A recent autumn storm caused the destruction of the metal goal fame in our garden. The small goal with the weather-beaten net had fallen into disuse. But I liked it seeing it there on the grass. I suppose I half-expected, half-hoped, it would be used again. Once, it was a father and son thing and had been constructed carefully from a nice set of plans. At the time, it impressed both son and daughter no end. But that was then, this was now.
One of our trees, blown over by the recent high winds, caused the goal frame’s final demise. As I unscrewed the twisted metal I thought of the hours of innocent fun it had given us. It had been the scene of many goals and not a few great saves. My son, who is soon off to uni, smiled thoughtfully as I mentioned that this was the end of the ‘goalposts of childhood’. Perhaps he knew what I meant.
My own childhood goalposts had been ‘doon the back’. Drawn with chalk on the red brick of the ‘sausage wall’ at one end, and on part of the ‘wash hoose’ at the other. Many a league, Cup and international match was played out between those goals on the Dennistoun dirt. We once put on a parallel version of a historic England v Scotland match while the real match was being played at Wembley. Jim Mone sitting on one of the dykes had a transister radio to his ear. As we played our match he chalked up live score updates on the wall — our Twitter and FaceBook anno 1967. What a day.
We did use a pile of jackets up on the old Dennistoun cricket pitch, but only rarely. Mostly, we played on the red gravel surface at the Finlay Drive entrance. That pitch was fitted with real goalposts — like the ones they had at Hampden. Or so we imagined.
These sentimental memories of receding years accompanied my removal of the ruined metal goal frame. But, as you can imagine, it seemed an almost symbolic act. For fans of Scottish football the ‘goalposts’ that once defined the game of our football childhoods — have not only been moved, they’ve been been twisted and mis-shapen out of all recognition.
The past decades have seen a fundamental change in the way our game is run and governed, at home and abroad. Money is now king and sporting consideration is a luxury we sometimes have to put to one side — or at least, so we’re told.
At the risk of stating the obvious, sport, if it is to mean anything at all, has to be based on clearly defined rules and principles. These rules must be applied equally to all the participants, they are certainly not optional extras. However, to misquote and paraphrase George Orwell, ‘all teams are equal, but some teams are more equal than others’ — at least, when it comes to Scottish football.
The efforts by the SFA to re-interpret rules to fit the unfortunate circumstances surrounding the demise of Rangers FC in 2012 have left most of us scratching our heads. Much of the Scottish media has backed up the SFA’s efforts, something which has added to the general confusion and chaos. In fact, it’s become clear that the death of Rangers, as we knew them, has been such a traumatic event that it must be denied. The authorities and media seem to have been so besotted with one club that its loss is out of the question. And so, it’s been gifted a bizarre kind of immunity from liquidation and death that implies its on-going existence, long after it drew it’s final breath.
This situation has opened the door to a legion of businessmen on the make. They have been allowed to perpetuate the myth, with SFA blessing, that they ‘saved’ Rangers. And their unwavering message is, that they can only succeed if fans keep giving them their hard-earned cash. To those outside the blue bubble it looks like a huge con trick. If the only source of real money in football is the fans, then the Ibrox faithful have been royally fleeced.
How different it could have been if the former club had been allowed a dignified end. A year out of the game would probably have allowed fans to restart a newco of their own. They could have applied for entry into the professional leagues along with the other clubs waiting in line. Chances are they would have been given special dispensation, and walked straight into the bottom tier. Of course, they would have claimed to be the continuation of the spirit of the previous entity — but would anyone have argued against that? How different it could have been if the rules governing the game had been respected. The SFA may even have kept their dignity intact and the press not felt obliged to print half-truths, falsehoods and lies.
You’ve got to wonder why Dunfermline and Hearts fought so desperately to avoid liquidation. After all, the Scottish football authorities now seem intent on convincing us that liquidation has little or no effect on a football club. Even past sins, such as wrongly-registered players are as naught — if, at the time, they were thought to have been registered correctly. By this logic, we have to ask: if a ‘company’ running a ‘club’ bribes a referee, will retrospective action will be taken against the ‘club’. The players and the club, after all, will have done nothing wrong. And since the referee was not known to have been bribed, and not struck off, he was qualified to referee the match in question, at the time. Using the SFA thought process, the result would probably be allowed to stand. Personally, I’m not sure I follow SFA logic. They’ve ‘moved the goalposts’, and (you saw it coming) bent them into an unrecognisable shape.
Which brings me back to our garden. The old metal goal frame is waiting to be driven down to the local re-cycling centre. The twisted metal and worn-out net are useless. Ruined by forces beyond our control. There is no interest in a replacement at present. Perhaps, if we have grandchildren, they will show an interest in football. If they do, I’ll build a new set of goalposts. They’ll be straight and true, the way the goalposts of childhood should be. The way goalposts should always be.
scapaflow says: (1270)
January 9, 2014 at 12:11 pm
One unforeseen outcome from the furore around the EU Investigation may well be that, PL starts to apply the same rigour he brings to his duties at Celtic, to his duties at the SFA. Now that would be good for Scottish Football.
——————————————————————–
In view of CO’s intervention following Big Pete’s joke at the Celtic agm I hourly await an SFA Missive to Rangers asking the club to disassociate itself from the heinous attack on Celtic, Scottish Football and many Scottish Institutions and, in particular, the damage that could be done to the Commonwealth Games which Rangers will financially benefit from.
Should I hold my breath ❓
Seminal
Your post is correct re the cash shortfall.
As per the mail article Wallace needs to save a £1m per year (nice pressy number that) to get them to season ticket time, then collect the funds from the loyal.. They then continue to lose it at £1m per month until that runs out too. That gets them to maybe November 14.
There is no plan for the spivs after that. There doesn’t need to be!
Smugas says: (672)
January 9, 2014 at 12:24 pm
Seminal
Your post is correct re the cash shortfall.
As per the mail article Wallace needs to save a £1m per year (nice pressy number that) to get them to season ticket time, then collect the funds from the loyal.. They then continue to lose it at £1m per month until that runs out too. That gets them to maybe November 14.
There is no plan for the spivs after that. There doesn’t need to be!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Does getting to Nov 14 assume that the take up for ST’s will be at the current levels? I think the take up will be lower than expected. Too many bears I know are not happy about forking out for uncertainty and knowingly lining the pockets of Spivs. They are cash weary.
ecobhoy says: (2203)
January 9, 2014 at 12:24 pm
Probably not, but its a lovely spring day in Edinburgh, and one can live in hope….
Like the majority of Celtic supporters, I welcome any enquiry that is open, transparent and published into the public domain. I know that all the documentation and published accounts relating to these land deals is already out there and show that Celtic are guilty of only one thing and that is that they struck some very good deals.
Now that the people who think they are, are clamouring for openness and honesty maybe some of them will review their own position in this respect, or more likely they will revert back to type and shy away from the truth as that is the last thing they want.
Celtic have published audited accounts every year and they have declared the deals that are being attacked by those looking for deflection. The truth is out there but across the city they don’t either care about or even want the truth. I’m reminded of the line in the film, A few good men, “You can’t handle the truth”
seminal says: (16)
January 9, 2014 at 11:46 am
I am no believer in the long term viability of brand Rangers but I have come to conclusion that all this talk of iminent Sevco administration is bunk.
