Questions, questions, questions

ByAndrew Smith

Questions, questions, questions

 

As SFM folk will know, Scottish Football authorities can be enigmatic at best, puzzling and corrupt at worst, and downright crazy and incompetent in either situation. On this blog over the years, we have asked questions constantly of the authorities and the clubs, but like anyone with a fan-centred interest at heart we get ignored. “Fans are not a homogenous entity”, they say, “there are more opinions than there are fans”. This artful premise gives the clubs an excuse to ignore fans’ input, and other than on platforms like this, fan opinion is seldom gathered or curated.
The following blog, put together by Andy Smith, the Chairman of the Scottish Football Supporters Association, asks a lot of simple questions that don’t get asked often. He also invites fans to raise their own questions and opinions.
Of course, there are headline atrocities committed by the people in charge of the game.
The Five-Way Agreement, the continuity myth, the refusal to punish the biggest incidence of systematic cheating ever experienced in the game, and the casual adoption of the post-truth model introduced so successfully by venal politicians on both sides of the Atlantic.

But what enabled those assaults on the integrity of the sport? In order to get away with the big con, there have to be wee cons. Ticket allocations, kick off times and dates for set-piece occasions which make it difficult if not impossible for fans outside of Glasgow to participate, refusal to hold match officials accountable in the way an underperforming player or a misbehaving fan would be, and countless other incidences where fans are inconvenienced, or even put at risk. 

The only way to combat that level of arrogance is to unite where we can, and although in a partisan sport that can be difficult to achieve, SFM is testimony that it can work. This blog is an invitation for us to begin to look forward, and not get distracted by the past. I  hope SFM-ers participate and make their views clear.

Big Pink

 

What did Alan Dougherty, Gordon Harvey and Eddie Hutch have in common?

They were teachers who gave their time, to thousands of kids, including me, and asked for nothing back. To a man they gave up, overnight, as part of a ‘work to rule’, in an ugly pay dispute in the early 80s.
They were never thanked properly by the game?
They were and are sair missed.
Why did football let that happen?
Why has nobody ever grasped this particular nettle since?



Should you be able to have a beer at Bayview watching East Fife play Clyde on Feb 5th?

Just like the fans at Murrayfield, just over the Firth can and will, at the sell-out game vs England on the very same day.



Should you be allowed to enjoy a beer at Celtic Park watching Celtic vs Rangers on Feb 2nd?

A smaller crowd than Murrayfield too, and very few away fans. But some history and maybe a different situation altogether.

 


Are our leagues too small, leading to constant pressure and short termism by clubs?

Club CFO’s say the pressures are brutal and when their team is in trouble everything else gets sacrificed to avoid the financial chaos of relegation.
Many CFO’s dread the thought of promotion too knowing full well the seesaw implications of our small leagues.



Should the bottom of SPFL be an automatic relegation to open up the pyramid?

Our unique, one league only, convoluted play-off formula was only ever a last minute switcheroo/deal by the SPFL2 clubs at the time to protect their places in the SPFL ‘old boys network’.
I’d suggest East Stirling, Brechin and Berwick would change their votes if asked again.

 

Your Invitation to Say What You Think


Scottish Football Alliance Fan Survey January 2022

The Scottish Football Supporters Association is an independent and growing fans organisation in Scotland with circa 80,000 members. We have members from all senior clubs in Scotland and throughout the pyramid.
Many of those members regularly visit the SFM site.

We have been asked by the new Scottish Football Alliance (http://scottishfootball.org/) to provide an independent insight into what fans think about various aspects of our game, in particular what fans think our game needs to move forward. It is time for change, and football seems incapable of change from within.

Scottish Football might not acknowledge it, but it really needs the input of supporters like you. The fact none of us have been asked our opinions in the past says a lot.

We need to help and tell those running our game and other stakeholders like the Scottish Government what football needs to do.

Scottish football certainly has to think longer term and get closer to its fans.
In any business overview we are the core stakeholders.
The way we are treated and ignored is quite commercially bizarre.

To that end we have commissioned a short two minute survey, but we’d also welcome and appreciate any more detailed insights into what Scottish Football needs to do or do better. Please email those insights (in addition to participating in the survey) to me, at andrew@scottishfsa.org

I know from experience that when you get a group of fans in a room to talk about football, after the local rivalries and stuff gets dealt with, usually with humour, we can all see what the game has done for us, the power of good it can be for our communities and the things that need to change.

I constantly find that most fans not only see the bigger picture but also collectively want to give something back.

When this survey ends we will aggregate and analyse the results and share them far and wide inside the game and to other interested stakeholders like The Scottish Government.

The results will also become the foundation of policies The Scottish Football Alliance will publish and circulate.

At each stage moving forward we will work closely with The Scottish Football Alliance providing then with further fan insight.

And we will keep you and all other fans involved.

Survey Notes
You can participate in the survey by follwing this link:
https://s-f-s-a.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/scottish-football-alliance-survey

The questions are simple Yes/No and there are no right or wrong answers, just opinions and insight into what fans think.

About the author

Andrew Smith subscriber

836 Comments so far

John ClarkPosted on11:05 pm - Apr 24, 2022


Albertz11 24th April 2022 At 10:22
‘..What exactly have Rangers done wrong?’
+++++++++++
Well, where to start?
As the whole world knows, Rangers of 1872 cheated Scottish Football and the British taxpayer for at least a decade under SDM, and were liquidated in 2012 because they could not pay the huge debts they owed, and not just to the taxman!
And TRFC of 2012 creation is a living lie of a football club in claiming to be RFC of 1872!
But you and I appear to be in agreement on one point : that TRFC of 2012 creation had a prior contract with Park’s of Hamilton and that the SPFL made a balls-up of the contract with cinch in not taking that into account.
Having said that, I think I can reasonably opine that TRFC were unnecessarily playing silly buggers by not responding to the SPFL’s request for information/proof of their contract(s) with Park’s of Hamilton. They could easily have provided evidence that there was a contract without disclosing the confidential details of the contract?

View Comment

paddy malarkeyPosted on12:40 am - Apr 25, 2022


Albertz11 24th April 2022 At 10:22

The SPFL signed a contract with cinch knowing that Rangers had a pre- existing contract that precluded them from fulfilling parts of this deal.

How do you know this ? I’m pretty sure that’s what the court is being asked to determine . The last court date was procedural , to determine who was entitled to be represented at the hearings on the provisions contained in the contracts .

View Comment

paddy malarkeyPosted on9:14 am - Apr 25, 2022


Chances of this sort of tyhing happening up here ?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61211255

View Comment

Albertz11Posted on9:40 am - Apr 25, 2022


John Clark 24th April 23.05

Well, where to start?
……………………………………..
As i’m sure you’re aware i was referring to the cinch deal.

