time subs due to tactical reasons. That should have been more than ample for those following but the reporter had to add no injuries involved, thankfully. It should have been enough to clarify injuries weren’t the cause of subs, but to add the word “thankfully” was a little over the top.
35. 
    

    Vernallen 13th March 2022 At 21:42
    Same omerta wrt racist and sectarian chanting as other msm sites ? Acceptance of it is normalising it . It’s not even commented on , let alone raise an apology for transmitting it .
36. 
    

    Vernallen 13th 21.42

    With a potential last eight place in the Europa League at stake for a Scottish club then perhaps the comment is understandable.
37. 
    

    Big black mark on my tongue – never saw this at the time
    https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/rangers/why-it-was-an-onerous-afternoon-at-dens-park-3609379
38. 
    

    Paddy Malarkey 13th March 2022 At 22:30
    ‘..Big black mark on my tongue..’
    %%%%%%%%%
    There are bigger, more culpable black marks on the tongues of Pattullo and his counterparts in the SMSM who refuse to call the the Big Lie for what it is: the big LIE, cobbled up as blatantly and as nonsensically as any lie that the hound of hell in Russia has cobbled up so far.
    By geez, what those heroic reporters of the Ukrainian war must think of ‘journalists’ of the kind WE have in the SMSM who are afraid to say ‘boo’ to a lying football club and a lying football governance body!
39. 
    

    Based on last night’s performance, televised live to a global audience (ok, a small “g” for global), it’s not only the pundits that don’t have an up to date version of the laws of the game. Everyone makes mistakes and things can be missed, offside calls can be marginal either way and sliding tackles can be viewed as yellow or red depending also on fine margins. But not applying the handball rule as it is written in the Laws of the Game and making a rule up is another level. Fortunately for Mr Beaton his error didn’t affect the result as they say (although if Celtic had been 2 up at the break Utd may have thrown caution to the wind, so who knows). However regardless of consequence such an error must have ramifications on the referee? At the very least he should be called to account and asked why he was not applying the Laws of the Game. I won’t hold my breath…
40. 
    

    How pitifully cowardly must our SMSM football hacks and editors feel, who are either afraid to state the simple truth that TRFC is NOT RFC of 1872, or (perhaps worse] are willing propagandists for the biggest sporting lie in Scottish football’s history. Lying in a matter of Sport?
    What shame those who claim to be journalists must feel in their souls when they compare themselves with people like Marina Ovsyannikova who face imprisonment or worse for speaking the truth not to a mere provincial ‘ sports governance body’ or to the board of directors of a ten- year-old football club, but to a tyrannous government that will imprison them for years, if not quietly ‘disappear’ them.
41. 
    

    John Clark 15th March 2022 At 13:57
    I think they will continue to confuse the two clubs until the original entity is finally liquidated . While still in limbo , it can have its 150th birthday , and it was nice of the new club to host a party for them at the ground they used to play .
42. 
    

    In my inbox at 19.49 this evening:

    “Lausanne, 15 March 2022 – The President of the Appeals Arbitration Division of the Court of Arbitration
    for Sport (CAS) has denied the request filed by the Football Union of Russia (FUR) to stay, for the
    duration of the CAS proceedings, the execution of the UEFA Executive Committee’s decision to suspend
    all Russian teams and clubs from its competitions until further notice (the Challenged Decision).
    Consequently, the Challenged Decision remains in force and all Russian teams and clubs continue to be
    suspended from participation in UEFA competitions.
    The CAS arbitration proceedings continue. The parties did not agree to an expedited procedure and a
    hearing has not yet been fixed.
    In the arbitration proceedings brought by the FUR against the FIFA Council’s decisions:
    1) to suspend all Russian teams and clubs from participation in its competitions until further notice, and
    2) to give a “bye” to the team of Poland to the final of “Path B” of the European play-offs for the 2022
    FIFA World Cup, due to take place on 29 March 2022,
    the CAS decisions on the FUR’s requests to stay the execution of the FIFA decisions for the duration of
    the CAS proceedings are likely to be issued at the end of this week “
43. 
    