Given Stockbridge’s closeness to the management accounts and taking him at his word (I know) that there will be £1m left in the bank at April then surely the name of the game is to get them to ST renewal in May/June. Surely this would be achievable with cuts of only about £3m?
They can then put up STs by 50% which should close the monthly deficit to about £0.5m from £1m assuming other costs do not rise. It means that they would still run out of money sometime during 2014/15 – unless they can find a credit facility that can cover the £6m or so. Perhaps not impossible for a better run Rangers on a cusp of a return to the top flight?
However if Ally blows it in the Championship then it would be curtains….
===================================================================
One thing history teaches is that anything is possible. But the problem I see with your scenario is that for it to work the Spivs would need to want to run a football club. I just don’t think that’s in their DNA once they have extracted everything of value. They then move on to the next low-hanging fruit – that’s what they do.
But there might indeed be an understanding between the Spivs – through the medium of new Board members excluding Easdale – and The Requisitioners that they will inherit Ibrox for a price of course 😉
The timing will be under the Spivs control and obviously Ibrox sale/leaseback is critical to the scheme but so is a cash cheerio to the Spivs and I really wonder whether the Requisitioners can raise enough in the 120 days to see the Spivs walk.
Whatever happens here the Spivs will be concentrating on being able to walk away ‘cleanly’ long before BDO finish their investigations into the circumstances surrounding the D&P sale and the Sevco 5088 claims. Once the mystery offshore investors get their hands on their loot in their tax havens then it’s gone forever.
Amazing that the footballtaxhavens site which is so interested in Celtic hasn’t exposed the mystery owners of Rangers – now why would Rangers supporters not be interested in that and where the £22 million IPO money went ❓
If Celtic FC are found to be guilty as charged, I will eat my bowler hat and reveal the hidden resting place of RFC.
Looks like the Sons of Struth FB site has been shut down. The present board incumbents will claim another victory. be interesting to see if the protestations at matches continue or peter out.
Adding a wee bit of diversity to the conversations: Anyone who has seen my posts over the past few years know I am pretty much a proponent of youth getting a chance in football. Something of which (the top league) football in the UK generally see little of IMO…
In the past it was always quicker and easier to spend money on seasoned players who would supposedly come into your team and hit the ground running. This today, as we know is very much a myth. Players having to aclimitise to a specific game feature, these individuals are often experienced internationals with the playing diversity that comes with that. I understand sometimes players move to a new country and are without their families etc, yeah there is pressure but football is a game, it should be embraced as such, the health benefits in that job are second to none, similarly with the financial benefits akin to that.
http://celticjournal.org/4052/whats-the-point-in-signing-for-celtic/
Good article here, some good examples of what is wrong at one club but I think this is systemic to the top UK leagues. When a manager has money to spend they often want to enhance their own stock (My opinion), bring in their own players, stamp their own id on the team and often overlook talent on their own doorsteps to those who they themselves have brought in.
Regards this article, for fans of most clubs in the top divisions I am sure you could in the next 2-3 mins write down a dozen experienced players who your manager(s) has brought in costing your club significant coin when maybe they could have bled some youth players instead, ie, it did not really turn out well.
I have said before youth should get a chance when ready, the optimal age for me to give them first team experience is 17/18yrs old. As they get older and overlooked I think something is lost (in most cases), there are of course late developers though.
I would be more excited as a fan to read of a young 17 yr old Celt coming thru setting the proverbial heather on fire than buying a 26 yr old foreign player with 10 caps for his country and a dubious injury record.
I am not saying Lennie and Celtic have not been successful in their signings but for every good one I could throw in one that is not so successful.
Difficult for managers looking for that balance and blend and I am biased in my quest to see many more youngsters get their chance… I coach under 15s and watch many games a week in various age groups and I see some brilliant talent as do a lot of youth coaches. I see the good and bad of ‘pro-youth’, for those not in the know, this is where youth teams affiliated to pro/semi pro teams in Scotland take on players into a non competative set up purporting to supply better coaching and obviously facilities. Boys are often thrown by the wayside after 6 weeks when it is decided they are not good enough. Remembering that these kids are often going thru exam times etc it is a pressured situation that for me is flawed in so many ways.
Anyways enough on the subject more to follow on Youth Football and my other main gripe regards football in the winter. Thanks for reading.
On The subject of Sevconians claiming that Celtic have not paid their Tax dues
. . . Will the next Sevconian claims centre around the Celtic players – not paying their full Tax dues when they returned from the Champions League (away) matches, because they bought stuff at the “Duty Free” ?
m.c.f.c. says: (121)
January 9, 2014 at 12:57 pm
Pretty sure someone did a handy guide on youtube
Isn’t there some monies due to HMRC this month..? Anyone know how long HMRC give you to pay those dues before they take action?
Mayb Gers fans havent tried to scrutinise the affairs of their own club, either this or the last one, because they are evidently not very good at it.
The next rehashed story as a squirrel, i predict, will be against Celts manager staff or players. Something on Mr Lennon or Mulgrew perhaps. Mayb some diversification to other clubs even. Who knows? Anything but a look in the mirror.
m.c.f.c.
“but if the intention of the RIFC owners (known and unknown) was to run a tight-ship, sustainable football club, they would have controlled costs from the outset”
“I think you need to look at the evidence of the owners’ basic motivation as witnessed by their actions –”
—————————————
This is true and who knows why costs weren’t controlled from the outset. My guess is that Green et al expected to be back in the top flight sooner and that they needed a free spending rangers of old in order to keep up the illusion of it being the same club.
However, recent actions imply to me that things have changed. The three directors recently brought in do look like professionals and will attempt to cut costs while attempting to maintain the bears’ belief in their brand.
It may go against the group think here that Sevco are on the verge of admin followed by asset stripping, but this does not really make too much sense to me when considering from the perspective on the two largest shareholders: Laxeys and Easdales. I doubt that their share of the assets alone (Ibrox and MP) would cover their expense in investing in the shares of RIFC.
Bsasically the days of the penny shareholders in control has passed to those with a bit more “muscle”, namely Easdales and Laxeys. They’re the daddies now, and that is why we are seeing the late dash for austerity.
GeronimosCadillac says: (170)
January 9, 2014 at 12:28 pm
Smugas says: (672)
January 9, 2014 at 12:24 pm
Seminal
Your post is correct re the cash shortfall.
As per the mail article Wallace needs to save a £1m per year (nice pressy number that) to get them to season ticket time, then collect the funds from the loyal.. They then continue to lose it at £1m per month until that runs out too. That gets them to maybe November 14.
There is no plan for the spivs after that. There doesn’t need to be!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Does getting to Nov 14 assume that the take up for ST’s will be at the current levels? I think the take up will be lower than expected. Too many bears I know are not happy about forking out for uncertainty and knowingly lining the pockets of Spivs. They are cash weary.
================================================================
That was the short hand version.
Long hand
Few take up the offer.
Stockbridge threatens admin2 so some take it up to avoid a points deduction and no promotion.
Administrators, or Stockbridge again, threatens tesco time as the game’s clearly a bogey. More forced to take up offer.
Green and Whyte play their trump card – see J Brown for details – all remaining doubters are forced to take up offer to see big hoose remain theirs (completely ignoring the fact they would probably be buying a lease, not a stadium). Remember the line in the pavement quote – well they’re about to find out what he really meant!