Talk of vandalism and potential riots. Really?. A bit of tape was placed over the cinch logo whilst the interview was being conducted. I’m sure it could easily be removed afterwards.

View Comment

Albertz11Posted on9:47 am - Apr 25, 2022


PM 25TH April 00.40

Stewart Robertson 4th August 2021.
……………………………………………………………………..

And now Gers Managing Director Stewart Robertson has hit back in a letter penned to clubs.

Crucially he claims Rangers made it clear to the SPFL there was an issue BEFORE the deal was signed.

Robertson has written: “We have been in private dialogue with the SPFL Executive since 8 June on this topic but, given that they have sought to make the issue public, it is appropriate for you to be aware of the circumstances involved.
“For the avoidance of doubt, Rangers continues to comply with the rules of the SPFL.

“One of the key rules that protects the commercial interests of all members is Rule I7.

“When the SPFL Executive put forward the written resolution with regards to the new sponsorship contract, Rangers immediately notified Neil Doncaster that, in line with Rule I7, we would be unable to provide the new sponsor with many of their rights due to a pre-existing contractual obligation.

“We cannot breach an existing contract. This is a legal principle which is founded in Scots Law and is the reason that the SPFL has Rule I7 within its rules.

“Rangers has complied with and will continue to comply with the SPFL rules and fulfil all sponsorship obligations which do not conflict with our pre-existing contractual obligations.

“However, this situation has raised some questions which the members may well wish to ask of the SPFL Executive:

Given the possibility of Rule I7 being relied upon by members, did the SPFL Executive/legal advisors include a clause in the contract with cinch, which allows the SPFL not to provide rights to cinch where members rely upon Rule I7? If not, why not?
Given that the issue was raised by Rangers (when there is no need under the rules for Rangers to do so) immediately after the written resolution was raised, why did the SPFL Executive proceed to sign the contract when they knew there was an issue and without further checking with Rangers as to its extent?
Did the SPFL Executive inform cinch prior to the contract being signed that it could not provide all of the rights it was contracting to provide due to SPFL Rule I7?
It was interesting that the Chairman provided the Chief Executive with the credit for closing the deal when it was introduced to the SPFL by an agency that will receive c.£100,000 pa in fees for each of the 5 years of the deal. That is c.£500,000 of cash that will be leaving the Scottish game. Is this the best use of Scottish Football’s limited resources? Could this money have been better spent by employing a full time Commercial Director?
“I trust that this clarifies the position. Best regards. Stewart Robertson

Managing Director.”
………………………………………..
As JC points out ( 24thApril 14.46) the COS seemed satisfied that this was indeed the case.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:02 am - Apr 25, 2022


Paddy Malarkey 25th April 2022 At 00:40
‘..I’m pretty sure that’s what the court is being asked to determine .’
++++++++
The Court’s judgment has this, PM. I assume that these are what the Court accepted as being the ‘facts’ of the case.
“Facts
[4] The petitioners specialise in the sale of new and used cars. They have a longstanding
commercial relationship with Rangers. This includes advertisement by Rangers of the
petitioners’ business. A written contract has been in existence since June 2015. It was
renewed on 17 May 2021. The following month the SPFL entered into a sponsorship
contract with Cinch; a business concerned in the sale of second-hand cars. Previously,
Rangers had expressed their concerns to the SPFL that the terms of the two contracts might
conflict with one another. Subsequently, Rangers have refused: (a) to provide the SPFL with
the rights, facilities and properties required under SPFL’s contract with Cinch; and (b) to
produce a copy of their contract with the petitioners.”
As you rightly say, the Court was only deciding whether cinch and Park’s were entitled to participate in any Arbitration process that the SFA would set up, and decided to uphold the decision of the judge of first instance that they are indeed so entitled. They were not deciding whether TRFC were right in saying that Rule I (7)(i) allowed them to ignore the SPFL/cinch contract.
One wonders what the heck the SFA is planning to do to sort out the matter.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on3:16 pm - Apr 25, 2022


I’ve just noticed that the SPFL signed a deal a few days a ago with some games non-fungible tokens games company called Sorare,
TRFC have said they cannot join in because they already have a separate contract with another such company with two years to run.
This time the SPFL are having regard to their Rule I [7(i)] , and not insisting that TRFC should be part of the Sorare deal, so they have learned something from the cinch nonsense.
I gather from ‘Ibrox News’ that there may be some concern at TRFC being ( as they put it, I think) ‘excluded’ from sharing in the deal if Sorare develops in a big way!

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on4:36 pm - Apr 25, 2022


Big Pink 24th April 2022 At 19:56

Rangers* get away with so much I think because they have balls the size of the moons of Jupiter. It may lack class and display a brazenness associated with “wee man” syndrome, but it goes unsanctioned.

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

No other club would be tolerated behaving in this way in my opinion. The massive number of Rangers* supporters in the Scottish media wouldn’t overlook it for a start.

View Comment

vernallenPosted on10:47 pm - Apr 25, 2022


How long before the SFA/SFPL take a stand against Rangers. They agree to re-schedule a game to assist in their EL travels, then the team turns around and embarrasses them by taping over the name of a league sponsor. Granted their is some dispute about an existing contract at Ibrox with another car dealer but they could have just as easily moved their interviews to an area with no sponsors board, or just used one of their own. Still no action in regards to the throwing of toilet rolls and other objects at an earlier game, and, still no action on the glass throwing at their own stadium. It does appear strange that if Ibrox did have another sponsorship deal with a car dealer there doesn’t appear to be much publicity surrounding it on their jerseys, on the boards around the stadium etc. I think if the car dealer was interested in sponsoring he would want some form of positive p.r., rather than having it drug through the courts, but, again that’s the Ranger’s
way, when in doubt go to court. Its time someone at the governing bodies stood up and said enough is enough.

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on11:37 pm - Apr 25, 2022


One of the better examples of ‘nailed it’ on Twitter tonight.

https://twitter.com/moonbeamsdidit/status/1518531793313484802?s=21&t=Fuk5vFc74zkwtm19bHnnEg

View Comment

paddy malarkeyPosted on12:39 pm - Apr 26, 2022


Albertz11 25th April 2022 At 09:47
John Clark 25th April 2022 At 11:02

Rangers had expressed their concerns to the SPFL that the terms of the two contracts might
conflict with one another.

They might conflict but they may not . If that’s not what the court is deciding , then what ?

