Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?

ByTrisidium

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?

A Guest Blog by Auldheid for TSFM

Honesty requires both transparency and accountability. In pursuit of honest, transparent and accountable governance of Scottish football, and only that objective, the following letter, with attachments, has been sent to SPFL lawyers, CEO and SPFL Board Members.

An honest game free from deception is what football supporters of all clubs want. It is the action the letter and attachments prompt that will tell us if there is any intention of providing it.

It is a response on behalf of readers here on TSFM, but the sentiment which underpins it is almost universally held amongst fans of all clubs.  Importantly it is a response directly to all clubs, especially those with a SPFL Board member, that will make the clubs and the football authorities aware just how seriously supporters take the restoration of trust in an honest game, honestly governed.

The annexes to the letter contain information which may be published at a later date. We thought it appropriate to first await any response from any of the recipients.

Please also draw this to the attention of friends who are not internet using supporters and love their football and their club.

Auldheid

__________________________________________________________________

Harper MacLeod
The Ca’d’oro
45 Gordon Street
Glasgow
G1 3PE
19 Feb 2014
Copy sent to SPFL CEO and Board Members *
Dear Mr McKenzie
We the contributors to The Scottish Football Monitoring web site write to you in your capacity as the legal adviser employed by Harper MacLeod to assist the Scottish Premier League (now the Scottish Professional Football League) to gather evidence and investigate the matter of incorrect player registrations involving concealed side letters and employee benefit trusts as defined in the eventual Lord Nimmo Smith Commission.
We note from the then SPL announcement that set up an enquiry that the initial date range to be covered was from the inception of the SPL in July 1998, but that was changed to 23 November 2000 because, according to our understanding, that is the date of the first side letter supplied by Rangers Administrators Duff and Phelps. It is also our understanding that the SPL asked for all documentation relating to side letters as well as the letters themselves.
It is a matter of public record that Rangers Administrators failed to supply the SPL all relevant documentation. Indeed the seriousness of not complying with SPL requests was the subject of an admonition of Rangers/Duff and Phelps from Lord Nimmo Smith under Issue 4 of his Commission.
Quite how serious that failure to comply or concealment was in terms of misleading the Commission and so Lord Nimmo Smith can now be assessed from the information contained at Annexes 1 to 10 attached.
We think that as legal advisers to the SPL (now the SPFL) you have a responsibility to make them aware that their Commission was misled by the concealment of documents starting on 3 September 1999, and signed by current SFA President Campbell Ogilvie, whose silence on the ebt matters referred to in the attached annexes* is questionable at the very least.
This letter but not attachments is being posted on The Scottish Football Monitor web site as this is matter for all of Scottish football and support for the issue being pursued to establish the truth can be gauged by responses from supporters from all Scottish clubs once the letter has been published there.
A copy of this letter with Annexes has also been sent to the SPFL CEO and members of the SPFL Board.
Acknowledgement of receipt and reply can be sent by e mail to:
(Address supplied)
Yours in sport

On behalf of The Scottish Football Monitor contributors and readers. http://www.tsfm.org.uk/

Addressees copied in
Neil Doncaster CEO
The Scottish Professional Football League
Hampden Park
Glasgow G42 9DE

Eric Riley (Celtic),
The Celtic Football Club
Celtic Park
Glasgow G40 3RE

Stephen Thompson (Dundee United),
Tannadice Park,
Tannadice Street,
Dundee, DD3 7JW

Duncan Fraser (Aberdeen);
Aberdeen Football Club plc
Pittodrie Stadium
Pittodrie Street
Aberdeen AB24 5QH

Les Gray (Hamilton),
Hamilton Academical FC
New Douglas Park
Hamilton
ML3 0FT

Mike Mulraney (Alloa)
Alloa Athletic FC
Clackmannan Road
Recreation Park
Alloa FK10 1RY

Bill Darroch (Stenhousemuir).
Stenhousemuir F.C.
Ochilview Park
Gladstone Road
Stenhousemuir
Falkirk
FK5 4QL

About the author

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

3,234 Comments so far

FeduplongtimeagosoawizPosted on5:58 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Is there no end to blatant cheating where this outfit are concerned? Surely the world can see it now..! Disgraceful and another travesty of justice…more to come though, guaranteed….!

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on6:10 pm - Mar 9, 2014


It just goes to show
The referee can`t gift you a goal unless the ball actually crosses the line

View Comment

Kicker ConspiracyPosted on6:13 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Hope they don’t turn up at Forthbank for the replay. 🙂

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on6:21 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Looks like its all lining up nicely for a tasty Arab v Dons cup final then!
(with due deference to Albion Rovers and St. Johnstone, of course)
That’s going to be a hot ticket… no mistake!

View Comment

BrendaPosted on6:30 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Have just witnessed sevco’s ”””goal””’ sorry but there is just no doubt that referee should be sacked ……… But knowing the farce that is scottish football he’ll get the final 😕 our beloved game is rotten to the very core.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on6:47 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Hirsuit pursuit @ 1.15

And also explains thornhills deliberations continually focussing in on the loans. As I’ve said before The taxable bit is entirely unconnected to the loan bit the loan is just required to get the funds back to the person that earned them which is kind of the point really!

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on6:50 pm - Mar 9, 2014


‘Honest mistake’ redefined. Was quite impressed when I heard Gough’s 9 out of 10 times comment, but having seen it more like 999, 999 out of a million. Still, there is the consolation of the conflicted one botching the SF draw.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on7:06 pm - Mar 9, 2014


This is the problem with the inconsistent and opaque application of rules with regard to the off field problems of Rangers throughout the last couple of years. Now every time a referee makes a mistake or a bad decision people claim with absolute certainty that it was not a mistake, our game is rotten to the core and it is blatant cheating. I haven’t actually seen the incident in question yet but I’ll take the word of people here that it was a shocker. I don’t believe for a second it was blatant cheating though, any more than I believe that the referee at the Manchester United game yesterday was cheating when he somehow contrived to not send Robin Van Persie off for a shocking challenge minutes after being booked. I think he just got it wrong.

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on7:22 pm - Mar 9, 2014


E.for me…… 🙁

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on7:23 pm - Mar 9, 2014


RyanGosling says:
March 9, 2014 at 7:06 pm

3

5

Rate This

This is the problem with the inconsistent and opaque application of rules with regard to the off field problems of Rangers throughout the last couple of years

______________________________________________

You are right Ryan.
The Ibrox club have had unequal treatment.
Other fans resent this.
Every time an honest mistake is made in their favour, we get up in arms.
It would help things enormously if those involved in the running of the game were not so embroiled in the Ibrox chicanery of the past.
Those who tried to move heaven and earth to try and pursue the interests of one clubs broken business model and help them escape the unpleasant consequences of their cheating remain in situ.
We are entitled therefore to question everything while that remains the case.
Everyone associated with running Rangers(IL) – I include Dave King in this – he should be allowed no part in scottish football going forward – or with being party to the 5 way agreement needs to be expunged from the governance of Scottish football in any capacity.
But until the governance is cleared of the lingering stench of impropriety, suspicion is not only inevitable, but appropriate.