Season well with liberal sprinklings of chick young huff puffery. If in adult company throw in an ogilvie inspired restructure proposal but don’t overdo it like it like last time – results can badly backfire.
Eat before sell by date. Sell by date to be completely dictated by anonymous, unloyal shareholders who, of course, will always be open to offers.
BTW Eco.
I am increasingly of the opinion that admin2 (the reality, not just the threat) will be completely dependent on your paragraph copied below.
” Whatever happens here the Spivs will be concentrating on being able to walk away ‘cleanly’ long before BDO finish their investigations into the circumstances surrounding the D&P sale and the Sevco 5088 claims. Once the mystery offshore investors get their hands on their loot in their tax havens then it’s gone forever.”
Joethebookie says: (39)
January 9, 2014 at 11:35 am
17 0 Rate This
Bauhaus, I understand you have doubts over JI’s influence?
=====================
Joe, the doubt I have is that Jack Irvine, or anyone else, can instruct the European Commission to undertake an investigation.
He can’t and he hasn’t.
This fanciful notion of protracted negotiations between Wallace & McCoist . . . . .
Surely no discussions or negotiations were needed. Surely over a quiet word lasting no more than 15 minutes he was ‘telt, in no uncertain terms’
David Limmond got 6 months for a sending threatening communications. Hopefully others will take note.
Ask The Family – Tax Calculus
Here’s a little puzzle to pass the hours before one of the OF clubs announces an Admin event.
My employee salary bill is £500,000 per month and I deduct 40% in PAYE and NI. I have no more money so I do not send the PAYE and NI deduction to HMRC at the end of the quarter, but instead use it to pay the next month’s employee salaries at a voluntarily reduced rate of 25% – still deducting 40% in PAYE and NI.
How many months can I recirculate HMRC’s money before anyone notices ?
Am I the only one that thinks that Bauhaus may have a point? (just the one, mind!).
Let the EU hold their commission, if Celtic have done nothing wrong, then they will have nothing to fear. Easy for me to say that, though. I’m not a Celtic fan.
The fact that it will probably be a colossal waste of time and resources shouldn’t matter, let justice be done!
One thing I have noticed though, and I’m generalising here since the only real contact I have with Celtic fans is through this forum, but when Celtic fans hear about accusations about wrongdoing at Ibrox, they’re first reaction is to question it and see if it stands up…… Whereas TRFC fans seem to hear something about Celtic and their first reaction is to shout about it as loud as possible, for as long as possible, regardless of whether it’s subsequently shown to be nonsense or not, hence why we’re still hearing about Juninho’s EBT, the financial doping of Co-op’s 30million quid, and the cherry on the top, the fact that Celtic apparently died in 1994. Seems to be that Celtic fans are a bit more forensic in their research about Rangers…… just a bit more, dare I say it, obsessed ……. 😉
[Edit] And I agree that it frankly beggars belief that he doesn’t seem to know who Jack Irvine is.
My point is really a simple one:
Corsicacharity thought he had something and took it to the Charity Regulator.
A few on here thought they had something and took it to the Advertising Standards Authority.
Chris Graham thought he had something and took it to the European Commission.
Yet the first two are championed, the latter vilified on here. Despite the fact the first two complaints have been unsuccessful whilst the latter is still being dealt with.
I don’t feel this helps this discussion board’s intent to be balanced and forensic.
And when Chris Graham’s complaint is dismissed he will surely be ridiculed in a way that the others I mention have not been. If I am right – why?
And in general – how logical is it to say (as many basically are) “ecobhoy has explained it all so this European Commission is irrelevant”? Please think about how blinkered a set of priorities that implies…
If the season tickets go up by 50% in the championship, that’s the same price as they were in the old SPL, and the take up is the same then that will decrease the shortfall by £500k a month or £6m a year. If I am reading the earlier poster correctly.
Just a few points with that
1, With the current board in place and the salary budget being cut is that going to happen. Will the uptake really be the same. That wouldn’t be much of a rebellion if the same fans who hated the board, wwere having their tickets go up by 50%, and at the same time seeing the squad diminished simply kept buying into it.
2, Was the income from season tickets really £12m last season. The total for Gate Receipts and Hospitality was £13.2m. I can’t believe £12m of that was from the season tickets alone. Or is the poster really including all income from that source will be increased by the same 50% and levels of uptake will remain the same.
I was actually writing this and going to make some more points but realised something else and wanted to ask a question. UIt comes from the audited accounts.
Given that Rangers accounts actually showed a profit, because of the release of negative goodwill (or somesuch) in essence the re-valuation of the properties, and that the profit generated earnings for the shareholders, was this actually paid to them.
Note 30 to the accounts (The last note and indeed the last entry in the accounts)
30. EARNINGS PER ORDINARY SHARE
Earnings per ordinary share has been calculated in accordance with IAS 33 as follows. No share options or convertible shares are held within the Group, therefore no diluted Earnings per Share calculation is required.
13 month period to 30 June 2013
Earnings for the purpose of basic earnings per share, being profit for the period (£’000) 948
Weighted average number of shares for the purpose of basic earnings per share 45,426,085
Earnings per ordinary share 2.09p
=================================
So if someone owned say 5,000,000 they would earn around £100,000 from that shareholding.
Was that actually paid out from a business whose trading loss (the real figure) was £14m.
Bauhaus (1:25pm) – you have a good enough point.
You must bear in mind, though, the undenied preponderance of Celtic fans contributing here. Of course they all have the best intentions of being as objective as possible, but the allegiance can’t, and shouldn’t be, covered up.
And, besides, Chris Graham is undeniably a bit of an arse (IMO, allegedly, etc.).
seminal says: (17)
January 9, 2014 at 1:10 pm
It may go against the group think here that Sevco are on the verge of admin followed by asset stripping, but this does not really make too much sense to me when considering from the perspective on the two largest shareholders: Laxeys and Easdales. I doubt that their share of the assets alone (Ibrox and MP) would cover their expense in investing in the shares of RIFC.
============================================================================
Seminal – it appears to me that you are looking for reasons to hope that things will be different in future – I assume because you have emotional attachments to Rangers. The truth is that your faith will be exploited by the spivs – that is exactly what they do – they deceive and steal. Look at what they have done already and extrapolate – assume the same motives, the same behaviour and the same probably outcomes. For example, the player wage bill is outrageous – but is dwarfed by the non-player and director wage bill plus bonuses plus pay-offs etc. Ultimately, as the spivs pick the bones there will come a time when there is nothing left and someone will be buying a pig ion a poke. In an earlier post I suggested that maybe more recent investors (Laxey, Easdale, Prior etc) are in that position and there is no way to a sustainable football club (a salable club) and no easy way to quickly extract cash from the property. The new directors are simply employees paid to do a job for the owners. Football is of no importance to the spivs. If you disagree – give me an example of a shrewd football-oriented move and I’ll give you ten cash-extracting moves. Harsh but true.
Shooperb says:
January 9, 2014 at 1:25 pm
[Edit] And I agree that it frankly beggars belief that he doesn’t seem to know who Jack Irvine is.
——
I don’t know who Jack Irvine is, actually. I gather from here that he’s some manner of TRFC spokesperson, but that’s about it. Outside of this forum, I don’t recall ever hearing his name mentioned.