View Comment

ParadisebhoyPosted on1:34 pm - Apr 26, 2022


P.T. Barnum once said “ There is no such thing as bad publicity “.
Some posters have suggested that Cinch will be raging at the actions of TRFC . I think they will be absolutely delighted . I had personally never heard of Cinch before this season but now every football fan knows where to go if they want to buy a car online .

View Comment

nawlitePosted on1:40 pm - Apr 26, 2022


Big Pink, that letter has always been great evidence that the 2 entities existed side by side, but I’ve only just noticed the biggest giveaway to the truth contained in that letter – the heading actually confirms the fact that Rangers FC itself KNOWS that the club IS the company.
The heading reads The Rangers Football Club PLc (In Administration) (“the Company”) I hadn’t really noticed that before. I know they are using (“the Company”) there to indicate that any time the words ‘the Company’ appear in the body of the letter they mean The Rangers Football Club (in Administration), but nonetheless it proves that they know the Club is the Company in my opinion. That letter is more important than I had realised, I believe.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on1:55 pm - Apr 26, 2022


Paddy Malarkey 26th April 2022 At 12:39
‘…They might conflict but they may not . If that’s not what the court is deciding , then what ?’
++++++++
I think , PM, that the Court is no longer involved. They have said that cinch and Park’s MUST be invited to be represented/present at any Arbitration Tribunal the SFA may set up between TRFC and the SPFL. That is, the Court has not ruled on the question of whether TRFC are in breach of the contract with SPFL, since they were not asked to do that
If the SFA sets up a Tribunal without those parties being at least invited, they will be in breach of interdict.

Since , as far as I know nothing has been said by the SFA or SPFL , perhaps the SPFL has reached some quiet agreement with cinch to re-cast the terms of the sponsorship deal to take account of TRFC’s non-participation, and the SPFL is no longer interested in trying to sue TRFC for not participating?

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on2:41 pm - Apr 26, 2022


Nawlite 26th April 2022 At 13:40
‘… the heading actually confirms the fact that Rangers FC itself KNOWS that the club IS the company.
+++++++++
The main point ,of course, is that the existence of the club as a football club with registered players permitted to play football was acknowledged ONLY UP TO ‘ the date that the members of the SPL, in general meeting, have consented to the transfer of the Company’s SPL share to the Dundee Football Club’.
At that date, of course, RFC plc ceased to be a member of a recognised football league, and automatically ceased to be entitled to membership of the SFA.
Immediately, a spin was put out by sundry folk that ‘Rangers plc share had been transferred to SevcoScotland /TRFC.
Up to that time, the football authorities had behaved properly in accordance with existing constitutions and rules of both the then SPL and the SFA [as Doncaster in somewhat injured tones was at pains to tell me in reply to a letter I wrote to him back in the days when I first began to understand the enormity of the Big Lie]

It was immediately after that that the rot set in, and governance integrity disappeared.
The notion was paraded that ‘Rangers’ share had been transferred to SevcoScotland/TRFC , so that
SevcoScotland/TRFC was the same club, inheriting the trophies etc etc of RFC of 1872, while some ‘holding company’ fell into Liquidation.
The sheer unadulterated falsehood and nonsense of that notion was A STAGGERING INSULT to anyone’s intelligence and could have been accepted as ‘truth’ only by venal or wickedly partisan men in Football Governance, who yield in the most cowardly and abject way to the blustering threats from marchers on Hampden, and no doubt from other quarters, and with not only the passive acceptance of those threats by the SMSM, but with the active propagation of the underlying untruth that RFC of 1872 was no more.

The fiction, the myth of ‘continuity Rangers’, simply cannot be allowed by the general run of clubs to continue.

It has soured the whole face of not just Scottish Football, but has caused the whole concept of honest sporting endeavour being ignored in order to appease malcontents whose anger ought properly to have been directed at those whose vanity and hubristic and recklessly cynical exploitative behaviour killed their club.

View Comment

vernallenPosted on5:48 pm - Apr 26, 2022


The DR has outdone themselves today printing a guide for anyone wanting to go to Seville for the EL final. If only they could channel some of that “investigative” reporting into some of the ills surrounding Scottish football.
What are Rangers finances really looking like, when will there be reform in the referees ranks, when will Scottish football land a sponsor who is not in conflict with any club, will the SFA step in regarding plastic fields.

View Comment

paddy malarkeyPosted on11:59 am - Apr 27, 2022


John Clark 26th April 2022 At 13:55
Sorry , get it now ! Back to the original hearing set-up but with an added number of participants .

View Comment

ParadisebhoyPosted on3:03 pm - Apr 27, 2022


Vernallen 26th April 2022 At 17:48
“will the SFA step in regarding plastic fields. ? “
I wish someone would .
I remember the SPL rejecting Falkirk from the top league due to their stadium not being to the required standard.
Surely , this is the ideal opportunity for the SFPL to say to Kilmarnock that only a grass pitch is suitable for the Scottish Premiership .
I appreciate there will be costs involved, not only with the installation of a new pitch but also with lost revenues, but I’m sure a financial solution could be found . Interest free loan from SFPL ? Contributions from other Clubs ?
They would also have to look at the situation with Livingston . We simply cannot return to the situation we had last season where 25% of our top league games were played on artificial surfaces ,

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on7:35 pm - Apr 27, 2022


Paradisebhoy 27th April 2022 At 15:03
‘..Surely , this is the ideal opportunity for the SFPL to say to Kilmarnock that only a grass pitch is suitable for the Scottish Premiership ‘
++++++++++
The strongest arguments put forward for the use of artificial pitches were, if I remember correctly,
that winter weather conditions would not cause postponements or cancellations of matches and
that pitch maintenance costs would be considerably reduced. It’s been a good few years since the first artificial pitches were introduced into Scottish Scotland [I was astonished to learn that the very first use in the world of such was in 1966/67, in the States!]
It’s not a subject that I was ever particularly interested in, and I have never played on any kind of artificial pitch , so I can have no real basis for airing an opinion.
But It seems extraordinary that ,as far as I can ascertain, no national football governance body, or UEFA, or FIFA has either banned them or made them compulsory.
The reason , I assume, must be that there is no strong evidence either way.
But if the climate of opinion is moving in the direction of insisting that all SPFL clubs should have ‘real’ grass pitches I feel that those who do not should not have to bear the cost of reconversion entirely by themselves, there having been no official opposition to their choice , legitimate at the time, to instal an artificial pitch.

View Comment

nawlitePosted on8:59 pm - Apr 27, 2022


I agree, JC. Like I said the other day, wouldn’t the other Premiership clubs be willing to share the cost ‘for the good of the game’ the way they have just done for VAR?