    Paddy Malarkey 15th March 2022 At 18:13
    ‘..While still in limbo , it can have its 150th birthday , and it was nice of the new club to host a party for them at the ground they used to play .’
    %%%%%%%%%
    Heh, heh, PM: that’s an interesting and entertaining take on the matter.
    And, technically, until RFC of 1872 is dissolved it has indeed been hanging around around like a bad smell in ‘legal’ existence since 2012: but not, of course, in any kind of football -playing capacity, having had to surrender its share in the SPL and losing thereby its membership of the SFA.
44. 
    

    ‘The Scotsman’s second leader today is a light-hearted piece about the ‘new’ job ,presumably to be known as FRO (Football Replay Operator) , working in the ‘VOR'( video operations room) of a football stadium.
    Apparently, this job will attract a starting salary of £22,280. So far, so innocent,
    However, it will attract a bonus of up to 10%.
    The Scotsman does not go so far as to indicate on what basis a bonus will be earned.
    Will it be the normal – based on ‘results’?
45. 
    

    What price real, honest, investigative journalism?
    From my inbox this morning:

    “As companies around the world distance themselves from doing business in Russia, the ‘professional enablers’ who have served powerful entities tied to the Kremlin are facing pressure to do the same.

    Today, American legal giant Baker McKenzie told ICIJ it’s leaving Russia and dropping Russian clients in response to sweeping new sanctions aimed at weakening the country’s war against Ukraine.

    Baker McKenzie was the focus of a major Pandora Papers exposé — which found that the prestigious international law firm had represented at least six sanctioned companies controlled by the Russian government.

    New global sanctions and overwhelming solidarity against the invasion have been “a public relations nightmare for big Western law firms that have acted as gatekeepers\facilitators for big Russian money,” says AML RightSource adviser Timothy White.

    ICIJ’s investigation on how Baker McKenzie served Vladimir Putin’s business interests around the globe was the latest chapter in our years of reporting on the powerful entities and enablers key to supporting the Russian president.

    Reporter Sydney Freedberg and ICIJ media partners discovered that Baker McKenzie had found lucrative work over the years with Russia’s largest state-controlled companies, winning a dozen contracts with sanctioned firms, including a military weapons maker, banks and an energy giant.

    You can find this story and ongoing reporting on the hidden wealth of Russian elites in ICIJ’s newly launched Russia Archive.”
46. 
    

    John Clark 16th March 2022 At 11:53

    ‘The Scotsman’s second leader today is a light-hearted piece about the ‘new’ job ,presumably to be known as FRO (Football Replay Operator) , working in the ‘VOR'( video operations room) of a football stadium.
    Apparently, this job will attract a starting salary of £22,280. So far, so innocent,
    However, it will attract a bonus of up to 10%.
    The Scotsman does not go so far as to indicate on what basis a bonus will be earned.
    Will it be the normal – based on ‘results’?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Although the post will not be the ‘decision maker’ in terms of VAR, it is a pretty poor salary given what a VAR decision could cost a club in terms of finance, although I’m not sure how many hours per week the salary is for.
47. 
    

    Upthehoops 16th March 2022 At 15:28
    ‘ ,, it is a pretty poor salary given what a VAR decision could cost a club in terms of finance, ‘
    %%%%%%%
    Aye. I haven’t seen anything much about the whole business of operating VAR and the set-up,
    I assume the techies will be employees of the company engaged to provide the camera work and such.
    But will it be the match referee who, looking at a pitchside monitor, alone will interpret what the video seems to say, or will it be a separate referee ( or two or three!) sitting in the operations room who will give the football ruling on what decision is to be awarded?
    Has anything been handily published for the information of supporters?
48. 
    

    John Clark 16th March 2022 At 15:59

    Has anything been handily published for the information of supporters?

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I saw a video feature on the BBC website with none other than John Beaton explaining the process. I think what supporters need more than anything is a clear explanation of exactly what will and what will not be subject to VAR review, because our game is already plagued by Refereeing inconsistency.
49. 
    

    Upthehoops 16th March 2022 At 21:39
    ‘..what supporters need more than anything is a clear explanation of exactly what will and what will not be subject to VAR review.’
    %%%%%%%
    Well, that is the question.
    Foul tackles, shirt-pulling and shoving at corner kicks, elbows into the eye-socket in midfield headers…?