It’s a fair point Bauhaus makes about regulators … would add to the charity regualtor and the ASA the fact that we all thought (even the Rangers guys) the Big Tax Case was open & shut to the detriment of OldGers, but it wasn’t – who knows how these committees come to their decisions…
Bauhaus says: (26)
January 9, 2014 at 1:25 pm
Corsicacharity’s complaint was not unsuccessful, though OSCR’s judgement was mild. see
http://www.oscr.org.uk/media/435827/2013-08-06_rangers_charity_foundation_s33_report.pdf
“OSCR found that the Charity’s decision-making
process which allowed important decisions to be
made by one trustee acting alone was in breach
of trustees’ duties and constituted misconduct on
the part of the charity trustees as a whole.”
You are making the same mistake that Ranger;’s fans often make with respect to inquiry results, be it the Big Tax case, or LNS, equate little or no punishment with a not guilty finding. When in fact, LNS did find guilty on various counts of rule breaking, and the Big Tax Case ruled guilty on some charges, with the rest still under appeal.
Do try harder.
Essential reading from The Rangers Standard (Look at the number of hits)
Exclusive: European Commission seek explanation on Celtic land deals
The Rangers Standard > Hits: 33549
Across the Great Divide
Alex Mooney > Hits: 10632
Against a Rangers Boycott
John DC Gow > Hits: 2506
Over To You, Mr Wallace
Chris Graham > Hits: 5331
Rangers: Towards A Constitution
Alasdair McKillop > Hits: 1813
David Somers – Making a Statement
Chris Graham > Hits: 4092
Nominee Director – Shareholder Statement
The Rangers Standard > Hits: 2447
Exclusive Interview – Alex Wilson
Chris Graham > Hits: 5560
Graham Spiers: A Case To Answer
Colin Armstrong > Hits: 9787
The Rangers Football Club ‘Selfie’
Stewart Franklin > Hits: 3698
Half-full or half-empty: Rangers and the Scottish Cup
Alasdair McKillop > Hits: 3758
…and they call us obsessed 😯
Bauhaus says: (26)
January 8, 2014 at 11:50 pm
From where I am the answer is “a load of The Rangers fans bombarded the EU Commission who have therefore initiated a low level informal probe according to their own rules”
There is an alternative theory that Jack Irvine has persuaded the Daleks, the Death Eaters and Dracula Prince of Darkness to concentrate their fire on Parkhead to squirrel attention away from the demise of The Rangers.
Take yer pick, mate
——————————————————–
To paraphrase Carl Sagan:
Intelligent people doubt their knowledge, while the ignorant are always so certain of theirs
Bit strong. 😯
Bauhaus says: (26)
January 9, 2014 at 1:25 pm
My point is really a simple one:
Corsicacharity thought he had something and took it to the Charity Regulator.
A few on here thought they had something and took it to the Advertising Standards Authority.
Chris Graham thought he had something and took it to the European Commission.
Yet the first two are championed, the latter vilified ….
= = = = = =
Corsicacharity indeed had something and researched, published on a blog and eventually took it to the Charity Regulator. Go read their decision.
A few on here had something and complained to the Advertising Standards Authority. The club removed the ad. The ASA eventually found on balance in favour of the advertiser, but this is controversial based on the evidence a number of posters have quoted, including the ASA’s own rules.
Chris Graham knows he hasn’t something and vexatiously takes it to the European Commission.
The latter vilified, and rightly so based on the evidence openly available. He should have waited to see how it all panned out, rather than rushing to the EC.
Bauhaus,
The next squirrel will be along soon.
Bauhaus says: (26)
January 9, 2014 at 12:12 am
Maybe we Celtic fans should stick our fingers in our ears, our heads in the sand and loudly sing “nothing to see here, move along”. Like The Rangers fans did over so many years.
——————————————————
No-one on this site is saying “nothing to see here, move along”. Several posters with much more knowledge on relevant matters than you or I have expressed a fairly derisory opinion having done the cursory 15 minutes diligence it would have taken any so-called journalist to seriously undermine the claims.
Likewise, no-one is saying there should be no investigation and most, if not all, have expressed the view that a transparent and fair investigation would on the contrary be a good thing.
What is missing on the other hand, are dog whistle tactics, demanding that those making the accusations should be subject to serious repercussions – take your pick from boycotted, carpeted by their employer abused in the street, added to a hit list etc etc.
So you’re willingness to judge the behaviour of your fellow fans in expressing perfectly logical and well reasoned opinions as commensurate with a group of fans who’s club’s gravestone is inscribed with “Let’s wait and see how it turns out” is extremely flawed in my opinion
Carl31 says
January 9, 2014 at 1:06 pm
Maybe Gers fans haven’t tried to scrutinise the affairs of their own club, either this or the last one, because they are evidently not very good at it. The next rehashed story as a squirrel, I predict, will be against Celts manager staff or players. Something on Mr Lennon or Mulgrew perhaps. Maybe some diversification to other clubs even. Who knows? Anything but a look in the mirror.
——————————————————————————————————————————-
Thanks to Charlotte Fakes, we know that Media House will scratch around for any negative story about Celtic, no matter how tenuous the link. Remember how last year the rags told the nation about that nasty Mr Desmond having shares in a nursing home that was under scrutiny by the health authorities and therefore every Celtic supporter in the land should hang their heads in shame because of this.
I wonder what Peter Lawwell must think when he meets up with his counterparts from Ibrox, knowing that they pay Jack Irvine to dig up the dirt on Celtic at every opportunity? Does he merely smile at them in sheer and utter contempt? – or does he just have a chuckle a la the Gary Hooper £24m bid from the unknown galaxy?
JLeeHooker says: (84)
January 9, 2014 at 1:47 pm
1 0 i
Rate This
Essential reading from The Rangers Standard (Look at the number of hits)
Exclusive: European Commission seek explanation on Celtic land deals
The Rangers Standard > Hits: 33549
————————————
I love the way the title implies the EC got out of bed one day and simply decided to “seek explanation” on Celtic land deals completely under their own steam. Desperados.
Bauhaus
The difference between the reaction to the Charity and ASA enquiries is that prior research suggested they were a “goer” in both cases.
The charity case was solid and only a desire to minimise the consequences saw it treated as less than the duplicity it was.
The ASA case as far as I can see still leaves questions about the authority sought but there were solid arguments like UEFA FFP Article 12 for supporting the case.
In short the response was not a quick rebuttal because homework had been properly done first.
Ecobhoy’s homework suggests that unlike the other 2 cases there is nothing to make BBC headlines of.
Its about the quality of the research and the understanding of the issues that influences the reaction.
Nothing more nothing less and although the information will be interpreted via green or blue lenses, the reaction fundamentally depends on the quality of the research backing the case.
Billy Boyce says: (168)
January 9, 2014 at 2:11 pm
Thanks to Charlotte Fakes, we know that Media House will scratch around for any negative story about Celtic, no matter how tenuous the link
———————————————————
I well recall the memo from Jack to Craig Whyte, which among other services, undertook to stir the sh__ by sourcing and placing “negative stories about our rivals”, as well as the intriguing – and in my opinion much neglected – offer to similarly place stories “we may not want as official club policy”. Perhaps policies that would be frowned upon by reasonable people but would chime with a specific hardcore dempgraphic? Well we have now reached a climate where the manager and people associated with TRFC can go around chanting WATP in public and it passes without comment in the media, so he must be doing something right (or wrong for the rest of us)
Angus1983 says: (1319)
January 9, 2014 at 1:41 pm
4 2 Rate This
Shooperb says:
January 9, 2014 at 1:25 pm
[Edit] And I agree that it frankly beggars belief that he doesn’t seem to know who Jack Irvine is.