It was the Rangers club that cheated, not the Rangers fans. In fact the club cheated their own fans just as much as everyone else in scottish football. I wish the fans of the Ibrox club would stop excusing their clubs behavior and take it to task over it instead.

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on7:23 pm - Mar 9, 2014


RYANGOSLING 7:06 – Before I say anything else let me say I think you’re one of the 5 best posters on this site, and probably the single most important, bringing a much needed sensible Ibrox perspective to the blog. Honourable mention to Greenock Jack but I think your contributions shade it.

You are correct that some of the decisions that favour your club are genuine honest mistakes. There are also genuinely honest mistakes that favour other clubs and there are probably also less than honest mistakes that favour other clubs. Today’s was a shocker but there is a very small possibility that it was mere incompetence. The sheer volume of bizarre decisions that favour your current and former clubs (sorry, but that is my opinion) make it practically impossible, however, that simple chance is the explanation. When McCurry had his utter shocker in the Rangers – Dundee Utd fixture of 2008 the MSM may have ignored the context of a season full of mistakes from him benefitting one club and one club only, but I and most other ordinary fans did not.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on7:29 pm - Mar 9, 2014


RG – absolutely.
TRFC – through its own actions and those of RFC before – has lost any sympathy from other Scottish football fans.

Bottom line: TRFC just doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Some might now regard TRFC in all instances as ‘guilty until proven innocent’ which is unfair – but also understandable.

View Comment

Palacio67Posted on7:30 pm - Mar 9, 2014


RyanGosling says:
March 9, 2014 at 7:06 pm
————————————————
I watched that challenge by Van Persie, and I thought the Referee deserves enormous credit for noticing that RVP touched the ball first.

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on7:31 pm - Mar 9, 2014


ecobhoy says:

March 9, 2014 at 11:32 am
Cluster One says:
March 8, 2014 at 5:38 pm
Many thanks for the great reply

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on7:50 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Palacio67 I agree that Van Persie did, on close viewing of the replay, touch the ball first but the referee did not notice that as he did in fact give a free kick. Therefore he viewed the fairly wild challenge by a player who had already been booked for something similar as a free kick but somehow contrived not to produce a second yellow. It had to be either a red card or no free kick awarded, in my view anyway. That’s all slightly off topic but that’s my take on it.

View Comment

Long Time LurkerPosted on7:53 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Flocculent Apoidea

Just wanted to say – I attended the UTTT for the first and only time on Thursday 06 March.

John Clarke was most diligent in is note taking – almost to the point of distraction. In terms of internet bampots I believe that he should be recognised as a legend. Without his attendance at the UTTT we would not have had the insight that we have been lucky to have received as a result of his efforts.

Before, during and afterwards he was most generous with his time.

The Murray Group QC also took the time to come over and chat with John.

John, I want to also take the opportunity to thank you for your time and for your contributions. I enjoyed my day at the UTTT. From my perspective I was drained, it took a lot of effort to concentrate on the arguments offered. I don’t know where you get the energy from to have attended each day and to then go home and type up your notes.

View Comment

bobferrisPosted on8:00 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Compare that decision today with the decision by Mike Tumilty early last season at Berwick to chalk off Berwick’s winner, which it would have been with seconds left, for their player seemingly breathing in the vacinity of Neil Alexander. I have developed a real affinity with Albion Rovers, having been to see them 11 times over the past season and a half and I was absolutely gutted at the end. They were cheated. As Radio Scotland were reporting from their texts, everybody was asking if that decision would have been given at the other end. Toughie!

Still, at least Rovers know they have nothing to fear and they have already taken a scalp at NDP.

View Comment

Lord WobblyPosted on8:08 pm - Mar 9, 2014


E bah gum.

I do still have the Scotland Argentina 1978 glass with signatures.

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on8:08 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Outraged as most of us are at the latest Sevco Rangers ‘honest mistake’, not sure that there are any Albion Rovers fans on this blog. We should all recognise that their club has been cheated out of a ’90 minutes away from a Scottish Cup final’ opportunity. Who knows if they will ever get another one, although winning the replay would be one of the biggest FOs in Scottish football history.

View Comment

TSFMPosted on8:09 pm - Mar 9, 2014


John Clarke and the UTT Warriors,
Our sincere thanks for providing a service to all fans of the game last week. I find it incomprehensible that in a week where one hack went on a jolly to Liverpool to interview Aiden McGeady about the vital nature of his relationship with Gordon Strachan (a man who is not his manager either at club or national level), there was such little attention paid to what was going on at the tribunal.

One Scottish journalist actually contacted me last week and congratulated the blog for “re-asserting itself” in the wake of the debates on anonymity, Auldheid’s SFA initiative and the reporting – yes reporting – of the UTT.

I think we should all be indulging in a bit of back-slapping for the next few days 🙂 , but backs which are most eminently in need of a good whack, are those of John and Auldheid. The prodigious quality and quantity of their work are a testament to everything that is good about social media.

Thanks guys.

View Comment

FeduplongtimeagosoawizPosted on8:47 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Does a certain team / club etc. in the lower divisions still get premiership referees for all their matches? Do any other matches in the same division warrant the same “standard” of refereeing? A bit OT but I’ve lost track..

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on8:55 pm - Mar 9, 2014


How ridiculous does the SFA’s decision to hold both semi finals at Ibrox look now?

Aberdeen v St Johnstone should be at Easter Road/Tynecastle
Dundee United v Albion Rovers/Sevco should be at Firhill/Parkhead

View Comment

justshateredPosted on8:58 pm - Mar 9, 2014


TSFM says:
March 9, 2014 at 8:09 pm

Did you not ask the journalist if he was not ashamed that, as it is actually his/her job, he/she was not reporting on it or one of his colleagues but leaving it to a self funded website.
While any recognition is grateful, and I’m sure I speak for everyone here that this website has become the ‘go to’ place for the real story on Scottish football, this story is begging to be told by some one who can reach far more people than ourselves. And by that I mean the printed word for while the press in Scotland is diminishing by the week it is still where most people go to get their version of events. The public are therefore being told a lie on a grand scale while the person that congratulates this site sits on their hands. That is shameful.

Perhaps this website should ask to interview this journalist and actually ask him/her some of the difficult question regarding the culture within our printed press. Obviously anonymity would be guaranteed but it would be interesting to see the insight from the other side. To see their mind set, policies, and editorial positions within his/her paper. Ask Stuart Cosgrove, also anonymously, regarding editorial discussions within the BBC regarding the reporting, or non-reporting, of this story because this is actually as big a part of the story as the story itself!

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on9:14 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Friday morning’s UTTT proceedings have just been posted on the UTTT thread. They run to the end of Mr Thornhill’s case ( just at about 12,30 or so).
Mr T’s reply took from then till about 4.00, and I’ll get that on tomorrow, maybe, if I can make sense of what he said, and how he said it. He was more hurried and fragmented in his presentation.