    When it comes to integrity in sport and sports governance, and attempts to ensure that we as punters who fund the feckin game get Truth in sporting competition we can hardly rely on what a lying SFA might introduce!
    God almighty, the SFA lie.
    Can we trust anything they introduce?
    Not in my opinion, because they sold their very soul in a base act of betrayal of truth and sporting principle by the stupid , stupid nonsense of ‘continuity’ RFC of 1872.
    There is no Zelensky in Scottish football governance.
50. 
    

    Braga v TRFC . Could be a wee bit of a culture clash . From Wiki
    Braga’s emblem is the city of Braga’s shield with Mother Mary and baby Jesus with the blue from the city’s shield changed to red. On the top of the emblem is the golden Mural Crown of Braga, with the name “Sporting Clube de Braga” on it. Many Braga fans have said that Mother Mary gives them luck.
51. 
    

    Interesting to note this in the ‘Scottish Sun’ today (online update at 9.28 a.m.]
    “TICKETS for the controversial Sydney Super Cup Old Firm clash went on sale at 3am last night – as a report claimed Rangers could be pondering an 11th hour withdrawal from the event.”
    I hope TRFC do pull out so that the whole feckin lying nonsense of them being continuity Rangers will not get an airing and no one makes money out the pretence that they are!
    And bloody Celtic need their arse kicked for having been ready to sign up to the very idea of TRFC taking part!
52. 
    

    It’s difficult to understand how the DR keeps referring to the Rangers reaching the final 8 for the first time since 2008. Once could be understood as a simple mistake as their reporters have a colored version of history. To repeat the same assertion a second time in really a show incompetence. And one other point why is it that Kris Boyd only seems to comment when Rangers win and hardly a peep when they lose. Is there an update on the potential injury to Morelos last night.
53. 
    

    Passing through St Enoch’s Square the other day I noticed The Rangers shop had closed down. A small notice in the window confirmed its closure. Has anyone any information?
54. 
    

    Ballyargus 18th March 2022 At 22:25
    ‘.. the other day I noticed The Rangers shop had closed down. A small notice in the window confirmed its closure. Has anyone any information
    %%%%%%%%
    I came across this peculiar page
    https://www.locaji.co.uk/scotland/glasgow/rangers-store/333652/?msclkid=d183b853a70d11ec966f6d50a233981f
    I don’t pretend to know the ins and outs, though.
55. 
    

    MY post at 22.56, Ballyargus: scroll down to ‘comments’ on the link!
56. 
    

    Ballyargus 18th March 22.25.

    Shop was operated by Elite/Hummel.

    No Castore merchandise and not endorsed by the club. Litigation is ongoing.

    Official Rangers shop in the city centre is at the top of Buchanan Street.
57. 
    

    I’ve just been reading the nonsense about TRFC being RFC of 1872 at this link

    https://sydneysupercup.com.au/#about

    It irritated me.
    I therefore visited the website of ABC Australia ( TV news] and I’ve sent to their ‘Check facts’ email
    address a copy of my recent email to Minister Ayres, suggesting that they might want to check the actual facts about the Liquidation of RFC of 1872 and its cessation of existence as a football club entitled to play etc etc. (and et bloody cetera]
    Surely to God, whatever else about the ABC, it cannot be staffed by hacks such as we have in the BBC, who fed for many years on the succulent lamb of a shamed knight and had a vested interest in propagating the Big Lie?
    In which connection, there has not ever to my knowledge , been any hack prepared to go into print to show the reasons why he argues that a 10 year old creation can possibly be considered as being entitled to claim to be a much older club.
    Perhaps that is only to be expected; because when a QC can tie himself in knots blathering on (to the mild amusement of the Court] about the ‘whatness ‘ of what makes a football club: the fans! the history! the what-it’s-all-about-ness!, I imagine that the kind of SMSM hacks we have would make even bigger ars.s of themselves!
58. 
    

    Albertz11 19th March 2022 At 07:29
    ‘..Shop was operated by Elite/Hummel. No Castore merchandise and not endorsed by the club. Litigation is ongoing.’
    %%%%%%%%%%
    When you say ‘ litigation is ongoing’ , Albertz11, are you able to give details of when an actual Court action was raised, and if any actual hearing in that action has already taken place in ( I suppose] the English Commercial Court ?
    Or are parties still simply discussing/negotiating to try to avoid the expense of Court action?
    From the outside, it looks to me that all three parties were actually at the madam, or at least very, very casual in their approach to checking the legitimacy of what they signed up to.
    I would imagine that none of the parties wants to risk having to pay legal expenses, if they were to lose on the merits. Better to cut a deal.
59. 
    