——
I don’t know who Jack Irvine is, actually. I gather from here that he’s some manner of TRFC spokesperson, but that’s about it. Outside of this forum, I don’t recall ever hearing his name mentioned.
======================
Angus, I do of course know who he is MEANT to be from here and the main Celtic forum online and the main Rangers one.
Outside of these three internet sites? Never heard of him.
Someone above suggested I should seek his influence by comparing articles in Scottish papers. Unfortunately Scottish papers aren’t sold in the town where I live.
Bauhaus says: (29)
January 9, 2014 at 2:21 pm
Unfortunately Scottish papers aren’t sold in the town where I live.
===========================================================================
Here you go – research yourself silly
British Newspaper Archive – 6.5 Million Newspaper Pages Online
http://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/
Thousands Of Pages Added Every Day
The British Newspaper Archive has 292 followers on Google+
Google News Newspaper Archive
http://www.news.google.com/newspapers
A description for this result is not available because of this site’s robots.txt – learn more.e+
Bauhaus says: (26)
January 9, 2014 at 1:25 pm
2
17
Rate This
My point is really a simple one:
Corsicacharity thought he had something and took it to the Charity Regulator.
A few on here thought they had something and took it to the Advertising Standards Authority.
Chris Graham thought he had something and took it to the European Commission.
Yet the first two are championed, the latter vilified on here. Despite the fact the first two complaints have been unsuccessful whilst the latter is still being dealt with.
I don’t feel this helps this discussion board’s intent to be balanced and forensic.
And when Chris Graham’s complaint is dismissed he will surely be ridiculed in a way that the others I mention have not been. If I am right – why?
And in general – how logical is it to say (as many basically are) “ecobhoy has explained it all so this European Commission is irrelevant”? Please think about how blinkered a set of priorities that implies…
=================================================================
it’s funny your writing and debating style strongly remind me of a poster on Scotslawthoughts who also lived in England. However they were a Rangers supporter so it obviously isn’t you being a bhoy and all.
You are obviously an intelligent person and have a certain way of presentation which on the surface might appear to be logical and reasonable but IMO leads to a taint of deflection although I am happy to put that down to your self-confessed ignorance of Scottish Football rather than any ulterior motive.
I am interested in your ‘take’ on the charity and ASA issues. The charity was heavily criticised for the failure of the Trustees but IMO given a pussycat approach penaltywise by the regulator. The ASA have been made to look foolish IMO and unable to actually defend their decision which clearly cuts across their previous position.
But surely the correct judgement to be made is not necessarily to dismiss the accusations because of the finding of a regulatory body. If that were the case then the Bryson Definition – using your logic – must be correct. I adopt a different approach and actually look at all sides to an argument and come to a decision which I feel able to defend on an objective and factual basis.
As to the Lennoxtown post I did I quite simply took some of the salient points of a sectarian-fuelled approach IMO by the writer/s and, using public records, adanced what I believe to be the truth of the matter and the pathetic attempt at analysis by the blog concerned.
At no stage have I suggested that an official investigation into the accusations shouldn’t be carried out although once the complaining parties have been identified I think there is a stong possibility that legal action could follow in view of certain comments made. But that is another issue for another time.
I think Celtic will be strenghtened by any independent investigation and consequently Rangers further damaged if that is actually possible.
But as a Celtic supporter is there anything you can see in my demolition of the footballtaxblog on the Lennoxtown land purchase that you think I have got wrong? If you do I would love to hear what you have to say. If not I’m not really interested as the major Scottish football story I’m afraid is still centred on Ibrox and whether the club will survive and in what form and what effect any collapse will have on Scottish Football. As to what any investigation brings that will be of interest if it ever takes place and if it does I can see no reason, from a Celtic viewpoint to fear the rrsult, and that extends beyond Lennoxtown I should add.
Indeed its amazing how far interest extends when a Northern Ireland MP raises the issue in Parliament – I would have thought there were enough problems nearer to home needing dealt with rather than scurrilous claims against a proud Scottish Football Club with an unbroken history and a record of actually paying taxes and producing accounts on time. I know as a Celtic Man you will be proud of that record too.
Bauhaus says: (29)
January 9, 2014 at 2:10 pm
Adopting a Humpty Dumpty approach to the English language, is another trait of the desperate Rangers fan. Corsica was understandably livid about OSCR’s leniency, nonetheless, as OSCR’s judgement shows, (see above link), Corsica’s complaint was upheld, and hence, successful.
By the way – I joined this site on the public recommendation of Channel 4’s Alex Thomson who said it was well run & open to different views.
I am surprised how much personal abuse and playing the man there has recently been.
Bauhaus says: (29)
January 9, 2014 at 2:21 pm
Re: Jack irvine:
I do of course know who he is MEANT to be from here and the main Celtic forum online and the main Rangers one. Outside of these three internet sites? Never heard of him.
===============================================================
Interesting how on that basis you describe a very skilled PR operator with a long history in Scottish journalism as a ‘nomark’.
I’m afraid it makes me uneasy about your other opinions on anything given the tiny evidence base that you are prepared to operate on before issuing caustic comments about any individual. It doesn’t seem to sit well with your call for objectivity and examination of all the facts to get at the truth.
Do you also post on the main Celtic and Rangers forums as well and what do you think both are as I think most fans would disagree on which the main forums actually were – football sites are very varied and tend to attract quite different fan groupings often with very conflicting views.
Anyone else think this European Commission involvement is actually a good thing or Celtic? over the last couple of years I’ve seen this stuff on Rangers Forums and twitter accounts. You see comments about Celtic buying land for £1 chucked about Randomly + other stuff that I’m sure people make up and present as fact. This would provide a big slap down to the delusions they’ve been harbouring for the past few years.
Point is, none of it is ever challenged and held up for examination. Best outcome is that the European Commission have a look, dismiss any notion of state aid and ridicule the complainants and their understanding of basic finances.
It will be interesting to see what coverage this gets in the MSM (if any)
Ecobhoy says: (2206)
January 9, 2014 at 2:31 pm
7 0 Rate This
——————-
Ecobhoy: you ask me for a response to your post.
I can’t do that as your post clearly implies that I am a Rangers fan. That would be no big deal except that I have already stated that I am a Celtic fan.
I am sure you will understand why I don’t wish to engage with a post that is implying, several times, that I am a liar.
Discourse is not possible under those conditions, is it?
Bauhaus says: (30)
January 9, 2014 at 2:43 pm
Quite a few posters, myself included, have agreed with you to a certain extent when it comes to Mr Irvine. What you don’t seem to understand is that Scottish football writers are not in any way, shape or form journalists. They are gossip columnists, who depend on clubs and agents for their “stories”, which are often simply regurgitated PR pieces. Hence, a Max Clifford type like Jack Irvine, can exert influence out of all proportion to his actual standing. Mr Irvine, found a niche, and has been very successful at exploiting it.
Bauhaus says: (30)
January 9, 2014 at 2:43 pm
By the way – I joined this site on the public recommendation of Channel 4′s Alex Thomson who said it was well run & open to different views. I am surprised how much personal abuse and playing the man there has recently been.