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on10:01 pm - Apr 27, 2022


Paddy Malarkey 27th April 2022 At 11:59
‘..Back to the original hearing set-up but with an added number of participants ..’
++++++++++
Not quite, PM: it’s kind of back to the very beginning, really.

If the SPFL still want their dispute with TRFC to be dealt with, they must ask the SFA to set up an Independent Arbitration Tribunal.
But in setting up such a Tribunal [ which does not involve the SFA itself : their job is just to arrange the mechanics and they have no part in the proceedings] the SFA MUST , by Court order, invite cinch and Park’s as interested parties and ,if they so wish, must allow them to participate.
The SPFL didn’t want them to be able to participate. And the SFA apparently did not reckon that they had a right to participate.
Park’s appealed to the Court and the Court forbade the SFA to appoint a Tribunal without inviting cinch and Park’s. And the Appeal court upheld that judgment.

The SPFL clearly didn’t wish to have cinch give evidence about how , under their understanding of the sponsorship deal, the SPFL were not honouring the contract.
Nor did they wish Park’s to have the right to explain how damaging to their contract with TRFC the participation of TRFC in the cinch deal might be to Park’s interests.

I suspect that any Arbitration Tribunal would have difficulty in supporting the SPFL’s apparent recklessness in signing the cinch contract in spite of Rule I [7.(i).

My guess is that for, all round tidiness and minimisation of future difficulties, cinch and the SPFL will come to a wee deal that gives cinch a cheaper sponsorship cost than was originally agreed.

But I suspect that the membership of the SPFL will not be too happy at the next AGM!
Who knows, though?

The fact remains that there was a costly balls-up, in terms both of money and of administrative credibility on the part of the SPFL and probably also the SFA.
Surprise, surprise, I hear you say!

View Comment

ParadisebhoyPosted on11:20 pm - Apr 27, 2022


John Clark 27th April 2022 At 19:35
” I have never played on any kind of artificial pitch”
I’ve got one up on you there JC .
Glasgow Council used to have an Astroturf park at Helenvale St . Parkhead ( an area well known to you , I believe ) , I had the dubious pleasure of playing works football there ( Big Pink might have been in the same team )
It was like a thin carpet laid over hard concrete – a wee bit better than the red and black ash pitches we were used to – but not much .
Obviously , technology has improved the surfaces since then but still not as good as grass .
Very few games are now postponed during the winter now – undersoil heating has seen to that .
I agree with you and Nawlite that financial compensation should be made to Kilmarnock, Livingston and Hamilton if they achieve promotion .

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:53 pm - Apr 27, 2022


Paradisebhoy 27th April 2022 At 23:20
‘..Helenvale St . Parkhead ( an area well known to you , I believe ) ..’
+++++
Oh, how happily cruel of you to bring me back to Helenvale St!
Brings all kinds of association with my childhood memories relating to my dad and the old Parkhead tram depot!
And of, later in life, associations with my job.
I now go to bed with happy memories.

View Comment

Albertz11Posted on9:43 am - Apr 28, 2022


Paradisebhoy 27th April 23.20

Glasgow Council used to have an Astroturf park at Helenvale St
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Pretty sure that American Football (Gridiron) used to be played there in the late 80s.

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on11:58 am - Apr 28, 2022


Paradisebhoy
Indeed, I recall that Helenvale pitch. The scorch marks on my withers are a constant reminder.

Brings to mind the quote from Joe Namath, the famous American quarter-back. When asked if he preferred Astroturf to grass, he said: ‘I don’t know, I never smoked Astroturf.’

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on2:06 pm - Apr 28, 2022


Albertz11 28th April 2022 At 09:43 Edit

Pretty sure that American Football (Gridiron) used to be played there in the late 80s.
________________________________________________________

Think it was where the Glasgow team (can’t remember their name) played their matches?

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on9:38 pm - Apr 28, 2022


From the Court of Session Rolls
“LORD HARROWER – S Alexander, Clerk
Wednesday 4th May
Continued Procedural Hearing
between 9.00am and 9.30am
CA144/21 Imran Ahmad v The Chief Constable of Police Scotland”
Here’s oor Imran looking for some dosh.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:13 pm - Apr 28, 2022


‘Case update:
RFC 2012 PLC (FORMERLY THE RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB PLC) – IN LIQUIDATION
27 April 2022’

The latest report [27 April 2022] of the Liquidators of what used to be Rangers Football Club plc is to be found at
https://www.bdo.co.uk/getmedia/7d832153-5230-4874-8152-6cc05f98fe3f/Notice-to-Creditors-26-April-2022.pdf.aspx
The club it was that died: not some holding company, but the actual club that was a member of the SFA and former shareholder of the SPL Ltd.

And we had the usual ar.eholes on BBC Radio Scotland talking about tonight’s match v Leipzig being as big a match as any match in ‘Rangers’s’ history, with references back to 2008 and before: at which time of course TRFC did not exist even to kick a ball!
Honest to God!
Such liars have they CONSCIOUSLY made of themselves in a matter of ‘sports reporting’ that I now seriously question anything what they report on more important matters: because the heid bummers in Pacific Quay KNOW the truth because they/their predecessors in office actually reported the Truth until their shabby old BBC Trust (happily now as defunct as RFC of 1872] told them not to.
In my view, the BBC Controller, Scotland, ought to have resigned rather than obey that order.
The fact that he did not told me all.
We see with horror Putin’s denial of truth and his wild, lunatic fantasies. They have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands.
The lunatic [ or coldly calculated ]fantasy that TRFC is RFC of 1872 is every bit as much of a Lie: even if the consequences are not so dire.
And those who propagate the Big Lie are as unworthy of trust as any Putin.

View Comment

vernallenPosted on10:44 pm - Apr 29, 2022


Now we have Kenny Miller questioning Celtic’s ability to withstand pressure should they lose on Sunday. Could someone ask Kenny how Rangers handled the pressure when they were six points clear and seemed to home and hosed. One thought for the SFPL/SFA when it comes to chasing sponsorships. Perhaps Rangers could identify to the boards which groups can be approached without conflicting with current Rangers sponsors. This could stem arbitration cases, conflicts, etc.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:49 pm - Apr 29, 2022


Vernallen 29th April 2022 At 22:44
‘..Perhaps Rangers could identify to the boards which groups can be approached without conflicting with current Rangers sponsors. ‘
++++++++
We are not likely to get the full story of the sponsorship balls-up.
But what you suggest seems now to be kind of obvious- if clubs were asked by the SPFL whether they had pre-existing contracts before the SPFL began to negotiate contracts on behalf of all the clubs in the SPL then that kind of balls-up wouldn’t have happened.
Simples, no?
We have been very ill-served by our Football Governance bodies even in practical matters, never mind in ‘Integrity’ matters.
In other words, they have been incompetent as well as unprincipled.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:12 pm - Apr 30, 2022