    I’ve just seen this and although it’s not surprising at all, I am shocked that someone is talking about it.

    As we all knew, cheats even then! Will the SFA care? No.
    https://fb.watch/bSPwBF71s9/
60. 
    

    John Clark 19th March 2022 At 22:41

    I’ve just been reading the nonsense about TRFC being RFC of 1872 at this link

    https://sydneysupercup.com.au/#about

    That url link https://sydneysupercup.com.au/# about this tournament and the printed contents within are the biggest load of shite i have read for a long while. 55 is a lie for obvious reasons. same team as old is a lie for obvious reasons , demoted is another lie as the club never existed after liquidation to be demoted unless it achieved a CVA.
    If this was world war 2 and German propaganda you could understand the reason for the lies and the need for morale; but it’s not it’s peactime and this is simply football and the death of an incorporated football club, They died end of and the evidence is easily obtainable for anyone interested.
61. 
    

    “Rangers set for controversial post-split Premiership benefit …The Scottish Premiership split looks set to hand Rangers a controversial boost and Celtic given the opposite … (George Overhill – Ibrox News).

    IMHO -Naw it’s no!

    This inane drivel is nothing short of a pathetic plea/invitation to the football authorities to ‘pockle’ the fixture list in favour of a 10 year old club which has inherited entitlement DNA from its predecessor.

    Here’s what must happen:-

    Post-split, Celtic should play 3 home games (including one against TRFC) and 2 away games, with TRFC having 2 home games and three away (including one v Celtic). This equates to 19 home and 19 away games for each team. If this does not happen , there will be some ‘stooshie’!

    Admittedly, there may be some imbalance for other clubs, who may feel ‘hard done by’ – but not as argued by Mr Overhill

    Against whom they will play, other than each other and Hearts, is, right now a matter of exciting conjecture – leading, no doubt, to some (wild?) speculation in the next few weeks – so for the record, and with apologies to St Johnstone and Dundee who cannot make the top six, on completion of the first 33 fixtures, Celtic will have played TRFC, Hearts, Hibs, Livi, Motherwell, and Aberdeen twice away, whilst TRFC will have travelled to Dundee United, Ross County, and St Mirren twice.

    Go conject!!
62. 
    

    Pyros , eh ?
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1505543386467549188
63. 
    

    @Nawlite – I’m sure if the SFA did care the excuse would be given that it was a different “company” and so nothing could be done…
64. 
    

    BDO V Duff & Phelps.

    https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2021csoh994db16e7faaf44562b70dd717109201c0.pdf?sfvrsn=b8f1694d_1
65. 
    

    Could Rangers face disciplinary action for the toilet roll/tennis ball farce at Dundee. What happens if this occurs at Ibrox or the Sottish Cup semi final. Should the board be in front of this rather than facing another hit to their pocketbook. Keith Jackson takes a subtle shot at Rangers and the return to their infamous songbook. He doesn’t outright criticize or call for action but does highlight it and its about time someone in the media brought the issue to the forefront.
66. 
    

    The other day it was being reported that
    “The governor of the Bank of England has been accused of falling asleep in meetings about a serious pensions mis-selling scandal.
    Andrew Bailey, who was then boss of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), allegedly nodded off in 2019 discussions with advocates for the victims of the British Steel Pension Scheme (BSPS) debacle. ”

    He certainly , in my opinion, was sleeping on the job at the FCA when his people allowed RIFC plc to issue what to my mind was a wholly misleading Prospectus!
    There’s something not right about the FCA, what with Bailey’s successor Charles Randell having handed in his resignation ( to demit office in June 2022.
67. 
    