======================================================
Well all sites where football is debated can be pretty rough and tumble at times and I don’t know a site that exists where a new poster gets an easy ride.
AT is someone I generally respect as a journalist and not simply because of his Rangers material. However there are no icons that are untouchable if IMO they have got it wrong and I think he did recently over linking Millwall to Celtic which was difficult to fathom.
But what really annoyed me is that his blog took attention away from the real issues involved re abuse of another journalist and threats made to her because she had the temerity to rightly attack the sexist attitudes of some Celtic supporters.
Journalists are only as good as their next story and posters only as far as their next post IMO. None of us are Gods and we all get things wrong from time to time and can be called to account on it. As posters we also leave ourself open to calls to explain our position or reasoning and that isn’t playing the man.
That’s trying to understand why a person might hold a certain opinion and be opposed to another. Obviously the more a person posts the more you start to understand what drives them and you either accept that and agree to disagree or, if in disagreement, you fight like cat and dog (metaphorically) at every opportunity over the point at issue.
But I have learnt from these dust-ups and sometimes vary my position or someone else varies there and even better we reach a new position that all can agree on. But that doesn’t tend to come easily because most posters on here have passionate and deeply-held views irrespective of the club they support. Others have different motives but that usually surfaces quite quickly.
I agree that in amongst the detailed deconstruction of the RM allegation and the findings against RCT and the advice as to where one might readily find out all about Jack Irvine, there has been knee-jerk name calling directed at you. It doesn’t help. Even if you were to be a squirreling troll, it keeps the blog on its mettle.
I’d be interested in any response you might have to Ecobhoy’s post at (EDIT) 2:31pm though.
Is there anything more pathetic than someone who posts on forums , who pretends to support one team whilst actually being a supporter of a rival.
Why do it ?
Is it down to the poster knowing their points are so flimsy that it’s a desperate attempt to garner support
Is it just a reflection on the posters personality , where being honest and open is not part of their make up
Whatever the reason , it is almost always transparent and completely ineffective . What kind of Sociopathic personality can’t see this. Maybe someone who continually misjudges situations and always backs losers
Bauhaus,
I’ll try and help if I can with a football metaphor as I see where this is going.
In order to ensure that we, the defenders, don’t play the man ie. you, the attacker, we at least need a ball to kick around instead. One that bounces back and forth on a wave of meaningful debate. Not one that bursts completely on the first impact.
TSFM please read this in the helpful manner that it is intended – it’s still coming across as a bit cheeky but I see no other way.
Barcabhoy says: (322)
January 9, 2014 at 3:10 pm
======================
Ah, you think it’s Mullah Graham Barca.
Bauhaus says: (31)
January 9, 2014 at 1:15 pm
Is it not the case that if a complaint is made they are duty bound to investigate?
Bauhaus says: (30)
January 9, 2014 at 2:43 pm
0 0 Rate This
By the way – I joined this site on the public recommendation of Channel 4′s Alex Thomson who said it was well run & open to different views.
I am surprised how much personal abuse and playing the man there has recently been.
===============================
Nobody is playing the man. You have joined the blog and entered into a debate on a certain subject. You then claim to have no knowledge of a person who many on here and elsewhere see to be at the core of the media problems up here (even though I’m pretty sure that AT has brought him up before). You should at least have the courtesy to accept that most of the posters on here speak from a position of knowledge and not one of bile. Google Jack Irvine and you’ll find out all you need to know. So we’re not playing you, we’re just sizing you up.
Bauhaus says: (31)
January 9, 2014 at 2:57 pm
Ecobhoy: you ask me for a response to your post.
I can’t do that as your post clearly implies that I am a Rangers fan. That would be no big deal except that I have already stated that I am a Celtic fan.
I am sure you will understand why I don’t wish to engage with a post that is implying, several times, that I am a liar. Discourse is not possible under those conditions, is it?
================================================================
I have never stated that you are a Rangers fan and accept at face value your statement that you are a Celtic fan. I don’t actually care what team you support – all that interests me is your posts. If a post doesn’t interest me I ignore it and I do that with everyone no matter what club they support.
I never imply that anyone is a liar but quite simply would point out why what they say is incorrect if I knew that to be the case.
I didn’t actually ask you a response per se – what I stated was: ‘But as a Celtic supporter is there anything you can see in my demolition of the footballtaxblog on the Lennoxtown land purchase that you think I have got wrong? If you do I would love to hear what you have to say.’
And that has to read in the context you referred to my original post and also the Corsicacharity and ASA issues. Indeed, I clearly stated you were a Celtic supporter.
I think it’s fair to add that as your knowledge of what is happening in Scottish Football seems to be based solely on this blog and the Celtic main blog as well as the Rangers main blog it might be difficult to actually fully respond to my Lennoxtown post but the offer is there if you think there is anything wrong with it or even if you have any specific queries I will try to help answer them.
m.c.f.c
“Seminal – it appears to me that you are looking for reasons to hope that things will be different in future – I assume because you have emotional attachments to Rangers”
———————————————————
I don’t see how you can draw that conclusion at all. But it is typical on here to be called a troll or closet sevconian if you dissagree with the current group think.
Basically my argument is that most of the original penny share spivs have now exited the stage. Yes they had no interest in the football business and running a sustainable business in the long run which is why they put idiots like Green, Mather, Ahmed in charge.
Somehow, and don’t ask me how, they found bigger fools to sell their shares to. Namely Laxeys and Easdales who bought from 70p all the way down to 40p. Now these guys are sitting on losses on those shares. The only viable way they have to make a return is to separate the property company (RIFC) from the football club (Sevco) and get the club operating on an even keel so it can pay its rent.
To do that they need to make it to the next ST sale, which will require about £3m in cuts. Apparently this is being attempted. Ask Phil McG, he agrees with this. He has no “emotional attachment to Ragers”.
Thereafter they will require either a credit facility or rights issue of between £6m to £10m so they can survive the championship. To achieve this they require a viable CEO and chairman which looks like it has been achieved. Wallace and Somers may be many things but they are not spivs in the ilk of CG and IA etc.
Thereafter they hope that increased money from the top flight (and dare I say Europe) will keep them running.
Ultimately they are doomed but it will take longer than the 6 months or less predicted by many on here.
The era of “spivs” is largely over.
Easdales are not spivs. Laxeys are not spivs. Wallace and Grommit are not spivs. They are certainly not Rangers men and are certainly looking for return. But their MO is completely different.
Many on here are still “fighting the last war” against Green, Whyte etc. Those days are gone.
seminal says: (18)
January 9, 2014 at 3:21 pm
For what little it is worth, I find myself largely agreeing with you. However, I’m still not convinced that I see the current managemnt’s end game. Sale/leaseback has its attractions, but its not going to make them much of a return, nor do I see a short to medium return on the properties.
Neither do I see why anyone in their right mind would buy a football club with no assets, beyond a rump playing staff.
Much head scratching here….