View Comment

scottcPosted on9:21 pm - Mar 9, 2014


I guess TRFC will be praying there isn’t an insolvency event in the next ten days. Heaven knows how they would deal with Albion Rovers if they couldn’t field their superstars.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on9:23 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Bryce Curdy says:
March 9, 2014 at 8:08 pm

Albion Rovers is close to my heart. I am as disgusted as you are at what happened. I am also, however, overwhelmed with pride at the performance of Albion Rovers today and the response from James Ward. One word springs to mind ‘integrity’.

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on9:29 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Simple question, if Albion Rovers scored the goal that the Govan club scored would it have been given.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on9:35 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Bryce Curdy says:
March 9, 2014 at 8:08 pm
=======================
I fear the genuine chance Albion Rovers had to get through the tie has now gone. Had the Referee did what 99% of other Referees would have done Albion would be through as Rangers were clearly not going to score in a month of Sundays. The replay will be different in my view, although the overall standard from Rangers was appalling. They seemed devoid of ideas other than lumping high balls into the box. Any Rangers fan watching Dundee Utd today would surely worry about the pace and skill in that team, which will be the highest level they have faced this season by a distance, should they make it to the semi final. They are going to need every bit of the ‘home’ advantage Ally has been crowing about these past few days.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on10:12 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Ally McCoist on http://www.rangers.co.uk:

“I think the easy decision for the referee would have been to award a free-kick. I haven’t seen it again but I thought he was very brave to give the correct decision and obviously we are relieved we are still in the cup”

Boak!!!

THAT’s how stone wall a foul it was! 😯
TRFC felt the need to rush out a story from Mr Newspeak himself to try and take some heat out of this!
Mr McCoist praising the ref for having the courage of his convictions, indeed!

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on10:15 pm - Mar 9, 2014


bobferris says:
March 9, 2014 at 8:00 pm
‘…Still, at least Rovers know they have nothing to fear .’
————–
Better than that: they know that they are now feared!
I shared with Chick Young ( I thought he might have been bumped to make way for Tom English 😥 ) a sense of the power of James Ward’s quietly stated but stunningly powerful conviction, not hope or belief, but rock solid conviction, that they will beat Newco in the replay. Stated as a simple fact, as if ,like someone with the second-sight, he actually KNEW!
He’s not the seventh son of a seventh son, by any chance? If he has that power over the radio waves on a stranger , the effect on his players must be incredible!

View Comment

ZilchPosted on10:18 pm - Mar 9, 2014


TSFM says:
March 9, 2014 at 8:09 pm
—————————————————————————————————————————————————-
I, for one, would love to know what your journalist colleague believes is at the heart of the SMSM’s (non)coverage of the UTT.

My guess is that most would suggest lack of interest in the paying public and that reporting the final outcome would be enough. Got to sell copy dontchaknow etc.

TBH, I kind of get that. Maybe I/we are teensy bit obsessed with this story??? I know I am….

However, reporting the final outcome without covering the arguments and counter arguments and the rationale for that final decision only provides cover for those who would hide dark deeds.

We have seen from the FTT that lack of transparency by being held behind closed doors has left more doubt and uncertainty over the nature of the evidence presented and the validity of the decision reached.

JC and the UTT warriors have shone a spotlight on this part of the saga – the final decision, when it is announced, will be subject to measured and better-informed scrutiny by us, the tax-paying public, thanks to them.

Part of my tax-paying is to fund a national broadcaster. They are paid from tax so as to provide a national information and entertainment service.

I fear the two have become too closely entwined.

I don’t need my information to be entertaining. I want to hear what is actually happening, the News.

Whilst I might have some limited sympathy for corporations trying to sell news, I have virtually none for a publicly funded body that is paid from the national purse to provide it.

The BBC cannot be allowed to hide behind an argument of lack of public interest. It is their job to set the agenda.

In an age of commercially-driven dumbing down, it is more important than ever that our national broadcaster is seen to play the role of honest and intelligent broker of the news.

In the UTT and a great many other aspects of this saga, they have sadly been worse than deficient (a small number of notable exceptions aside).

The UTT goes to the heart of the greatest sporting scandal in the history of our wee nation.

BBC Scotland – where are you?

I want my money back.

View Comment

Flocculent ApoideaPosted on10:31 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Long Time Lurker says:
March 9, 2014 at 7:53 pm

Thanks, LTL (and Easyjambo, earlier). I attracted a lot of TDs for my (mainly rhetorical) question so can only assume folk thought I was questioning John’s work, which was certainly not where I was coming from. It was just my clumsy way of paying tribute. I know I wouldn’t be able to produce what amounted to transcripts of proceedings with additional, helpful comments – not with my handwriting and attention span. I can’t help thinking that if this kind of detail was available at the FTT, our collective flabber might not have been quite so gasted at the outcome. Thanks to everyone who took the time to attend and report back.

View Comment

BrendaPosted on10:32 pm - Mar 9, 2014


😥 valentinesclown

Nope!!!!!

View Comment

HaywirePosted on10:35 pm - Mar 9, 2014


JLeeHooker says:
March 9, 2014 at 9:59 am

I’m an E (but I tell everyone that I am a D) 😳

With an answer like that, you must be a closet Sevco supporter! (I’m joking, honest!)

Next, thanks to RLD for bringing some semblance of order to the age related proceedings.

With regard to the feedback on age groups generally, apart from being well amused at some of the rep(lies), I am not surprised at the predominance of the more mature person, at least I think that was what my daughter called us. Although anticipated, I’m a bit disappointed that we don’t have a few A, B and Cs to provide a bit more of a balanced view on the current state of Scottish Football.

However, I shall be interested to see the Poll results from TSFM.

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on10:51 pm - Mar 9, 2014


TSFM says:
March 9, 2014 at 5:44 pm

“What happened there Campbell?”
——————————
I heard the audio of Mr. Ogilvie carrying out the draw for the semi’s on Radio Scotland this afternoon. I’m probably reading too much into it but he sounded like a man uncomfortable in his own skin, even from the few words uttered.

I’m tempted to make the trite remark that perhaps he was discomfited by finding all the balls were the same temperature. Interesting times?

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolisPosted on10:55 pm - Mar 9, 2014


john clarke says:
March 9, 2014 at 10:15 pm

On BBC Scotland Sportsound a few days ago a school pupil asked during the Q & A

“How many teams does chick Young support?” 😆 😀 😆

Sign that child up to TSFM ❗

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on11:20 pm - Mar 9, 2014


sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolis says:
March 9, 2014 at 10:55 pm

5

0

Rate This

john clarke says:
March 9, 2014 at 10:15 pm

On BBC Scotland Sportsound a few days ago a school pupil asked during the Q & A

“How many teams does chick Young support?” 😆 😀 😆

Sign that child up to TSFM ❗

________________________________________

I suspect he’s a lurker here already.
(Can probably chalk up our first A, TSFM)

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on11:24 pm - Mar 9, 2014


Watching Sportscene tonight I got annoyed at the intro referring to the fact Rangers last won the competition…..! I’m sorry but this team have never won any Scottish Cup.