On a quiet night blog-wise, and just to remind myself of the cowardice of the BBC and the Football Authorities, I had a re-read of the minutes of the BBC’s Editorial Standards Committee’s meetings of April and May 2013, issued in June 2013.
I present to you [ again] the’ ready-on-command’ acceptance by the BBC of the Big Lie:

“The Committee began by looking at the events surrounding the administration of Rangers
Football Club plc. The Committee noted that ASSETS [my capitals] of that company were sold to a
company called The Rangers Football Club Limited (which changed its name from Sevco
Scotland Limited in July 2012). The Committee considered that differentiating between
these two companies and the football club could potentially make this a complicated story
to explain to a wide audience .[ I ask you! lying rather than spend time explaining a hard truth to the masses is a preferred option ?]
“The Committee noted, however, that the administrators of Rangers Football Club plc, its
LIQUIDATORS and those representing the Scottish football authorities had taken a common
approach when explaining how the football club had been affected by this process. The
Committee believed that these groups had made clear that in their view the club was a
separate entity from these two companies [ but they did not, and could not, name this ‘separate entity.] and that its operations were unaffected by either its previous owner being placed into administration or its SALE to a new company [there’s the lie : the club was NOT sold: only some assets were sold: if the club had been sold whole and entire , the new owner would have been liable for all the debts] and the purchaser of those assets had to apply o the SPL to buy a share in that Limited company [ which was refused] and then had to beg to be allowed to buy a share in the SFL [ good old whassisname, Longmuir?] in order to be eligible to apply for membership of the SFA.

You have to scroll to page 25 on this link
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/appeals/esc_bulletins/2013/apr_may.pdf

The facts are blindingly obvious. Lies have been told by shifty men with vested interests.
It is appalling that such men could influence the BBC in such a way.
As said before, it is one thing for ‘businessmen’ to be liars, another thing for sports governance bodies to help create a tissue of lies. BUT it is quite, quite unconscionable for the BBC to help them with their lies.
It was RFC plc that had the share in the SPL on which basis it was a football team eligible to participate in Scottish professional football. It was not Craig Whyte or Wavetower or some other entity. It was RFC plc that lost the share in the SPL and membership of the SFA, and died as a football club, just as other football clubs of cherished memory have died because they could not pay their debts.

And the BBC in Scotland should be ashamed of itself for having given in to bluster and bullying.
Who, since 2012, can any longer instinctively take a BBC Scotland report on ANY subject as being true?
I certainly don’t.
Because I reckon that if they can lie on behalf of conmen in sport, what will they not lie about under pressure from really powerful people in Government of Finance?
Where are the Laura Kuenssbergs in BBC Scotland?

View Comment

wokingceltPosted on7:56 pm - May 1, 2022


What with the rise of nationalism at the moment (and tragically in Ukraine) I can’t help but think that supranational bodies such as UEFA should take an additional responsibility to level the playing field for teams in their competitions to draw the venom from national organisations.
Obviously not for this season as you cannot change rules mid-flight. But I note that Leipzig are playing tomorrow in advance of an away semifinal on Thursday and I compare with the understandable push to pull forward TRFCs match v Motherwell. I do think that UEFA should look to claim primacy on fixtures before their matches with minimum rest time (at least the knockout rounds) to provide balance and avoid any potential bias in member country associations (there is only one other club in Scottish football history that has had fixtures moved by the authorities for their European adventures- that would be RFC 1872…)

View Comment

wokingceltPosted on9:20 pm - May 1, 2022


In other news I see that Maurice Ross reckons that John Lundstram is worth twice as much as Ryan Kent. Talk about damned by faint praise…Ryan Kent (in old money) is a forward. A forward who this season has scored 2 goals in the SPFL ..who wants to start the bidding?
Maybe off-piste and apologies to those who think so, but personally I think the above plays to the wider governance of Scottish Football.

View Comment

vernallenPosted on10:57 pm - May 1, 2022


So Rangers are upset with the activities at the end of today’s game with reports of objects being thrown, fans attacked etc, and possible hate crimes. Is this a case of pot/kettle/black. Where was the concern when glass/bottle were thrown in a recent game, what about the tennis balls and toilet rolls, what about the offensive song book. And to top it off you have the story of an alleged Ranger’s fan and his conduct and actions with the police in the news today. Perhaps cleaning up their own backyard would go a long way to easing this faux outrage.

View Comment

Albertz11Posted on11:14 pm - May 1, 2022


Wokingcelt 1st May 19.56

“there is only one other club in Scottish football history that has had fixtures moved by the authorities for their European adventures”
………………………………………………
Not true i’m afraid.

In 2003 Celtic’s fixture v Dundee was brought forward from the 17th to the 14th of May to allow them more time to prepare for their final v Porto in Seville the following week.

View Comment

dom16Posted on12:14 pm - May 2, 2022


Michael Stewart tweeting an apology to Jim Traynor from BBC programme in 2020.

https://twitter.com/mstewart_23/status/1521037253723754496?s=21&t=BGWiR205GVPQF2AK202VOQ

If it’s a result of legal action, seems an odd way to apologise.

Anyone know why this and why now?

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on3:43 pm - May 2, 2022


Vernallen 1st May 2022 At 22:57
”..Where was the concern when glass/bottle were thrown in a recent game, ,’
+++++++
We never have heard whether it was indeed handfuls of small pieces of broken glass that were hurled into the goal-mouth area, did we?
In fact, we haven’t heard anything since, about that incident, from the forsworn governance bodies created and sustains the ridiculously childish Big Lie that a club created in 2012 is identical to the Rangers FC of 1872 creation! By doing so , they abandoned any kind of moral authority as governance bodies, and are rightly now treated with contempt by some of those whom they would ‘govern’.

View Comment

paddy malarkeyPosted on4:48 pm - May 2, 2022


Something I found interesting about football and Scotland .
https://www.thelocal.es/20220502/the-scottish-roots-of-spains-oldest-football-club/

View Comment

wokingceltPosted on8:03 pm - May 2, 2022


@Albertz11 – I stand corrected re Celtic in 2003, thank you. I do however stand by my wider point that UEFA should look to mandate minimum clear days between matches going forward (and of course do not suggest changing rules mid-flight as it were).

