Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century

By

I had a bit of a laugh yesterday when I …

Comment on Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century by ecobhoy.

I had a bit of a laugh yesterday when I caught-up with a comment by a fellow poster that we should more or less stop being nasty to all those crusading SMSM journos who actually were asking all the difficult questions of the main players but for for some, as yet unexplained reason, were failing to write exclusive stories stating that Mr X or his associates had refused to answer the questions or would only say ‘No Comment’.

This might be a strange concept to the poster involved but printing the refusal of a man in the hot seat to give an answer to a probing question from a journalist is worth a thousand times more column inches than all the PR crap swallowed with the succulent lamb and regurgitated as an alleged ‘News’ story spun to order by a highly-paid media spinner.

I really am truly confident that every one of out fearless Scottish hacks have asked the Easdales if they are aware of the actual identities of the person/people behind Margarita and Blue Pitch whose proxy votes are wielded by the Easdale Camp.

I have read much in the SMSM of the percentage of shares that the Easdale Camp have voting proxies for but have yet to see any journo state how many shares were bought by the Easdales pre-IPO and on flotation of Rangers International Football Club Ltd and how many were bought from spivs after flotation which means not one penny of that purchase would have gone to Rangers but to stuff the pockets of those who have walked away.

I am also certain that the Easdales have been asked by all these clued-up SMSM forward thinkers about what their plans are for Rangers and how they intend to turn Ibrox into a financially self-sustaining football club.

As I say I truly utterly believe that our SMSM hacks have asked these very simple questions and perhaps I have missed their exclusive revelations but somehow I don’t think I have.

WHY ARE SMSM JOURNOS SO FRIGHTENED OR CONFLICTED THAT THEY COWER IN FEAR ❓

As for their apologists they really ought to take a hard look at themselves and spell-out how they can defend such cowardice ❗

It’s really quite simple – if you’ve asked the questions and been told to f*** off then write the story ❗

And this isn’t just about the Easdales but the myriad of questions that need to be asked and answered vis a vis the Rangers debacle and which I don’t believe for one minute have actually been asked by a single Scottish journalist – what a terrible indictment of those who should be in the forefront of not only seeking the truth but in printing it.

And what an absolute disgrace when judged against the thousands of real journalists who are tortured and murdered every year throughout the world for trying to bring the truth to their readers. They suffer and often die because they won’t be silent like Scottish kid-on journalists.

ecobhoy Also Commented

Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century
Press stories today claim Mather has walked away with £300K.

But the document released tonight which is allegedly Mather’s contract shows quite clearly that if he is sacked by the company then he gets a 12 months pay-off.

But if he decides to walk then he only gets 3 months viz £75k.

So what did he get and if it was £300K what were the grounds for sacking him?


Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century
Cerdan says: (6)
October 16, 2013 at 1:42 am

Auldheid

Is there no way you can be persuaded to focus on DOS and develop a strategy to have the mechanics of DOS illustrated and its implications understood in the mainstream?
——————————————————————————————————————————-
I have no wish to reignite or contribute to the debate on the Celtic resolution especially with the long-awaited second meltdown at Ibrox which I have always believed has the potential to expose many of the SFA and CO machinations in its wake.

Nor do I have any need to jump to the defence of Auldheid as he is more than capable of doing that for himself.

He, like myself, has more than one core area of interest which he posts on and has built up a bit of expertise in all of them – neither of us are one-trick ponies 😉

I also have been interested in DOS and EBTs and I can assure you that plenty in the SMSM are fully aware of the mechanics and implications of these schemes and so is the SFA and CO. The problem is that the SMSM has decided not to ask any detailed questions for fear it would have to print the truth.

We are therefore left with a number on conspiracy theories because the SFA isn’t a transparent organisation and it’s up to all of us to exert as much pressure as possible particularly through well-researched posts with as wide a distribution as possible.

I also dislike intensely being told by other posters what I should be posting on and what I should be ignoring – especially if it’s an area I have put a lot of time, research and thought into. Of course if what I post on is of no interest to anyone else well that’s life and anyone who posts lives with that risk.

People like Auldheid have built respect for their contributions because they care deeply about certain topics and put in a lot of time and effort into opening our eyes and minds and even though I might not agree with what a poster has argued I fully respect their right to make their own decision as to what they post on as long as they remain within the remit of the blog.


Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century
john clarke says:
October 8, 2013 at 12:17 am

No. A look at the creditors list shows that it was ‘just’ relatively small beer people , and maybe the likes of the Scottish ambulance service and Glasgow City Council and so on, that were stiffed
=======================================================================
One of the things I could never work out was that Glasgow City Council was only stiffed for something like £5k which has always amazed me because that would mean that about the only thing getting paid was the rates and that really really surprises me.

Same with Murray Park I don’t think any rates was owed on that to is it East Dunbartonshire Council. Again struck me as very strange.

I wonder if when a valuation is under appeal that payments stop but even if they did surely in an admin/liquidation that the Councils would have given notice of their full debt?

Maybe Rangers were bang up to date with paying their rates rates but as I say I have often wondered because the rates bill was obviously high.