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolisPosted on11:33 pm - Mar 9, 2014


I used to be a Level 3 (Senior County) Referee before I tore my ACL.

From the SFA website
The Laws of the Game: Law 12 Fouls and Misconduct
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_football.cfm?page=3605

From the BBC Scotland website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/26509298

Moshni’s “goal” is a textbook example of “jumping at an opponent”

As he was “180” (degrees) to the incident, before making his decision, referee John Beaton should have consulted his Assistant Referee The correct decision is undoubtedly a foul on the ‘keeper’. 😳

Waiting patiently for an SMSM “reporter” to ask the SFA Referee Secretary for a comment and for their employer to publish it. 🙄

View Comment

manandboyPosted on12:21 am - Mar 10, 2014


sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolis says: March 9, 2014 at 11:33 pm
Moshni’s “goal” is a textbook example of “jumping at an opponent”

As he was “180″ (degrees) to the incident, before making his decision, referee John Beaton should have consulted his Assistant Referee The correct decision is undoubtedly a foul on the ‘keeper’. 😳
_____________________________________________________________________________________

I guess the ‘Fix’ is still in then.

As if it could be a straight game with Sevco & the SFA involved.

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolisPosted on12:42 am - Mar 10, 2014


manandboy says:March 10, 2014 at 12:21 am

I guess the ‘Fix’ is still in then.

As if it could be a straight game with Sevco & the SFA involved.
_____________________________________________________
My earlier post set out why I consider that the ref got it wrong and why I think he got it wrong.

In the absence of credible evidence to the contrary, I maintain that he made a mistake. Until that time I did not (and will not) question his integrity or honesty.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on12:51 am - Mar 10, 2014


On the latest refereeing mistake.

Referees make mistakes all the time but it is the ones that effect the “big teams” that draw attention and one “big team” seems to get such a share at vital times in a game that if the decisions in their favour were plotted as a graph, their path would look like the curve of a bowling ball.
Inevitably therefore referees get accused of bias and it is that which makes mistakes, honest or otherwise, more than just mistakes in supporters eyes.

That is not good for referees and it is not good for our football, so surely now, more than ever when the game is crying out for honesty those in charge (if that is not a popular misconception) should be having a rethink to not only produce better referees but a system where no perceptible curve exists, which in turn allows referees a degree of freedom from the bias charge (which will never disappear completely because fans are partisan. .

Refereeing is a SERVICE the SFA provide to the leagues for which the SFA referee’s get paid. The idea of treating refereeing as a service has been suggested before going back to June 2011 at

http://celticunderground.net/sfa-reform-one-down-three-to-go/

Surely the potential benefits of changing responsibilities should be investigated in a feasibility study or is refereeing in Scotland a closed shop reserved only for those in the professions?

The Referee Service

This would be split with the SFA doing the recruitment, training and match appointments (having taken the nature of the game to be officiated into account).
However the monitoring and evaluation would be the province of the customer, using referees or ex refs from anywhere to mark to a standard set by the customer.
This spilt of responsibilities would prevent any one person being in a position to exert his own influence on referees as a result of being part of the appointment and evaluation process.
It would safeguard the SFA from the kind of suspicion that led to the referees’ strike and lead to a higher standard of referee because the customer would be setting the standard not the supplier (as happens everywhere in business but football)
If it did not, it would free the SPL/SL to hire their own referees from wherever they could get them. A bit of competition never did anybody any harm and that includes our referees who, if they reached higher standards, would be in more demand outside Scotland

There is something in this for everyone who wants Scottish referees to do a professional job of refereeing, including both professionals and non professionals from other lines of work.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on1:01 am - Mar 10, 2014


jean7brodie says:
March 9, 2014 at 9:23 pm
Bryce Curdy says:
March 9, 2014 at 8:08 pm

Albion Rovers is close to my heart. I am as disgusted as you are at what happened. I am also, however, overwhelmed with pride at the performance of Albion Rovers today and the response from James Ward. One word springs to mind ‘integrity’.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ward is an impressive individual (based only from what I heard on BBC Shortbread). He shook the Chicophant to the core before the game with his failure to bow down to the greatness of Rangers at Castle Greyskull.

Post match he actually stated they would win the replay. I for one believe him.

In other news my Rangers pals are very unhappy with Alistair with concern about the level of his remuneration being discussed because “he’s no even a Manager”. They are not happy with the high ball down the middle to Daly but I was able to remind them that it’s the Parlane/Johnstone way. The bit in between where they played football was paid for by someone else, nice as it was.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on1:26 am - Mar 10, 2014


justshatered says:

March 9, 2014 at 8:58 pm

Ask Stuart Cosgrove, also anonymously, regarding editorial discussions within the BBC regarding the reporting, or non-reporting, of this story because this is actually as big a part of the story as the story itself!
===================
With each passing day the more that is revealed the more the cover up becomes the story.

The SFA/SPFL and SMSM cannot hide forever behind the idea that information that tells readers that all is not as it was presented, can be buried forever.

Are the police still trying to trace the source of the material? I doubt it.

Has a judge not ruled material from the same source admissible precisely because everybody is aware of it?

Is there a public interest angle in keeping quiet a story of a national football association aiding and abetting one of its clubs to evade tax? Quite the reverse would seem to be the case.

Is it the sheer magnitude about what this unfolding story tells us of Scottish society at a decisive time in its history that scares off real reporting? Something is causing the truth to be buried.

Is the fear of authority that as a society we simply cannot handle the truth?

Does the Scottish government not have a view on events that are damaging part of the social fabric of Scotland or is the SFA already an independent territory (but hopefully not a preview of how it might all go wrong).

View Comment

HirsutePursuitPosted on1:34 am - Mar 10, 2014


Hirsuit pursuit @ 1.15

And also explains thornhills deliberations continually focussing in on the loans. As I’ve said before The taxable bit is entirely unconnected to the loan bit the loan is just required to get the funds back to the person that earned them which is kind of the point really!
====================================================
From JC’s transcript, it appears that Mr Thornhill has ignored or downplayed the importance of certain points and spent much time putting forward the case he would have liked Mr Thomson to make. We haven’t yet read Mr Thomson’s closing argument; but I would be surprised if he disputed many of the points raised by Mr Thornhill regarding the legality of the loans.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on1:49 am - Mar 10, 2014


Auldheid says:
March 10, 2014 at 1:26 am

Has a judge not ruled material from the same source admissible precisely because everybody is aware of it?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It’s not really a judge led thing. It’s more of a whistleblower concept which the Press are usually happy to report if it’s a major institution under scrutiny. the Scottish Press has failed spectacularly on this one.

Is there a public interest angle in keeping quiet a story of a national football association aiding and abetting one of its clubs to evade tax? Quite the reverse would seem to be the case.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

How did they help the tax evasion? That is nuclear. Please explain.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Is the fear of authority that as a society we simply cannot handle the truth?