The only realistic source of funds is to get planning consent for MP and sell it
This depends entirely on the attitude of Labour Councillors and their seniors in the Party
The Lennoxtown story gets whatboutery into the political arena
Planning consent may become an issue between Labour and the SNP
History has shown that when the establishment is under pressure on this type of issue
Facts are irrelevant
Reality is what the blue brigade believe it to be
Non favours to Parkhead have to be balanced by real favours to Ibrox
Neverthless
It is unlikely that the Spivs would apply for planning permission before TRFC go into Administration. They would be tipped off that they had no chance.They might apply for consent during Administration by claiming this is the only way to save TRFC
The politicians would be left with a PR problem
How to make planning consent conditional on real Rangers men acquiring TRFC without being seen as interfering in the Admin process
GoosyGoosy says: (501)
January 9, 2014 at 3:34 pm
And the very real floating charge Sport Scotland have over MP?
Edit
Wouldn’t flogging off MP to the SFA as ready made academy be more palatable all round?
Goosy,
Doesn’t that view seek to make administration2 for brandRangers someone else’s fault and someone else’s problem?
Surely not.
Tic 6709 on January 9, 2014 at 3:15 pm
1 0 Rate This
Barcabhoy says: (322)
January 9, 2014 at 3:10 pm
======================
Ah, you think it’s Mullah Graham Barca.
—————–
I wasn’t being specific, more of a general point.
As far as Chris Graham is concerned I find his contributions juvenile and immature. He has been judged to be an irrelevant no mark by the Rangers board. On this , I think they have got it bang on .
Among the many fables surrounding events at Ibrox in recent years, the one I’ve always liked the most is the romantic notion of making friends on the journey back to the ‘rightful’ place at the very pinnacle of Scottish football.
I like it because it seems so simple and has a certain charm but hides an accepted delusion, accepted that is among much of the Rangers support.
It’s not difficult to understand why Rangers fans would buy into it, it expresses an optimism which was lacking in the dark days of administration and liquidation. It also makes a bold assertion – the correct situation in Scottish Football is that Rangers should be on top.
The trouble is that supporters of football teams throughout Scotland have hopes and aspirations of their own, however humble they may be.
In their eyes this ever so friendly righteous dominance might look like contempt.
Having made many friends over the years I must confess to never having tried contempt as an ice breaker so I can’t recommend it for its efficacy.
I can’t imagine anyone being happily dominated either.
Naturally events haven’t quite worked out for Rangers fans in the way that they would wish. I say naturally based on events of the last few years.
Rangers and calamity seem to have become synonymous.
The fable of making friends on the way to the top has in recent days been replaced with the desperate hope that as financial reality bites into the desired narrative; a ‘welcoming’ hand can still be extended.
The hope seems to be that Cetlic might furnish them with the greatest piece whataboutary since James Watt radically improved the efficiency of the steam engine.
Making friends on the righteous path to a dominant position at the top was a negation of any idea of friendship.
The outstretched hand on the way down is just grasping, hoping that they are not alone. Wishing against any available evidence that troubles can be ameliorated buy stretching out a hand and pointing a finger.
I hope readers don’t mind me posting my musings on TSFM, in happier times I would post on Paul McConvilles blog, he was generous in allowing it.
I sometimes ramble a bit.
Stick with it Bauhaus. We need all viewpoints and lots of ‘new’ posters are regarded suspiciously (not by everyone) when they start posting.
seminal says: (18)
January 9, 2014 at 3:21 pm
I don’t see how you can draw that conclusion at all. But it is typical on here to be called a troll or closet sevconian if you dissagree with the current group think.
=================================================================================
Seminal – if you are so thin skinned, maybe you should find another topic to debate. My comment “I assume because you have emotional attachments to Rangers” was based on your selective (hopeful) choice of facts. I’ve suggested you look more widely – but you have chosen not to. So I’ll show you how it’s done – I read your comments and I ask questions about them to gain a better understanding of your position – here we go:
So RFCL is split off from RIFC. How much money does RFCL have and where is it from.
“credit facility or rights issue of between £6m to £10m” – an IPO for running costs – you misunderstand what an IPO is. The fans managed less than £5m last time – no institutional investor invests in funding running costs. What physical assets are investors investing in.
What business skills and experience do the Easdales have – ah yes – running buses and taxis.
What record do the Easdales have taking a husk of a football club and getting it into Europe ?
What business skills and experience do Laxey Partners have – ah yes – activist shareholders in the property sector.
What record do Laxey Partners have taking a husk of a football club and getting it into Europe ?
Come to think of it – which was the last Scottish football club with minimal resources and sky high costs that went from the third tier to champions league ?
Your scenario is based on hopes and dreams. btw I don’t recall referring to you as either a “troll” or a “closet sevconian”. I think you’ll find that’s all inside your head. And I think you’ll find that my opinion is not universally shared by poster on here e.g Phil McG so “groupthink” is nonsense.
@MCFC 40% off your £500k for taxes leaves ya £200k (reduced sal run, 25% sal agreed), 25% of £500k is £125k required for m2 run, minus 40% tax is £50k sal bill, subtracted from your £200k, leaves £150k – £50k sal for m3, £100k left – £50k for m4, -£50k m5, so all in all your £500k will run for 5 months inclusive (assuming i have read your 25% sal requirement correctly…) OR until such a time that Strathclyde’s finest shuts the big hoos down..!!
I did not factor in any costs syphoned off to ghost companies by the spivs in these calculations and I am sure the current board would chip in to pay the leccie bill over that period.
Did you get that right? Surely the 50k is the retained portion of the salaries, rather than the salary bill?
Month 1 – 500k salary -retain 200k (40%) This is now the ‘pot’
Month 2 @ 25% – 125k salary – retain 50k (40%) add this to the 75k you did not have to pay out of the 200k. Pot now £125k
Month 3 @ 25% – 125k salary – retain 50k (40%) Pot now 50k
Month 4 – unable to pay salaries from existing pot
scapaflow says: (1278)
January 9, 2014 at 3:38 pm
GoosyGoosy says: (501)
January 9, 2014 at 3:34 pm
And the very real floating charge Sport Scotland have over MP?
========================================================
Wouldn’t flogging off MP to the SFA as ready made academy be more palatable all round?
============================================================
The floating charge is only for £500k which would simply be repaid on the sale of MP. If my memory is correct then the Sports Scotland money was based on allowing community and SFA use.
I happily believe that CO would love to buy MP to help-out but I don’t think anyone at Hampden thinks that would fly – that might be the event that actually did trigger social unrest and I believe supporters would walk away from Scottish clubs in droves if it happened.
I think Mather was the obvious guy to do a joint-venture buy-out of MP with TRFCL and I would be surprised if that wasn’t under discussion. His pretty unexpected walkout coukld possibkly be connected maybe because the price got too high or perhaps Rangers just wanted shot of it to get a capital injection and chop running costs.
Not sure how the Bears would have taken MP being sold but if it meant the club survived – even just a bit longer – then I think they would have accepted it albeit reluctantly. Ibrox remains the Holy place that must be preserved at all cost and as many here have said many times – it is this attachment that is the main block to Bears thinking rationally and realising they need a stadium which is more economical to run.
But the problem there from the company perspective is that selling Ibrox for anything other than a football ground isn’t going to raise a tenth of the moeny required to build a new stadium.
State Aid would always be a possibility if Scotland won hosting rights to a major tournament – which I believe is allowed under Euro Rules – but again can you imagoine the uproar and one thing we have learnt is that Scottish politicians are as spineless as the SMSM.