Recent Comments by ecobhoy

Did Stewart Regan Ken Then Wit We Ken Noo?
jimmci says:
April 24, 2015 at 1:50 pm

And why did we not get the panel’s reasoning together with the decision last night?
———————————————-

Simples ❗ The Decision was the easy bit 😆 The explanation to sell it was the hard bit and despite a nightshift they appear to have fluffed their lines AGAIN 🙄


Did Stewart Regan Ken Then Wit We Ken Noo?
Allyjambo says:
April 24, 2015 at 2:18 pm

Might I suggest that SD’s main interest in this meeting was to put the RIFC board straight on some matters regarding the security over the IP and just how watertight it is, rather than to discuss funding or any ‘amicable’ discussion how best to move the club forward!
———————————————————-
You might be right but would SD want the club suffering another Insolvency Event? Perhaps they were asking for the second loan tranche of £5 million which the new board apparently rejected on taking control.

I have undernoted a reply I made to parttimearab last night which may have been missed but may also be relevant.

3. Insolvency events

(i) The inability of the Company to pay its debts as they fall due within the meaning of section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the “Act”);
(ii) The issue of an application for an administration order or a notice of intention to appoint an administrator in relation to the Company;
(iii) The passing of a resolution or order for the Company’s winding-up, dissolution, administration or reorganisation;
(iv) The declaration of a moratorium in relation to any of the Company’s indebtedness;
(v) The making of any arrangement or any proposal for any arrangement with any of the Company’s creditors; and
(vi) The appointment of a liquidator, receiver, administrator, supervisor or other similar officer in respect of any of the Company’s assets.

Now I haven’t a clue whether that has anything to do with the SPFL Rule Change. But it’s clear that there could be various stages in an Insolvency Event and perhaps the rule change is to cover all eventualities which might not have been previously defined in the Rule Book.

In particular I look at:

(vi) The appointment of a liquidator, receiver, administrator, supervisor or other similar officer in respect of any of the Company’s assets.

And I think of the various charges which have been placed on Rangers assets wrt the £5 million loan. I have previously posted that the contracts wrt a Default Event could see the assets pass to SportsDirect without any court hearing and SD also already has the power to appoint a Receiver to deal with any of the assets that pass to it via a loan default event.

Now that might not ultimately lead to a full-blown Insolvency depending on what SD actually decide to do with Rangers. But looking at the above I wonder whether with the SPFL rule change that just taking control of the assets is enough to be classed as an Insolvency Event under SPFL Rules?

Perhaps the SPFL are thinking ahead ?

But does the rule take effect immediately or from the new season?

It seems that if it is immediate and Rangers suffers an Insolvency Event then that would be an automatic 25 points this season and 15 next season. Assuming it is able to survive death a second time.


Did Stewart Regan Ken Then Wit We Ken Noo?
Resin_lab_dog says:
April 24, 2015 at 12:10 pm
ecobhoy says:
April 24, 2015 at 12:00 pm
blu says:
April 24, 2015 at 11:40 am
________________________________________________

From what I saw, all criticisms emanating from ICTFC was directed towards the SFA machinery and not towards CFC. Similarly, I have seen no evidence of any criticism of ICTFC being put forward by CFC. I see that fact as quite telling.

Celtic were quite entitled to make all the statements they made and had the boot been on the other foot, in the circumstances I am sure KC at ICTFC would have done likewise.

Similarly, had the situtaions been reversed w.r.t. the foul, I would have expected CFC to back their player robsutly in the same way that ICTFC did.

This is about governance of the sport, not internecine disagreements between member clubs – for which I am yet to see any cause advanced from either party.
——————————————-
Couldn’t agree more!


Did Stewart Regan Ken Then Wit We Ken Noo?
blu says:
April 24, 2015 at 11:40 am

My view is that Celtic played this one wrong (only in the public nature of it)and it was easy for media outlets to infer cause and effect in the Celtic/Compliance Officer actions.
———————————————–
There is some merit in your view IMO. However there’s a balancing act to be achieved which requires an answer to what the officials saw, didn’t see, or decided or didn’t decide on Sunday.

All I heard in the ground, leaving the ground, on the train, in the pub, was real anger and disbelief at the decision which worsened with the TV replays.

I do think Celtic fans were due an explanation and tbf to Celtic I doubt if they could have forseen what an absolute hash the SFA would make of it. Obviously the SMSM has ridden to the rescue of the SFA so what’s new about that?

But we’re still awaiting the answers requested. Will we get them? Not without keeping the pressure on the SFA on all fronts where Hampden’s dark secrets exist.


Did Stewart Regan Ken Then Wit We Ken Noo?
Gabby says:
April 24, 2015 at 10:18 am

If Celtic really, really felt they needed to send a letter, then this is the type of thing they should have sent…
———————————————
I disagree as the letter you suggest goes way beyond the immediate point which is simply: ‘Please explain how the decision was arrived at’. I say decision because when Celic sent the letter it seemed there had been no decision reached but that the incident had been ‘missed’ by all officials.

Once the SFA provide that info then Celtic can make a decision as to if and how it should proceed with the matter.

My credo in a situation like this is not to give any leeway to a slippery character or room for manoeuvre. Ask the straight simple question and take it from there once the basic position is established.

Never jump fences too soon and never ever jump fences you don’t need to especially if you don’t know what lies in wait on the other side.


About the author