Does the Scottish government not have a view on events that are damaging part of the social fabric of Scotland or is the SFA already an independent territory (but hopefully not a preview of how it might all go wrong).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I don’t fear authority or truth but the fabric of society is not being torn apart by this blog or Rangers or the SFA. Remember only about 10.000 out of 5M read it.

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolisPosted on1:58 am - Mar 10, 2014


Auldheid says: March 10, 2014 at 12:51 am

On the latest refereeing mistake.
___________________________

Auldheid,

As you probably know already, the SFA appoints all match referee’s for the professional game and referees’ match performance is assessed by clubs and an SFA appointed Match Assessor who is an ex-referee who officiated at a similar level to the match in question. All assessments are collated by the SFA Referee Department and influence future match appointments.

Referee training and development is the responsibility of each individual referee with support provided by Referee Mentors and colleagues and is provided by their Regional Referees Association and the SFA Referee Development Team, UEFA and FIFA depending on the level the referee officiates at.

Here’s a link to the SFA website for those more interested in tis topic:
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/index.cfm?page=1852

I think that improvement in referee performance would follow from full-time professional referees as this would allow them to concentrate fully on their match fitness, preparation and recovery. Evidence shows that physical tiredness leads to poor decision making from mental fatigue. So, on average fitter referees make fewer incorrect decisions the fitter they are. However even full-time referees, such as those in Ingurland still make howlers. Ask any of the fans of wee teams there for examples. ❗

Do you think that the SFA should ask current sponsors, Specsavers to fully fund full-time professional referees for those who want to give up their current careers ❓

Having considered the CQN suggestion I see no benefit in the SFA from “outsourcing” the Referee “Service”. This is because the SFA is the body recognised by UEFA, FIFA and the Scottish & UK Sports bodies and governments responsible for governing our game. If they decided to devolve this responsibility then it would be an abrogation of their governance responsibilities with regard to refereeing.

I think that we need to rid the SFA and the SPFL of those individual officers that clubs and supporters have no trust in, not let those individuals off the hook for their lack of honest and effective governance of our game.

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolisPosted on2:10 am - Mar 10, 2014


bogsdollox says: March 10, 2014 at 1:49 am

I don’t fear authority or truth but the fabric of society is not being torn apart by this blog or Rangers or the SFA. Remember only about 10.000 out of 5M read it.
___________________________________________

Auldheid actually wrote “Does the Scottish government not have a view on events that are damaging part (My emphasis in bold text) of the social fabric of Scotland or is the SFA already an independent territory…”

I think Auldheid meant the scottish football watching public which I estimate probably numbers hundreds of thousands of people trather than the 10,000 reputed to read TSFM.

EDIT: italic and bold functions do not appear to be working. 😳

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on2:39 am - Mar 10, 2014


sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolis says:
March 10, 2014 at 2:10 am
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Let Auldheid speak for himself.

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolisPosted on2:41 am - Mar 10, 2014


bogsdollox says: March 10, 2014 at 2:39 am

Auldheid already did. I’m just trying to help you to read what he actually wrote. Nighty night! 😀

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on7:30 am - Mar 10, 2014


HirsutePursuit says: March 10, 2014 at 1:34 am

From JC’s transcript, it appears that Mr Thornhill has ignored or downplayed the importance of certain points and spent much time putting forward the case he would have liked Mr Thomson to make. We haven’t yet read Mr Thomson’s closing argument; but I would be surprised if he disputed many of the points raised by Mr Thornhill regarding the legality of the loans.
==============================
Your reading of the UTTT, despite not being there, is pretty spot on. You will find, when JC makes his final post, that Thomson highlights his statement that the loans were not “shams” and was critical of the majority repeatedly using it against him in their decision (5 times in total). i.e. they had blindly focussed on the loans in isolation and gave less weight to the other evidence about the side letters and the operation of the trust.

HMRCs position is that the loans in themselves are legal, the trust in itself is legal, the payments are legal transactions, but that the purpose of the “composite transaction” was one that delivered earnings to the player free of tax.

Thornhill’s intention throughout was to break down the composite transaction into its constituent parts, showing that each part of it was legally set up and had legal precedents to support that position, while Thomson argued on Ramsay precedent that it should be viewed as a whole.

View Comment

Palacio67Posted on7:42 am - Mar 10, 2014


Good Morning all. I watched the SC draw yesterday and could not help notice how uneasy and nervous CO was. I had the sound down very low, just enough to hear and could also tell with his voice how uneasy he felt. I did however not notice the mistake he made, could someone fill me in what his ‘gaff’ was?

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:43 am - Mar 10, 2014


bogsdollox says:
March 10, 2014 at 1:01 am
7 0 Rate This

… In other news my Rangers pals are very unhappy with Alistair with concern about the level of his remuneration being discussed because “he’s no even a Manager”.
————–

I think it was pointed out on Sportsound that James Ward was on £90-a-week basic!

There was actually a TRFC supporter on 5Live on Saturday. His point was that he wanted the board out and the waste to end. The pundits asked him how it could be the the club had the second-biggest wage bill in Scotland — and why a lower league had to be won by 30 points, rather than just ‘enough points’.

The supporter had no real answer, but seemed to feel that it was the board’s mismanagement and not the football expenses that are to blame (strange that not all football supporters grasp the concept of cause and effect).

Anyway, Robbie Savage and Darren Fletcher get it, and they are hardly on top of the Ibrox story!

Seemed pretty unanimous view among pundits that the barge-goal from yesterday would not have been given in normal conditions. I had a discussion on a football-banter forum and recalled how Berwick were once disallowed a perfectly good goal against a team from Glasgow. The video from that match (that denied Berwick a famous victory) shows NO impedence, whereas yesterday’s ‘allowed’ was the obvious result of impeding a goalie that normally favours the keeper and leads to a foul. Maybe they should bring back the old TV caption: ‘Do Not Adjust Your Set’ 🙂

Btw, the BBC boycott now appears to remain place simply to save the manager’s blushes and as a warning to other broadcasters to ask only benign questions.

View Comment

bad capt madmanPosted on7:57 am - Mar 10, 2014


Having now just seen the Sevco “goal” I can only assume that the manager’s careful planning included a video of Hately assaulting Michael Watt to inspire and educate his players.

Sorry, that was uncalled for, but the honest mistakes just keep happening, don’t they…

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on9:10 am - Mar 10, 2014


I hope that complaining about referees is not deemed as lowering the overall tone of TSFM, but as far as I’m concerned the honest mistakes remain highly symptomatic of the bigger picture of corruption.

And The Scotsman should be renamed the NorthKoreasman with immediate effect. One article claiming the Albion Rovers manager agreed the ‘goal’ should have stood when what he actually said was he preferred to talk about his team’s performance. And Stuart Bathgate in another claims replays proved the decision was correct when in fact what they proved was that as well as a blatant barge it was actually a handball as well.

Still, at least when Campbell was informed of the ball warmer he mistook the meaning for something else entirely.