View Comment

Albertz11Posted on9:25 pm - May 2, 2022


Wokingcelt 2nd May 20,03

Would agree with that. Amazed to see RB Leipzig playing this evening tbh.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on10:00 pm - May 2, 2022


INNER HOUSE ROLLS
Thursday 5th May
EXTRA DIVISION
Summar Rolls [ and that is NOT a mis-spelling of ‘summer’, btw!]

at 10.30am
Thursday 5th May
Procedural Hearings

CA86/19 Reclaiming Motion (Lord Tyre) David Grier v The Chief Constable of Police Scotland

CA72/20 Reclaiming Motion (Lord Tyre) David Grier v The Lord Advocate

+++++++
David Grier appealing against Lord Tyre’s January judgments, which dismissed his claims
see the judgments here
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2022csoh02.pdf?sfvrsn=d620d954_1

View Comment

ParadisebhoyPosted on3:43 pm - May 3, 2022


I think it is now the time to ban away supporters from all Glasgow Derby games both at Celtic Park and Ibrox .
Having token numbers of away fans (700 etc ) only sets them up as easy targets for abuse and violence .
Much better to have Home fans only at these games – less toxic atmosphere, easier and cheaper to police and a better environment to introduce new supporters to our game .

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:47 pm - May 3, 2022


Paradisebhoy 3rd May 2022 At 15:43
‘…I think it is now the time to ban away supporters from all Glasgow Derby games both at Celtic Park and Ibrox .’
+++++++
If the clubs involved choose to do so, fair enough. How they manage their businesses is for them to decide.
But if you mean that some external agency ( such as Glasgow City Council or Police Scotland or the Holyrood Government) should impose such a ban, then I have difficulty.
Because for them to do so would be an admission of an absolutely unacceptable failure in their duty to protect us as citizens from baddies.
It is for Police Scotland to protect us against fkn hooligans ( and the occasional murderer]
It is not for us to limit our freedoms to suit them, or the City Council, or the Scottish Government.
In my strongly held opinion!

View Comment

vernallenPosted on1:32 am - May 4, 2022


The DR continues as a public relations arm for Rangers. I know its exciting to be on the verge of a major final but harking back to games in 60/61, 66/67, etc to show how they fared at home is a bit much. First that look into history has nothing to do with a club formed in 2012 and the game back then is far different from today’s game. I guess its anything to keep the Rangers fans onside and purchasing papers. Its time to stop living in the past and work toward improving today’s game and the reporting of the same.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on9:44 am - May 4, 2022


Vernallen 4th May 2022 At 01:32
‘..The DR continues as a public relations arm for Rangers’
+++++++
There are many lying ‘journalists’ in the SMSM, of course, ready to earn a dishonest crust by knowingly propagating a lie as ludicrous as any that spring forth from the mouth of a Russian madman murderer- in a matter of sport!
God alone knows what they would be prepared to lie about if something more than their pay packet was involved!

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on10:02 am - May 4, 2022


Anent my post of 9.44 this morning, my inbox has this from the ICIJ

“Investigations
Russia Archive
MEET THE INVESTIGATORS
‘There is no freedom and there is no press’: How one Russian reporter approaches journalism in the age of Putin
Roman Anin shares his journey to investigative journalism, and talks about the dangers of working as a reporter in Russia, the challenge of holding powerful people accountable in the face of constant threats.
By Nicole Sadek
May 3, 2022
“The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists collaborates with hundreds of members across the world. Each of these journalists is among the best in his or her country and many have won national and global awards. Our monthly series, Meet the Investigators, highlights the work of these tireless journalists.
In April, we spoke with Roman Anin, a Russian reporter who founded and runs IStories, short for “Important Stories,” a nonprofit news outlet focused on publishing investigative journalism.
Anin has been labeled a “foreign agent” and the head of an “undesirable organization” by Russian authorities for his dogged reporting critical of President Vladimir Putin and his allies.
Before IStories, Anin worked for the independent Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta, which partnered with ICIJ on some of the earliest investigations into offshore finance.”
How many of our SMSM people would be taken on by the ICIJ?

View Comment

jimboPosted on11:39 am - May 4, 2022


How come my ‘thumbs up’ vote does not register. ie the number remains the same?

In fact I just gave John’s last post a thumbs up there and the 1 vote already recorded – disappeared!

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on9:59 am - May 6, 2022


What does it say about European football, when a semi-final of one of its competitions is between two clubs one of which was founded in 2009, the other in 2012?
What does it say about the sporting integrity of German football administration that the club founded in 2009 [RB Leipzig] was not permitted [if they even asked!] to claim the sporting history of any older club.
And what, by contrast, does it say about the honesty and integrity of the SFA which happily permits a living lie of a club to go on living and profiting from the lie that it is 150 years old?

View Comment

vernallenPosted on1:43 pm - May 6, 2022


John Clark 6th May 2022 — 9:59

How can you expect people to believe the facts and actions of 2012 if the SFA follow the lies. The DR yesterday still persisting in calling it the 150th anniversary of the club and the 50th anniversary of the former teams European Cup Winners title. Some of the Scottish papers should abandon all pretense of being neutral and use a blue top instead of red. It would be correct to point out that this is Rangers first European final as the 2008 final was a different Rangers club. Good luck with that happening Hopefully the folk who control things in Seville are well aware of what happened in Manchester and are drawing up plans to stem the activities of the Rangers fans.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on10:53 pm - May 6, 2022


Vernallen 6th May 2022 At 13:43
‘..It would be correct to point out that this is Rangers first European final as the 2008 final was a different Rangers club.’
++++++
No one knows that better than the very SPL and SFA liars.
Remember, the SPL applied their Articles of Association and required RFC plc to surrender its share in the company.
The SFA had perforce to apply its membership rules. Under those rules, RFC of 1872 , had to surrender its share in the SPL Ltd.
No longer ,therefore, a member of a recognised league, it ceased to be entitled (like Third Lanark, like Gretna, etc] to membership of the SFA.
The SFL granted TRFC a share in the SFL Ltd, and on the basis of being a shareholder in a recognised league, the SFA accepted TRFC into membership as a new football club.
Everything else was all smoke and mirrors and damned lies!
And I am still somewhat amazed that RIFC plc got (gets) away with trumpeting in the market place that it is the holding company of the historically very successful football club that was the Rangers Football Club that was founded when my grandfather was a young man!, and not of the shabby outfit put together from the bundle of assets sold to CG dirt cheap by the Administrators , who failed to find a buyer to rescue that historic Rangers from Administration.
As a plain matter of law, the Rangers of my granddad’s day died the death of Liquidation [as spectacularly reported by one James Traynor and the rag he worked for at the time]- which was as honest a piece of reportage that that (to me) unpleasant individual ever filed.

