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
I hope the SFA chose the officials for Mondays cup replay very carefully,they will have it in their whistles to prevent a headache in the next round for their bosses,what,what do you think this might not happen.
Resin_lab_dog says:
March 15, 2014 at 2:50 pm
=======================
Cheers, as an aside my first encounter with ICT fans was after THAT game in 2000, which saw John Barnes getting the tin-tack. Coming out the ground some of them were asking Celtic fans to swap scarves with them. It was certainly a bit different, and they were really friendly. As I recall they had quite a big support there that night.
I see in the eventuality of a Dundee Utd v Rangers semi-final Dundee Utd are being given a maximum of 13,000 tickets. Would this have been the same had it been Aberdeen, and who made the decision?
“Raman Bhardwaj @STVRaman 48m
Have to say, find Dundee United’s request to move semi-final utterly bizarre. All clubs were aware of (stadia) situ much earlier in season.”
————————–
Raman sees nothing wrong with a non neutral semi final venue being used and The Rangers getting a home tie.
Incidentally i doubt if there will be 15k at the Dons v St Johnstone semi final
This hardly needs pointing out but some football people in Scottish sports broadcasting are remarkably stupid. Their continuing careers depend on a highly restricted view of ‘popularity’ , ‘track record’ and ‘insider knowledge’ seen as important by media organisations and those in charge of hiring various types of talking head. It’s no more sinister than local media in Manchester using former City or United players for example but it does help create an incredibly limited echo chamber that deals very badly with anything more complicated than penalty decisions or transfer targets.
Oh and I’m not surprised that Dundee United are getting a limited ticket allocation for The Rangers’ home Scottish Cup semi. If the Dandies can take 40,000 to Celtic Park for a LC final then they could fill half of Ibrox for a ‘neutral’ (lol) semi versus a third tier team formerly known as etc etc. At this point I suspect Police Scotland (Strathclyde Branch) would be putting their foot down about 20,000+ traditionally antipathetic Fiery Sheep rolling into Govan crying, ‘No quarter.’ (In a football sense.) And whether it was us or the Arabs, if Sevco really do go down hard in the semi then I can’t imagine the The Rangers support would be very happy. Especially with half the stadium singing, ‘You’re not Rangers anymooore…’
Still, they have to beat Albion Rovers first.
Totally gobsmacked, if it’s true, that Dundee United are being forced to accept an allocation of 13,000 tickets, whether or not it’s reasonable to assume they can sell more. Semi-final venues are meant to be neutral (I know, Hampden is only truly neutral when both, or neither club, hails from the East or West End of Glasgow) and every effort should be made to ensure that is the case here in view of the ludicrously early decision to award TRFC both semis. The crowd is never going to be an even split, but with such a huge home advantage, being, potentially, handed to TRFC, they should be limited to 50% of the tickets, and hell mend them. They could, of course, ask Dundee United if they’d prefer such an arrangement, after all, they would suffer the same drop in revenue as TRFC. But wait! I’ve got that wrong. Because there is not, in this case, the slightest glimmer of a chance of an even split of moneys generated, with TRFC getting a lovely wad of cash over and above the gate money. Forget it, Scottish football is run, after all, for the benefit of one, new, club, in a similar way as it was to the one that cheated it’s way to a(n) (un)fair number of league titles a few years back.
The question remains (for the hard of thinking); why do we get so angry at the way our national sport is traditionally run?
Angus1983 says:
March 15, 2014 at 2:56 pm
13 4 Rate This
Utter disgrace, if true, that United are geting a non-negotiable 13K tickets for a semi-final at a NEUTRAL ground. Albion Rovers will never sell their share.
If there are any petition-like complaints that need a name added, let me know.
P.S. I see Celtic are proposing to play their (potential) European Qualifier ties at Murrayfield next season due to ParkRed being used for a WRVS tea-party or something. I thought Murrayfield was seen as unsuitable for fitba. If not, why are provincial clubs having to go to Glasgow club stadiums for semis and finals while Hampden is out of action instead of playing them at neutral Murrayfield?
Conversely, why won’t Celtic be playing their Euro games at Ibrox?
——————————————————
Why should Celtic play their qualifiers at Ibrox Angus, can you give me one good reason? First of all both sets of fans would be dead against it for starters, then there is the lesser capacity and maybe also the ground safety concerns that we keep hearing about. I for one would welcome the qualifiers at Murrayfield as I have never been there even if I have to travel from Inverclyde to do so. The other query you make about the use of Murrayfield for certain games and why it has not been used before is probably because it is a UEFA competition and not an SFA run one.
Why so indignant?
50 thousand capacity stadium in the same city seems reasonable enough to me.
Bill1903 says:
March 15, 2014 at 4:37 pm
2 0 Rate This
Why so indignant?
50 thousand capacity stadium in the same city seems reasonable enough to me.
==================================
Ibrox is unavailable due to post commonwealth games work, including the pitch being relayed, as is Celtic Park and Hampden. Wasn’t going to get involved in this but I see unnecessary pot-shot’s taking place now.