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on9:26 am - Mar 10, 2014


The SFA committed publicly to provide information on all clubs on their website as part of the National Club licensing process.

To quote them ” information will be made freely available to members of the public”
All clubs had to provide audited information over 10 months ago. The information which would be provided is detailed below. It is straightforward and easily calculable. Preparation of the tables for publication would take a 1st year accountancy student 30 minutes on a spreadsheet . As best as I can see this promised information has never been provided.

Why ?

From SFA’s own documents

2.6 Confidentiality and Transparency
The Scottish FA guarantees the clubs full confidentiality as regards all non-public information disclosed during the Licensing Process.
However and without prejudice to the foregoing generality, each club hereby expressly consents to the Scottish FA notifying the club’s respective league body of any failure to obtain a licence and the reasons for that failure.
Furthermore, the financial information as detailed in Section 8.12 of Part 2 of this Manual with the exception of the net debt information will be made freely available to members of the public via the Scottish FA website.
The Scottish FA also reserves the right to disclose any award decision at any time. Subject to the disclosure to the club’s respective league body referred to above, the reasons for such decisions however will remain confidential. The Licensing Administration will adhere to the following guidelines:
 The Scottish FA has concluded a confidentiality agreement with each club. This will be updated as and when necessary;
 Members of the Licensing Committee, the Appellate Tribunal and any other individual engaged by the Licensor in the Licensing process must sign a confidentiality agreement before starting his or her tasks. Licensing Administration employees are subject to confidentiality
provisions in terms of their employment contracts;
 The level at which an award is presented to a club (overall and under each criteria heading) will be made available for general
consumption via the Scottish FA website

A club is required to submit a summary of financial information covering the reporting year for 2012 and the previous two years i.e. 2011 and 2010 as detailed below.
Clubs will provide this information as follows –
 SPL clubs – by 31 March 2013
 All other clubs – by 30 April 2013
Unless the 2010 & 2011 figures have not previously been provided the club only requires to provide the 2012 figures.

Year ended 2010
Year ended 2011
Year ended 2012

Period Ended
Turnover
Wages (Total Payroll Costs)
Wages to Turnover Ratio
Profit or Loss for Period
Net Assets at Period End
Net Debt at Period End

In submitting this information, the club must give consideration to a relevant reporting perimeter i.e. the entity or combination of entities in respect of which financial information has to be provided. In particular the financial information must include all remuneration paid to any employees including players and any costs/proceeds of acquiring or selling a player.
The reporting perimeter shall also include any entities included in the legal group structure which generate revenues or perform services for the club in respect of ticketing; sponsorship and advertising; broadcasting; merchandising and hospitality; club operations; financing; use of stadium and youth operations.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on9:29 am - Mar 10, 2014


Zilch says:
March 9, 2014 at 10:18 pm

I, for one, would love to know what your journalist colleague believes is at the heart of the SMSM’s (non)coverage of the UTT.

My guess is that most would suggest lack of interest in the paying public and that reporting the final outcome would be enough. Got to sell copy dontchaknow etc. TBH, I kind of get that. Maybe I/we are teensy bit obsessed with this story??? I know I am….

However, reporting the final outcome without covering the arguments and counter arguments and the rationale for that final decision only provides cover for those who would hide dark deeds.
————————————————————————————
I think it’s too easy to blame it all on a conspiracy theory and the actual answer is much more complex.

Basically society is changing in how it wants its ‘news’ served-up and the media industry is undergoing a massive change with the print side of it going into an irreversible decline and ultimately heading for extinction IMO.

There might be a stop gap stage where Monday to Friday it is all web-based and at the weekend a printed paper/magazine is produced. That I suspect will only last until the ‘Auld Codgers’ shuffle off and by then there will be very little news presented in written form.

So we have declining numbers of print journalists and staff numbers being cut remorselessly which means journos have less and less time they can spend on an individual story and more and more local papers are losing subs actually attached to the paper with the layout and subbing now being done
at regional centres covering groups of papers.

All the personal connections are therefore lost in these centres. The pressures on staff are horrendous, work conditions poor, wages pitiful – these are nothing more than ‘sweat-shops’ and many staff are having severe difficulties coping emotionally.

On the actual reporting side things are little better – few have time to build contacts let alone get out of the office to meet them and we have all seen the short-cuts employed through phone-hacking and the uses of private eyes.

And, of course, this is where PR practitioners come into their own by providing an endless stream of guff which is cut and pasted straight into the paper with seldom a question asked about it.

To do so results in a phone call from the PR firm to the Editor asking whether their publication still wants PR releases and the word gets sent down the line to the journo to ‘lighten-up’ and just bloody put it in the paper because it’s free and therefore helping to keep him/her in a job.

Most journos with any real ability saw this all coming quite some time ago and started planning and making their escapes. Older journos who are nearing a pension or who have little prospect of matching current wages and who just fear change – and it happens to a lot with increasing age – cling on like grim death hoping they actually reach the ‘magic’ years of service to get their pension.

Meanswhile the colleges and universities continually churn out more and more media studies students every year and their ain’t any jobs for them – well not paid ones 😆 And then there has been a curious increase in older computer savvy retirees with a good pension – from other professions – who used to take-up painting to occupy their twilight years.

They are now moving into the media industry big-style and I have no problem with that. The problem is that they are either undercutting rates or doing it for nothing but they are helping fill the internet’s voracious demand for material to produce ‘clicks’ and creating a barrier for younger print journos being able to switch to new media and earn decent money.

That’s just a little snapshot of the pressure media employees are under and few want to rock any boats at a time when just about every newspaper is desperately trying to downsize and shed staff.

To return to the UTT – that simply isn’t being covered because there are no longer the pool of trained journalists who could cover the hearing and come out with a story line most days to suit their publication’s readership. But it’s just not lack of training/experience: It’s the time required to understand the case which they don’t have and also because they have to produce a helluva lot more than one story a day.

JC has revealed a remarkable talent for the job of covering the UTT – it’s a rare gift and very very mentally tiring with the pressure always on the reporter that a mistake can end-up with you being publicly torn to shreds by the judge/judges and possibly worse.

And then we have to look at the space required to actually run a daily story – how many words or seconds can be allocated. On such a complex tale in just about every aspect the simple answer is far too many for the average news desk to even contemplate.

And that decision has got to be balanced against the costs of the resources to obtain the story and the viewing/reading audience it will generate given that – in the circumstances – at any given time 50% of the vast bulk of the perceived ‘target’ audience will disagree with the report.

And I haven’t even factored-in the harassment or low-level email campaigns that the coverage might generate.

I’m afraid I find it only too easy to understand why there has been no coverage and OK it will come when the written decision is published. However the parties involved will get it early which means the PR people have plenty of time to work on it to ‘shape’ the best response for their client. And the hard-pressed journos and cost-cutting editors will be only too please to receive the emailed PR released and stick it right into the paper or online.

And there’s no need to question anything in the press release because everyone else will be printing exactly the same thing. That’s the way the game is played.