But the print press is one thing: the BBC is something else.
And the liars therein are undoubtedly to be assigned to a level in Dante’s ‘Inferno’ much deeper than even CG and the governance bodies of Scottish football will be found.
No getting away with it, in the long term.
The gaping wound in the body of the Integrity of Scottish Football will not be surgically closed except by an honest facing up to the truth; and the painful recognition that TRFC is a 10 year old football club which (readily admitted by me] has done extremely well over its short life.
And its players are personally entitled to praise .[ I accept that the players are but mere blameless pawns who do not know that they are party to a Big Lie!]

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:16 pm - May 6, 2022


My post of 22.53 refers..
I think you can delete
‘The SFA had perforce to apply its membership rules. Under those rules, RFC of 1872 , had to surrender its share in the SPL Ltd.’
I wasn’t quick enough in editing.
You will know that without being a member of a recognised league, a football club has no entitlement to membership of the SFA.
And RFC of 1872 had to surrender its share in the SPL on account of its insolvency. That is the hard truth.
As a football club, it is as dead as my grandfather, who is ‘alive’ to me in memory, of course, but in no way is an active participant sharer in current life!
Whit? stand up the boy who said ‘zombie!’

View Comment

vernallenPosted on10:44 pm - May 7, 2022


You have to like the optimism by some of the reporters for the DR. Today Craig Swan offered up the following ,mathematically Rangers could catch Celtic for the title and the goal difference could be overhauled. Considering the goal difference after today’s game stands at 22 and Rangers only have three games left that is quite a stretch. To score at least 7 goals in each of their last three games and hope Celtic don’t score or give up a bucket full takes some wishful thinking.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:00 am - May 8, 2022


Vernallen 7th May 2022 At 22:44
‘..You have to like the optimism by some of the reporters for the DR. ‘
+++++++
Eh, what?
‘reporters’ ? ‘reporters??
Like the likes of yon James Traynor ,for instance?
who , one day is truthful reporter of the liquidation and death of RFC of 1872 as a football club entitled to participate in Scottish professional football and the next is a propagandist of the lie that RFC plc of 1872 was not liquidated?
God give me strength!
Scottish Football reporting will never be truthful until the the last liquidation denier is strangled by the last wipe-ar.e copy of the DR.

View Comment

EKloonPosted on1:01 pm - May 8, 2022


” still mathematically possible” , Until recently, the phrase that’s maintained our interest in every World Cup and European Championship for a generation of Scotland supporters. It enables a slower death of dreams but does little to ease the pain. I guess it has more traction at the end of the domestic season when play off places, relegation and promotion are in the offing. It’s more pertinent in a race with more than two horses.

View Comment

wokingceltPosted on7:06 pm - May 8, 2022


Well Celtic haven’t lost a league game by more than a single goal all season and I believe the record for goals in the SPFL is 9. I don’t know what odds I would get on TRFC retaining their title, but I’m keeping my pound in my pocket!

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:24 am - May 9, 2022


I have just read a Scottish Football Supporters Association communication that shocked me.
It congratulated TRFC on its great success in reaching the final of the whatever European competition,
But rather than congratulating a 10 year old club [ deserving of congratulation], it unnecessarily bought into the lie that TRFC is continuity ‘Rangers’ .
Pity.
Because I would think that truth actually matters.
TRFC is in actual, everyday fact, not RFC of 1872,
That fact must be recognised.
Advancing fan involvement in football by assisting in the propagation of a lie is not any way forward- for it plays into the hands of a football governance body that is rotten to the core.
I’m bloody annoyed.

View Comment

macfurglyPosted on11:36 am - May 9, 2022


John Clark 9th May 2022 At 00:24
I’m bloody annoyed.
———-
I’ve given up on them.
Regarding the BBC, the link below may offer catharsis, and an open goal for many on here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61349288

View Comment

nawlitePosted on12:22 pm - May 9, 2022


JC, like McFurgly “I’ve given up on them” When I first heard about the group being set up, I hoped it would be a good thing with fans of all clubs fighting against corruption, for fair governance etc. Indeed, I am sure BP was quite forthright in asking for members here to join them for that very reason. I seem to recall the big selling point was that they weren’t affiliated to the SFA like Supporters Direct. Immediately, though, it was obvious that they were not going to rock any boats and weren’t at all interested in challenging the corruption pre- and post the death of the old Rangers. I’ve posted my disgust a few times on here about the wee jokey articles they write about important issues of that sort. Without reading the article you refer to, I can imagine them doing nothing more than reiterating the Big Lie. Like BP, a large number of people were duped by them. As you’re fond of saying, they should hang their heads in shame!

View Comment

wokingceltPosted on2:13 pm - May 9, 2022


With regard to the Scottish media, I see some comments about the inappropriate entertainment/atmosphere at the Scottish Sportswriters Awards dinner. Well done to Eilidh Barbour for calling this out. How on God’s earth anyone would think that type of behaviour was appropriate for a “professional group’s” dinner is beyond me. But then again maybe I should just look at the standard of reporting and not have too high expectations of the people involved.

View Comment

vernallenPosted on2:27 pm - May 9, 2022


The manager of the year debate continues with some of the die hard media holding out for a EL win by Rangers as a vote for GVB. However its been pointed out this award and all the others are based on domestic schedules and some such as the players awards are voted on by players. While its an unique experience to reach a final they still haven’t won anything and while the gaping holes in the Rangers trophy case await an occupant there is still the matter of games to be played and in a one off situation anything is possible.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on6:03 pm - May 10, 2022


Wokingcelt 9th May 2022 At 14:13
‘..Well done to Eilidh Barbour for calling this out. ‘
++++++++
Yes, well done , indeed, and I of course applaud Ms Barbour ( and the other women who joined her] in the anti-sexist drive.
However, as said before, truth is indivisible. Ms Barbour would be even more praised by me if she had been as quick to protest at the nonsensical lie at the heart of Scottish Football.
If women are demeaned as women by male football journalists, we are ALL demeaned as football supporters by the perversion of the sporting and legal untruth, foisted on us by the game’s very governance body, that TRFC is Rangers of 1872!
Ms Barbour might like to consider that, and I think I am entitled to expect her to start reporting on, and referring to , TRFC as being the club founded by CG in 2012, and therefore not entitled to claim any sporting successes prior to their creation in 2012!

View Comment

nawlitePosted on7:02 pm - May 10, 2022


Not only that, JC, it would be great if she was as offended by the anti-Irish racism she hears being sung at every TRFC game she attends to commentate/punditise on, would it not? Or is she, like most of the media, selective in the words her ears find offensive and the locations she chooses to walk out of?