    I was watching golf and curling on the weekend and marveled at the precision required to make a successful shot. Inches or millimeters can substantially change the flow of the game and outcome. I then went back to the memory bank and the 3 goals chalked off for off-side in Rangers home game recently (EL game). Since the players can’t hear a flag being raised and have minimal chances of seeing it being raised, the question is did the Rangers players play through waiting for a whistle, or, did they pull up anticipating the off=side call. If its the latter case that could be a reckless attitude to develop especially when the majority of off-side calls aren’t that easy to detect. NHL games, played at a much quicker pace, and linesmen are responsible for off-side calls. In order to keep the game flowing the linesmen will holler out to both teams that an off-side has taken place enabling the offending team to tag up and re-group in the on side position, while the defending team also gets to re-group and offer a counter attack. Coaches can challenge what they believe was missed off-side call, if, they aren’t successful the team is assessed a minor penalty.
68. 
    

    Vernallen 21st March 2022 At 21:48
    ‘..Since the players can’t hear a flag being raised and have minimal chances of seeing it being raised, the question is did the Rangers players play through waiting for a whistle, or, did they pull up anticipating the off=side call.’
    %%%%%%%%%%
    That made me smile, Vernallen.
    I have maybe lost touch with some of what is happening in football generally, but surely it cannot be the case ( or maybe it can , these days) that the maxim ‘play to the whistle’ has been abandoned?
    Or that players are on ‘their honour’ to declare that they know themselves to be offside?

    Apart from the universally recognised ‘moral’ requirement that an opposition player should put the ball out of play as soon as he realises that a player on the other team might have been badly injured, it would, I think, be too much to expect players to referee themselves.
    And if they did, their manager would have a fit!
69. 
    

    My post of 20.16 refers.
    I revisited the site where the story about Andrew Bailey allegedly sleeping on the job was reported
    I noticed that the report asked what readers thought.
    Oh, how I wrestled with temptation! But in the words of the old song ” my resistance was low”
    And I sent a wee email to the FT.
    “john clark
    To:
    FTAletters@ft.com

    Mon, 21 Mar at 22:07

    Dear FT,
    I have just come across Sonia Rach’s ‘ Andrew Bailey’ story.

    I invite you/her? to have a wee look at this post that I’ve put on the football blog sfm.scot/blogs [look for ‘questions, questions, questions’ and scroll to today’s date and a post at 20.16 by John Clark].
    Therein you/she will find what I think!

    If you want anything further, let me know, and I’ll be happy to explain.

    Yours in a spirit of truth ,
    John Clark,
    Edinburgh.”
70. 
    

    You can almost taste the staunchness -TRFC statement .
    https://www.rangers.co.uk/Article/club-statement-220322/2h9XppImmXcboZdN8fF4kX
71. 
    

    Apparently in response to this –
    https://club1872.co.uk/news/club-1872-concerns-over-rangers-executive-management/
72. 
    

    Interesting commentary on Twitter from Jason Boyd. According to him

    Duff and Phelps have paid BDO the £4.3m awarded by Lord Tyre for failing to consider a fire sale where in his words “the company would have been liquidated, the team disbanded, and Ibrox and Murray Park sold for alternative uses” Neither party is appealing the ruling……….

    In Jason’s world that means Rangers FC Ltd aren’t being liquidated.

    If you want to read more @Jas72Boyd

    Anyone seen anything about this?
73. 
    

    Like buses –
    2021/22 UEFA Europa League
    Rangers FC vs. Borussia Dortmund (2:2), 24 February 2022
    Rangers FC
    Incident and decision:
    • Invasions of the field of play, Art. 16(2)(a) DR
     Fine: €5,000
74. 
    

    Paddy M, with King back in the picture more visibly, do you think this might be Club1872 agitating on his behalf, or more likely at his instigation? The fact that they specifically mention their aim to buy his shares among the other scattergun issues raises my suspicion. And the fact that the board see fit to respond so quickly and quite vehemently with wording like ‘people who wanted to be on the board’ makes me think they know it’s him as well. I hope it is more infighting that splits the board like the last time King was around.
75. 
    

    Nawlite 22nd March 2022 At 14:53
    I think Mr King is looking to get out of Dodge with his saddlebags full at the earliest opportunity and never look back .He isn’t concerned about any collateral damage inflicted on the 12 year old club – remember , he knows where the original club languishes and even spoke about resurrecting it .
    Wrt the disruption of the game at Dens on Sunday , strange that it seems to have affected only one group of players .