That’s why in this new era for news gathering and dissemination there is a desperate need for the likes of TSFM to critically analyse what is actually happening and break the real news. Many independent online groupings are already doing this successfully.

But it requires a sound financial footing and the employment of trained staff – there will always be room for many who create the TSFM Ethos and that’s who’ll keep the spirit of truth and sporting dignity alive and that means allowing their journos to tell the truth ‘without fear or favour’ no matter the team or organisation involved.

It can be done but will be very difficult and the starting point is to be objective and provide balanced and factual reporting. Obviously we all have strong opinions as football fans and are partisan as that’s the nature of our sport.

Wishful thinking and blinkers are not the way to go when we seek the lofty ideal of corruption-free football in Scotland and like it or lump it we have to have the Rangers support onside if we are to succeed. However that isn’t just another posts but at least a mini-series and perhaps more than a lifetime’s worh for the ‘F’ Division although I see a glimmer of a possibility for the ‘E’ Division winning the ultimate prize.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:34 am - Mar 10, 2014


Sometimes believe that Goalies get over protected these days. Most are big laddies and should be able to handle themselves.
However when an outfield player is going for a high ball and both his arms are extended skywards higher than the keepers then there is no way he is going to be able to head the ball.

Surely referees as part of their training must be told to review Jordan and Maradonna videos to see what trickery some players get up to.

No conspiracy – just a very very poor decision by the referee on the day.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on9:42 am - Mar 10, 2014


bogsdollox says:
March 10, 2014 at 1:01 am

In other news my Rangers pals are very unhappy with Alistair with concern about the level of his remuneration being discussed because “he’s no even a Manager”. They are not happy with the high ball down the middle to Daly but I was able to remind them that it’s the Parlane/Johnstone way. The bit in between where they played football was paid for by someone else, nice as it was

Whilst there were shades of the pantomime villain in your post there was also a valid point re the coverage per others this morning.

Craig Paterson, Chick Young et al were at pains to emphasise the size gap (I spared myself Sportscene last night following the expert 2nd favourites comment on Saturday night). “Fantastic for the plucky Rovers, won’t it just be pure dead brilliant to share a park with them again in a fortnights time” was writ large over all the coverage. Full marks to the Albion manager (sorry name escapes me) for not playing ball.

Key point is this. It is not the same Rangers period, but there’s another thread for that. It is not the same Rangers of Laudrup and even McCoist era because of a minor financial hiccup 😯 The point is the team that was on the park still should not have been the one that Albion Rovers were cheated by (they should have been cheated by a cheaper one 😆 ). Said team has cost 26 odd million to get to where they are. £26m of their own money, loosely described, but £26m none the less. Such shameful profligacy has got them to where they are now – allegedly potless and requiring further injection to get them to the end of next season we are led to believe. All so that Chick can continue to live his fantasy.

Before anyone claims “ah but the 26m went to the big bad men wot ran away” I would say this. The big bad men were Rangers. They paids their money, they took their chance. The footballing side of Rangers had to suffer to fund the payouts (who else exactly did the fanbase expect to do it, the banks? Oh….right!). To date, and relatively speaking, the footballing side hasn’t even started to foot the bill. I wonder if you took a straw poll of the 40k, sorry 30k, sorry 20 odd thousand fans on Sunday their thoughts on the current business plan I’d be interested in the results – especially if King’s-a-coming is not one of the multiple choice options. Nor is rewind the clock 18 months.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on9:44 am - Mar 10, 2014


I wish there was an insolvency angle to Moshni’s goal so that I could express an opinion.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on9:47 am - Mar 10, 2014


…………review Jordan and Maradonna videos……….

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————
I knew she was with Dwight Yorke…………….. but Maradonna too?

View Comment

bluPosted on9:52 am - Mar 10, 2014


wottpi says:
March 10, 2014 at 9:34 am
Sometimes believe that Goalies get over protected these days. Most are big laddies and should be able to handle themselves.
However when an outfield player is going for a high ball and both his arms are extended skywards higher than the keepers then there is no way he is going to be able to head the ball.
Surely referees as part of their training must be told to review Jordan and Maradonna videos to see what trickery some players get up to.
No conspiracy – just a very very poor decision by the referee on the day.
==================================================================
Agree with you wottpi (although on first viewing my thoughts were that a foul would be given and keepers get too much protection) – too many on here ready to jump in with the ‘one they prepared earlier’ conspiracy theory when Rangers are involved. I haven’t read any complaints here about Mr Collum’s perfromance in the other game yesterday – the sending off decisions were made too readily by an over officious careerist. Now I could understand ICT crying conspiracy – that’s four sendings off in two high profile cup ties.

View Comment

bluPosted on9:57 am - Mar 10, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
March 10, 2014 at 9:44 am
I wish there was an insolvency angle to Moshni’s goal so that I could express an opinion.
=======================================================================
Not difficult to find campbell – Rangers cut from the replay will mean they can actually pay for the next 5 star pre-match lunch.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on10:18 am - Mar 10, 2014


NewGers’ website headline states “Result is not embarrassing” Perhaps, but the headline andsubsequent justification is…

…When asked if it was ‘embarrassing’ Rangers couldn’t win at home this afternoon the manager replied: “It doesn’t matter if I think it’s harsh or not I think it is disrespectful to Albion Rovers who knocked Motherwell out of the Cup… As I keep saying I think people are maybe getting carried away with where our club is at this moment in time and the team. I think it’s highly disrespectful of people to say that and I’m certainly not going to say it.”

I don’t think it is disrespectful to expect a team in a higher division to beat a team in a lower Division, especially with a budget God-knows what times the multiple of the other and even more so playing at home? Albion Rovers were very happy with the draw. Rangers not. Rangers are still 3/1 to Win the whole thing, Albion Rovers 500/1. That tells the story. The fact that Rangers are trying to cover this
result with a figleaf that criticism of them not winning is somehow criticism of Albion Rovers is an age-old PR ploy.

That said, the fact the equaliser was as a direct result of foul – which the referee apparently didn’t see or didn’t acknowledge – means that they get to dance again. Both teams could do with a bit of extra money, so everyone’s a winner…

Glass half-full kind of morning for me it seems 😀

View Comment

tomtomPosted on10:22 am - Mar 10, 2014


jockybhoy says:
March 10, 2014 at 10:18 am
0 0 Rate This

NewGers’ website headline states “Result is not embarrassing”

…When asked if it was ‘embarrassing’ Rangers couldn’t win at home this afternoon the manager replied: “It doesn’t matter if I think it’s harsh or not I think it is disrespectful to Albion Rovers who knocked Motherwell out of the Cup… As I keep saying I think people are maybe getting carried away with where our club is at this moment in time and the team. I think it’s highly disrespectful of people to say that and I’m certainly not going to say it.”

I don’t think it is really that disrespectful to expect a team in a higher division to beat a team in a lower Division, especially with a budget God-knows what times the multiple of the other and even more so playing at home? Albion Rovers were very happy with the draw. Rangers not. Rangers are still 3/1 to Win the whole thing, Albion Rovers 500/1. That tells the story.