View Comment

wokingceltPosted on8:38 pm - May 10, 2022


@JC – thanks for the prompt. I have suggested that she call out the big lie that her “colleagues” spout.

View Comment

wokingceltPosted on10:02 pm - May 10, 2022


Apologies- just re-read my post – have suggested to Ms Barbour via twitter.

View Comment

vernallenPosted on5:30 pm - May 11, 2022


I hate to belabor the point but the DR appears to come up short again today in factual reporting. Graeme Young claims in his article that Rangers could win their first European final in 50 years, Quite a feat for a club formed in 2012. Why let the facts get in the way of purporting to be a genuine newspaper. Please supply those hacks with a dictionary tabbed at the page where the word liquidation appears and if necessary highlight the word so the truth finally dawns on them. After all this is the same paper that ran with the story in 2012 that Rangers were dead. Heaven forbid they should win next week and the deluge of BS that will ensue.

View Comment

Albertz11Posted on7:20 pm - May 11, 2022


Rangers & Sports Direct agree to out of court settlement with all proceedings discontinued with immediate effect.
This has been the case since 23/02/2022.

View Comment

macfurglyPosted on11:21 pm - May 11, 2022


nawlite 9th May 2022 At 12:22
———-
Sorry about the delay in replying.
Yes, they have became a neutered PR arm of the SPFL. Any thoughts of having an independent, critical, supporter forum for change has, with them, gone. Their emails make me cringe I’m afraid. There remains a void therefore, for any group that wants to challenge the current power structure. This lot have turned out to be Henry McLeish’s diversionary strategy, fearing an insurrection and diverting energy from the real issue.
Let me say, fair play to TRFC in their final, but all the financial corruption during the 90’s, (allegedly) ,and beyond and the subsequent nonsense over the liquidation of Rangers, as well as 80 years of sectarianism needs to be aired, acknowledged and apologised for before catharsis and progress on the field of Scottish football will happen. What appeared initially to be a hope, has turned out to be a hope successfully integrated and managed by those in power. Over to you Donald.

View Comment

vernallenPosted on1:38 am - May 12, 2022


Albertz11 — 11th may 2022 — 19:30
It will be interesting to see what the financial outcome of this court battle is. Since the PR arm of Rangers has been strangely quiet I sense that the settlement could have been substantial. If we have to wait for the next set of financials it could be well buried under a miscellaneous expense heading.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on5:26 am - May 12, 2022


Vernallen 12th May 2022 At 01:38
‘..Albertz11 — 11th may 2022 — 19:30
It will be interesting to see what the financial outcome of this court battle is.’
+++++++++++++
I’m in Texas at the moment.
I have just read ‘ The Athletic’, on-line journal of ‘The Athletic Media company ‘
https://theathletic.com/news/rangers-settle-lengthy-dispute-with-sports-direct/KUeGITaH3NWo/
I haven’t yet tried to look up the [English] High Court document, but will do so tomorrow. ( it’s only 11.07 pm here at the moment]
I feel a wee email to ‘The Athletic’ coming on, just to let them know that the Rangers of which they speak is not the historic Rangers of 1872.
Just to keep my hand in!

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on6:59 pm - May 12, 2022


LORD HARROWER – S Alexander, Clerk
Court 6 – Parliament House
Wednesday 18th May
Continued Procedural Hearing
between 9.00am and 9.30am

CA144/21 Imran Ahmad v The Chief Constable of Police Scotland
Pinsent Masons LLP SGLD Ledingham Chalmers LLP

View Comment

wokingceltPosted on10:35 pm - May 12, 2022


I know we all have opinions but I don’t understand why Albertz11 gets 3 thumbs down for reporting a matter of fact. If I have missed something I would appreciate being corrected but I don’t see why his post deserves a thumbs down.

View Comment

vernallenPosted on10:50 pm - May 12, 2022


I happen to notice that the top Rangers currently wear appears to lack the 5 stars that were on former tops. Is this just a mistake, or, are my eyes playing tricks on me. If the stars are missing could it be an admission that they aren’t the same team as the one that sported the five stars and they are actually a new team.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:11 pm - May 12, 2022


Remember when a real journalist was reporting on the Administration [ so truthful in his reportage that he was threatened by some thuggish hack(s) in the SMSM] ?
I give you Alex Thomson: and remind you of how so terrified of Liquidation 3 of our then MSPs were[because they knew damned fine that it would be the end of RFC of 1872] that they tried to use their political muscle to tell D&P to avoid Liquidation at all costs.
If they could felt they could influence Administrators [who acted as officers of the Court!], how much more would they have been able to influence the already morally weak-minded personnel in Scottish Football governance?
Have a read [or, perhaps, a re-read] of this.
https://www.channel4.com/news/by/alex-thomson/blogs/rangers-political-interference-case-msps
Thomson seems to have sussed the the whole wicked intent create the myth that RFC of 1872 survived Liquidation without paying its millions of pounds of debt , while other football clubs bust a gut to avoid Liquidation knowing that Liquidation is death.
The rank rottenness of the SFA and the SFL/ SPL in 2012 was appalling.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on4:50 am - May 13, 2022


Wokingcelt 12th May 2022 At 22:35
‘.. I don’t understand why Albertz11 gets 3 thumbs down for reporting a matter of fact. ‘
+++++++++++++++
Possibly it’s to do with the fact that he is very selective about which facts he reports, refusing as he seems to do to report the fact[not an ‘opinion’] that RFC of 1872 is in Liquidation, and the fact [also not an ‘opinion’ ] that TRFC is a club brought into creation in 2012.
There is no room for an ‘opinion’ about what are absolute matters of fact and of Insolvency law and of straightforward application of SPL/SFL articles and the articles of the SFA.

View Comment

nawlitePosted on12:56 pm - May 13, 2022


Woking Celt, Albertz11 certainly didn’t deserve thumbs down for that post, but I think many share my view that he only posts here either to highlight good news or counteract bad news for TRFC. As a result of that view, those thumb downers may be querying why he thinks this is good news for TRFC. I’m making an assumption on why he posted what he posted – he may simply be making us aware of something I wasn’t aware of and, if so, I thank him.

Albertz11, it would be useful to know if you think this is good news for TRFC. Obviously the closure of proceedings is a good thing in itself, but given the court had already found against TRFC in this case, with only quantification of the settlement to SD outstanding, closure comes at a financial cost. This had been rumoured to be significant and tying this up with Phil’s recent piece about TRFC seeking investment, he hints that this settlement could be a cause, at least in part. Do you have a view, or any insight?

Finally, to be less placatory, what do you think of the new Orange 3rd strip for use in the EL final? (and I don’t mean in respect of its design etc)

View Comment

Leave a Reply