Reflections on Goalposts


TSFM You floated the possibility to one poster that he might …

Comment on Reflections on Goalposts by Castofthousands.


You floated the possibility to one poster that he might get Stuart Bathgate to do a question and answer for the podcast. A few musings if I might permit myself such license.

For some time it has been apparent to me that TSFM is setting the agenda in football reporting to a not inconsiderable extent. There are numerous instances when the MSM have co-opted our ideas and phraseology and made it part of a wider rhetoric. Phil Mac’s recent suggestion that he might assist TSFM in getting a press pass was likely made in the light of this emerging reality.

It is to be noted that internet crowd sourcing of information (witness Wikipedia) is part of a new information rich future that will only continue to grow. You can ignore this and get washed away in the tsunami or get on your surf board and ride the wave. So I think TSFM may have some leverage, if only it can be exercised effectively.

There are a number of issues with media personalities engaging directly with TSFM. Apart from the green tinge to the agenda, the discussions on here can verge on the disrespectful since we are bounded only by good taste in the scope of our discussions. So personalities may feel a bit vulnerable in swimming in such shark infested waters since we are beholden to no-one. The flip side is that anyone choosing to take the plunge could enhance their credibility (Graham Spiers, Tom English, are you watching) by braving the chilly waters.

However before this is likely to happen I think the ice needs to be broken by engaging with personalities that would not necessary feel compromised by whatever agenda we happen to be following that month.

Ian Fraser comes to mind. We have long bemoaned the lack of financial insight into recent events and perhaps an open honest exchange with someone with some real expertise might enlighten us and keep us from the more extreme speculation that I myself am prone to partake in.

If we can find some angles that do not immediately aim to breach the dam (Campbell Ogilvie for instance would never put his neck on the block), we might get some good content and even more credibility.

Castofthousands Also Commented

Reflections on Goalposts
Campbellsmoney says:
January 29, 2014 at 5:30 pm

“castofthousands – bet you wish you hadn’t asked now”
I’m glad I asked and glad you answered. I’m disappointed I still don’t fully understand but that is a measure of my knowledge rather than your explanation. What is important is that YOU understand and I suspect others will get the gist. If this ever becomes an issue then the resulting debate will make all clear I suspect.

Reflections on Goalposts
Campbellsmoney says:
January 29, 2014 at 4:50 pm

” there can’t be a right of relief of any sort here as the guarantor and the chargeholder are different parties.”
causaludendi’s reposting of Sam’s detailed explanation was just about fathomable to me. Your retort above (along with other posts) indicate you have an accessible knowledge of such machinations in a way that I will never have. If it isn’t too much trouble could you run that past us again in a way that a relative 5 year old such as myself might unerston?

Reflections on Goalposts
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
January 29, 2014 at 4:42 pm

“seems a strange and wasteful spend of money for a company tight on cash if the above is true”
Am I merely speculating that you are intimating that these are the actions of a real estate company rather than one whose core business is sport?

Recent Comments by Castofthousands

Time for Scots Government to Take Bull by the Horns
I was watching some youtube concerning chaos theory a few days ago. Not that I understood it fully but the basic concepts were intelligible to me.

Chaotic behavour might be experienced by bridges for instance during high wind events. The predictable environment for which the structure was designed to sustain might be breached and oscillations set up that ultimately shake the thing to bits.
It seems that any system can sustain a certain level of complexity: Parameters that are exceeded without any catastrophic consequences. However if the ‘complexity’ continues to increase then it is likely that at some point the system will fall into chaos.
I think that is where we might be in the timeline of the farrago. Pressure has been ratcheted up over a number of years and now a major event has introduced a whole new level of complexity.
The SFA currently probably have the least control over events than at any time since 2012. Their tactics will be reactive: They will have no coherent forward strategy: They will not be in possession of an ethical framework that might help guide them to safety.
LNS now looks like part of the cover up. However this malfeasance was hidden in plain sight. Rather than being an instrument to mock football fans and supporters it has now turned into a gravestone that seems only to be lacking an inscription and dates. Football supporters weren’t meant to be able to decipher the legal jargon. In reality if you scratch the surface of the rhetoric of bile there is beneath a cohort of supporters who have a firm grip on the facts. Those supporters help inform their associates and thus attempts to create a false narrative have been foiled.
The situation is finely balanced between order and chaos. Who knows what events might sway this balance.
Perhaps a fans group will take some sort of legal action. Perhaps clubs will start to exact influence. Perhaps a wealthy private individual will take it upon themselves to mount some kind of legal challenge to LNS. These option may not all be feasible but there may be many others not yet considered that are.
Either way it looks like the good ship SFA is taking another voyage through the icebergs.

Time for Scots Government to Take Bull by the Horns
AllyjamboJuly 8, 2017 at 10:09

“Until now, we have all looked at the mis-registration aspect only to be a ploy to avoid detection by HMRC, and undoubtedly it was, but I think it has blinded us to the quite simple fact that improper payments, definitely illegal within the confines of football, and possibly criminal within the law of the land, were made.”

Is the general lack of inertia in addressing this matter a symptom of a wider culture of casual payments within the game? We know that historically football has been quite lax in its fiscal controls. Does this history confer a collective guilt that makes clubs reluctant to become animated in current circumstances?

Time for Scots Government to Take Bull by the Horns
 DunderheidJuly 7, 2017 at 21:35
I wonder: can anyone give me a link to the SFA’s rules vis-à-vis the powers of its Board?

Might be amongst this lot. Hopefully the multiple links will stick.
SFA articles of association
SFA registration procedures
SFA cup competition rules
SFA’s club licensing criteria (December 2013),%20Admin,%20Finance,Codes%20(2).pdf

Time for Scots Government to Take Bull by the Horns
DarkbeforedawnJuly 6, 2017 at 10:54

“Rangers were never, at any time, accused of operating an illegal tax evasion scheme and if they had been, this would be a criminal proceedings and not a civil one.”
” However, I cannot think of a single example in history where a club has had trophies stripped for owing a debt?”

The validity of the honours won during the EBT period is not questioned simply because the club had debts. The footballing integrity argument arises from the mis-registration of players.
RFC might argue that they believed the payments they made were legitimate loans and need therefore not appear as part of a players contract on their registration document. To accept such a level of ‘self-certification’ however would render the whole registration process pointless. The so called loans were so obviously part of the players contract that their absence from the registration process could be best explained by a wish to keep them hidden from simple scrutiny.
In effect the registration rules were circumvented to facilitate a commercial risk.
That doesn’t look a lot like sporting integrity to me.

Time for Scots Government to Take Bull by the Horns
HirsutePursuitJuly 6, 2017 at 00:35
“Similarly, the commission could accept the idea that the EBT arrangements were legal in all cases.”
I appreciate you are simply stating the commission’s premise but it seems such a fundamental error for LNS’ panel to base their decision significantly on a separate decision that was subject to appeal (FTT BTC ruling). It was such an obviously contentious case that it would seem naive to latch onto it for any kind of justification.

About the author