That said, the fact the equaliser was as a direct result of foul – which the referee apparently didn’t see or didn’t acknowledge – means that they get to dance again. Both teams could do with a bit of extra money, so everyone’s a winner…

Glass half-full kind of morning for me it seems 😀
==============================
I had Albion Rovers at half time, Rangers at full time @ 30/1 so I guess you could say It’s a wallet half empty day for me 😆 😆

View Comment

Jack JarvisPosted on10:39 am - Mar 10, 2014


blu says:
March 10, 2014 at 9:52 am

“Mr Collum…………..an over officious careerist.” Hammer – Nail – Head.

Also, John Beaton’s “How very dare you, sonny” reaction to his arm being brushed by a Rover’s player trying to attract his attention after the equalising ‘goal’ looked to me like that of someone who is not so much angered by the actions of another, but is embarrassed by his own.

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on10:42 am - Mar 10, 2014


So with a replay any bonus the players may receive for reaching the semis is withheld while the prospect of more cup money still exists.

That’ll help keep them going for one more month

View Comment

tomtomPosted on10:52 am - Mar 10, 2014


ptd1978 says:
March 10, 2014 at 10:42 am
1 0 Rate This

So with a replay any bonus the players may receive for reaching the semis is withheld while the prospect of more cup money still exists.

That’ll help keep them going for one more month
=========================
I see that the Albion players were on a bonus of 3 months wages for qualifying. Given that the club will receive another windfall with the replay I hope the players get this bonus irrespective of the result.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on11:08 am - Mar 10, 2014


Any chance this may be brought forward,and how would it affect Mr Kings plans:

From Rangers Rumours.
“Just padding on some info.
Just found out from rangers that if you renewed your season ticket by the 4 month payment method then your season ticket will automatically renew next season and first payment will come out your bank as soon ad tickets renew.
This has been confirmed by Rangers as part of the agreement we signed up to by accepting to pay by 4 installments.
Please make sure that you are all aware that unless you that your ticket will automatically renew whether you want it to or not, unless you advise Rangers by email or writtinh a letter anytime now and well before end of season.
This is in small print on season ticket paperwork and is a bit underhand in my oppinion.
Not saying cancel tickets just letting fellow supporters know what maybe they hadn’t realised”.

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on11:09 am - Mar 10, 2014


Auldheid says:
March 10, 2014 at 1:26 am

“With each passing day the more that is revealed the more the cover up becomes the story.”
————————————-
I think it’s starting to move beyond cover up toward culture.

The provenance of the Charlotte material can of course be disputed and whilst being an early champion of her cause I have grown cautious concerning its motives.

Charlotte broke ranks. In a culture where the wider population are kept largely in the dark and thrown titbits to gorge themselves on her material was an unprecedented feast. We are not accustomed to such a rich diet and we lapped it up on the basis of its novelty value alone. I’m not saying the material does not have veracity. It undoubtedly has but as I think campbellsmoney said earlier, you should be asking who is telling you this stuff and why. Without that level of critical thinking there is the danger of becoming the instrument of someone else’s devices.

The bigger picture must be that this level of shenanigans is going on all the time. The FTT/UTT is a highly technical illustration of the same thing. We are all subject to the tax system but there are strata which demark the ordinary folk from people ‘in the know’. Whether it’s a knowing glance or a funny handshake, there are ways around the rules that the rest of us would never consider employing.

If you don’t feel you can beat them and aren’t inclined to join them, where do you go to exhaust your frustration? On here I suppose.

The whole cover up thing is bigger than just Charlotte. She is just the tip of an iceberg but there is likely far more massive objects beyond our view. Fighting an unknown enemy is a very difficult exploit. I don’t think you are wrong Auldheid to pursue this aspect as every little bit helps. If you can’t drag the ship from its anchor point however then it is possibly because the object it is lodged in is far more massive than you ever expected.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:15 am - Mar 10, 2014


How will this affect King’s Plans?

Ask him, he wrote it!

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on11:15 am - Mar 10, 2014


Auldheid,

Good to know that Turnbull is up to speed and sorry to hear his health is not of the finest.

Thanks for the response and the good work.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on11:59 am - Mar 10, 2014


When it comes to things like the UTT, journalists are way out their comfort zone. Today’s hacks prefer to reprint a PR prepared paragraph than actually go and find out what’s going on themselves.
Cosgrove asked yesterday how much people would know of the Ibrox shenanigans twenty years ago. (Pure social media). Judging by MSM behaviour so far, which has barely commented on the most scandalous aspects which are in the public domain anyway, readers, listeners and supporters would be none the wiser.
James Doleman is reporting daily from the hacking trial,(www.the drum.com) aside from him the only MSM reporting is when a celeb or a scud book is involved.

Dedicated TSFMers like John Clarke are providing an insight not only to the BTC but also the mechanics of the Tribunal system.

Keep putting the MSM to shame whilst educating eejits like me!

View Comment

bobferrisPosted on12:18 pm - Mar 10, 2014


TOMTOM – I don’t know if you’re aware of the Daily Record Betrescue bseason long betting competition, but I enter it most weeks (I have to buy the paper occasionally for my housebound dad) and I haven’t even been on the leaderboard for the past two seasons. At the weekend I decided to be a bit ambitious and do a treble of Chelsea, Wigan and Albion Rovers. So that disgraceful decision cost me a mythical return of about £6,200 and in all probability, unless someone did the same or better (unlikely) the season prize of a grand.

On that goal, I was a bit stunned to read a Rovers fan on pie and bovril criticise his keeper for it. Seems some folk think the keeper should have attacked the ball and dealt with it earlier which is plain wrong when you see the trajectory of the cross. Even if he’d been 7ft tall he could not have caught that ball on the six yard line. Perfectly positioned, arms outstretched, just about to gather and he’s hit, albeit Moshni only has eyes for the ball. Dermot Gallagher this morning on Sky said that last part to explain why it was a good goal but to me that shouldn’t matter. He doesn’t mean to clatter Parry but he does. It just goes to show that it’s all about interpretation and there you have an experienced Premiership referee saying it was a good goal. It’s all about opinions but his opinion is wrong lol!

Collum’s performance in the Highlands deserves highlighting too, two terrible red card decisions, both probably bookings. I doubt Collum has ever tackled anybody in his life, it’s very hard to do so with your toes pointing down. So bad refs and honest mistakes everywhere not just at Ibrox but you just can’t help wondering about Beaton’s thought processes and, as Neil Parry said himself, whether he would have reached the same conclusion had Albion Rovers done the same at the other end to go 2-0 up.

View Comment

wildwoodPosted on12:29 pm - Mar 10, 2014


This decision by the SPFL to refuse Aberdeen a further allocation for Sundays Cup Final sums it all up for me. Which governing body would insist that there were empty seats for a cup final while fans, prepared to pay, we’re left disappointed?

Are we seeing an attempt by them to insist on Armageddon?

This is outrageous.

View Comment

Comments are closed.