JimBhoy says: (35)
January 9, 2014 at 4:01 pm
=============================================================================
JimBhoy – oh – now I’ll have to work it out 🙂
I was assuming a whole quarter’s PAYE & NI at 200K per month – as you say. So I’ve got £600K. My new net salary cost is £125k minus 40% = £75k/mth so I’ve got 600/75 = 8 months. So we agree – except I “borrowed” more from HMRC than you did !!!
Funny how we both “did not factor in any costs syphoned off to ghost companies by the spivs in these calculations” which is really what it’s all about.
Joethebookie says: (40)
January 9, 2014 at 3:16 pm
5 0 Rate This
Bauhaus says: (31)
January 9, 2014 at 1:15 pm
Is it not the case that if a complaint is made they are duty bound to investigate?
=============================
I don’t know, Joe.
It’s a pertinent question and one we should not assume we know the answer to until someone who knows their stuff can clarify.
Some public bodies are required to investigate every complaint – the Independent Police Complaints Commission, for instance – but I don’t think all are even in the UK and obviously this will be under EU rules.
But it certainly makes a big difference as to how much weight this Commission is currently giving to the issue
EDIT – the guy to ask is probably Chris Graham so, surprisingly perhaps, I’m unable to help!!
ecobhoy says: (2209)
January 9, 2014 at 4:18 pm
0 0 Rate This
Leeds United bought Elland Road back from the council prior to it being used for Euro 96. Things may have changed in 17 years but I think a condition of Elland Road being used was that it was owned by the club. Whether that was down to Uefa, the FA or state aid rules I can’t say
Bauhaus says:
January 9, 2014 at 2:43 pm
I am surprised how much personal abuse and playing the man there has recently been.
——————————————————————————————————————-
I have read your posts and all related replies since you joined this blog. In my opinion you have received no personal abuse whatsoever. Perhaps you can give me an example? In fact the opposite is the case. Other contributors have gone to great lengths to assist you in establishing the facts of the EU complaint, so that you can now make an informed judgment on the matter. Fellow posters have been most helpful in pointing you in the direction of research that will allow you to appreciate the influence that Jack Irvine has in the Scottish football media.
Your writing style may suggest to some that you are not all you make out to be. I know that one poster has expressed the view that you are acting like a troll. That is not personal abuse but merely an observation because you will not accept or do not understand the detailed arguments of others on here.
If I thought for one second that you had decided to join this forum so that, as a big Celtic supporter, you could gloat over the demise of The Rangers then I would be the first one to castigate you for it. There are Celtic message boards where your views would be welcomed, but TSFM is for constructive debate. Just imagine if you were a bear – it would be torture having to come on here and learn of the skulduggery that is being inflicted on your club on a daily basis, with no happy outcome at the end of it. You might even want to lash out at others e.g. EU complaint in your total frustration and inability to improve the situation. Consider yourself fortunate therefore that you are not of the blue persuasion. Of course if you were pretending to be a Celtic fan then you would only be exhibiting childish behaviour in trying to promote your arguments, and surely you are not that stupid?
Please be clear that I’ve never, here or anywhere else, said or suggested or insinuated that being a Rangers supporter equates to dishonesty. Neither have I questioned your statement that you support Celtic.
It’s up to you whether you decide to respond to ecobhoy’s of 2:31pm post or not.
JLeeHooker says: (85)
January 9, 2014 at 1:47 pm
2
0
Rate This
Shooperb says: (345)
January 9, 2014 at 1:25 pm
just a bit more, dare I say it, obsessed
Essential reading from The Rangers Standard (Look at the number of hits)
Exclusive: European Commission seek explanation on Celtic land deals
The Rangers Standard > Hits: 33549
Across the Great Divide
Alex Mooney > Hits: 10632
Against a Rangers Boycott
John DC Gow > Hits: 2506
Over To You, Mr Wallace
Chris Graham > Hits: 5331
======================================================
Murray Park? G51? Really? 08 February 2013 Written by Graham McLaren 8702
this one was not on your list ,it includes this little snippet
The worm has definitely turned and in areas such as G51 the values have tumbled faster than Larsson diving for a free kick. There is absolutely no end in sight for prime property in Glasgow such as Buchanan Street or Byres Road but dear old Govan?
“If anything of the commercial property variety is selling in Glasgow, be it land, retail or office, in prime locations it commands discounts off the original purchase price of about 25%. That is for the best position in town, make Govan an offer and they’d bite your hand off.”
So if Green makes “Govan” an offer GCC would bite his hand off !!!
would that be state aid ?
http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/220-murray-park-g51-really
Barcabhoy says: (323)
January 9, 2014 at 3:10 pm
Is there anything more pathetic than someone who posts on forums , who pretends to support one team whilst actually being a supporter of a rival.
Why do it ?
—————————
This may help to answer your question:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Concern_troll
“A concern troll visits sites of an opposing ideology and offers advice on how they could “improve” things, either in their tactical use of rhetoric, site rules, or with more philosophical consistency.
“[ … ] One common tactic of concern trolls is the “a plague on both your houses” approach, where the concern troll tries to convince people that both sides of the ideological divide are just as bad as each other, and so no one can think themselves “correct” but must engage in endless hedging and caveats. This preys on a willingness to debate critics and allow dissent; everyone wastes time discussing the matter and bending over backwards, so as not to appear intolerant of disagreement, all to the great amusement of the troll.”
seminal says: (18)
January 9, 2014 at 3:21 pm
Basically my argument is that most of the original penny share spivs have now exited the stage. Yes they had no interest in the football business and running a sustainable business in the long run which is why they put idiots like Green, Mather, Ahmed in charge.
==================================================================
I don’t know that I agree that the 1p a share mystery overseas buyers have gone. I am sure they are still there and the Spivs won’t go until the Ibrox bones are picked clean. The mystery owners were still there at the RIFC agm because Easdale had quite a lot of their proxy shares and there hasn’t been that large a volume of shares sold since then identifying a mass exodus.
Green and Ahmad had jobs to do for the mystery owners and have gone because there was a change in direction/gearor they achieved what was expected of them. Mather in some ways just happened to be there at the right time although in retrospect he seems to have ended-up believing it was a wrong move. He’s the guy I think that could really tell some tales and he might even be honest about it.
We are on the lip of a new stage but it is also a precipice and anything could happen as there are so many variables involved and only those at the very centre know the planned direction and that IMO doesn’t include the chair or CEO.
Billy Boyce says: (169)
January 9, 2014 at 4:28 pm
3 0 Rate This
Bauhaus says:
January 9, 2014 at 2:43 pm
I am surprised how much personal abuse and playing the man there has recently been.
——————————————————————————————————————-
I have read your posts and all related replies since you joined this blog. In my opinion you have received no personal abuse whatsoever. Perhaps you can give me an example?
—————————————-
No, Billy, you haven’t read all replies but thankfully TSFM or whoever is modding got shot of it quickly.
In addition, calling someone a troll or a liar can indeed be personal abuse, especially if enough people do it to a single individual. Perhaps most importantly to an open blog/forum like this, if enough people do it to that one poster it wrongfully stifles debate. Both because mud sticks and because you can exhaust someone trying to defend their good name
People should stick to TDing me, that very effectively tells me my opinions are in a minority!
Some internet forums have a very useful house rule: you cannot ever call another poster a troll or a liar: if you have suspicions you report them to Admin. who have the power and discretion in this area.
Martin says: (21)
January 9, 2014 at 3:45 pm
===========================================================================
Martin – some top quality rambling 😉