Bill1903 says:
March 15, 2014 at 4:37 pm
Oooh stop it you!!! Sensitive stuff.
Allyjambo says:
March 15, 2014 at 4:26 pm
==========================
It just goes to show the stupidity of deciding the semi-final and final venues so far in advance. I still think we should know whether the club from Ibrox have been paid up front though!
😯
Bring on the Sevco
😉
There was a wee debate on Sportsound about DU’s protests. Initially offered 11,000 tickets (whit?). Also made their reservations about venue known at the time (DU told Jim Spence).
I can see the point. Few tickets on offer, recent history of animosity fuelled by Charles Green (‘enemies of Rangers’) with fans following his lead, boycotts, etc. No reason the game cannot be moved, unless, as suggested, money has changed hands, but that is surely not the case.
Lets not get ahead of ourselves.
Certain people, I’m one of them believe Rovers will win.
It is incredibly stupid that decisions were taken that stood a great chance of creating this grossly unfair scenario. Even the decision to stage the final at Celtic Park was wrong. A very simple solution (shouldn’t have needed to be a ‘solution’) would have been to have a semi at both Celtic Park and Ibrox, with the final played at Ibrox if Celtic were in it, or CP if TRFC made it. If they are so desperate to supply their favoured club with additional revenue they could have made the final Ibrox unless that club was involved. I’m sure Celtic could have lived with playing a final against TRFC at Ibrox if that was the outcome.
That, to me, is such a simple solution (might need tweeked a bit) that I have to wonder why Regan and co couldn’t come up with it themselves. Could it be, just a wee maybe, that they had been told there was a likelihood that, without the guaranteed payment from two extra, high revenue, matches in April, TRFC wouldn’t make it till a May Cup Final day?
ianagain says:
March 15, 2014 at 6:03 pm
I take it your confidence is based on an ‘honest mistake’ free quarter final replay!
Ally
No the way they used the pitch. 9 ft shorter width to stifle the ‘well.
I can see it being extra time and penalties.
Ibrox playing surface looks worse than hamilton palace grass parks.. Cost cutting?
Good article from on-fields-of green How can any rangers fan take the glib and shameless liar seriously, he is over for a holiday, nobody invested in rangers will give this fame seeking charlatan the time of day bar MSM… Kingy go buy a blazer and tie ffs…!!!
TSFM.
I cannot really believe someone gave the thumbs down to your last post!
Statement from Govan Club
http://t.co/DsSDfZyyYu
The two over riding factors re the grounds are these: there was no need to announce the grounds. Sportsound today kept saying that the clubs wanted the early decision. What clubs? Can’t see it makes any difference to any clubs bar 2 and they could have been told any final or semi involving one half will be played at the other half’s. Seems simple to me. Secondly no club has a pitch fit to play two semis two days in a rOw in April in Scotland. This should never have been an issue.
Thirdly, and I didn’t even intend a ‘3’ can I assume Ibrox will be withdrawn as a neutral venue from now on since they can’t cope with segregation.
Can I f…
valentinesclown says:
March 15, 2014 at 6:43 pm
You can almost hear that huge sigh of relief from every TRFC supporter worldwide. That’s it then, no problems at Ibrox. No intention to use the stadium or Murray Park as security; for the loans they can’t get! They have plans (yes, more plans) for future investment. Well maybe they didn’t say that; they have plans to look for future investment, they just don’t know where yet. And so on…
Oh, wait a minute, the GSL has still to give his version of the discussions. I wonder how much of what he says will match the board statement:
i) None = bad news for the bears
ii) Some = bad news for the bears
iii) All = bad news for the bears
valentinesclown says:
March 15, 2014 at 6:43 pm
Statement from Govan Club
=======================
Dave’s been to the bus office and will be jetting out shortly. Bags packed, see you in the DR soon Dave. Bye bye.
valentinesclown says:
March 15, 2014 at 6:43 pm
1 0 Rate This
Statement from Govan Club
http://t.co/DsSDfZyyYu
————
“All good. Everyone in agreement. Fans will be told when they can give us more money … er …invest again.”
Dave King’s take on this will be fascinating.
Results of the demo poll below. I have to admit to being a little surprised. I tend to think that flies in the face of the TU/TD trends on the blog – although voting was only possible for registered users (who are in turn the only people who can comment) and TU/TDs are available to casual visitors.
My inference being of course that the older we get the less (in general) we cling to partisan views.
Clearly, the modal class is the 45-59 age group, and the mode can be estimated at around 56. I am a bit disappointed at the almost total absence of under-35s, but draw your own conclusions 🙂
Group No %
Under 18 2 0%
18 – 24 6 1%
25 – 34 36 3%
35 – 44 224 19%
45 – 59 638 54%
60 – 75 264 22%
Over 75 8 1%
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
TSFM do we have any way of finding out how the poll result compares against the current age mix of fans currently attending games in Scotland?
Fantastic spat on sportsound ( that raises a lovely image but I digress). Spencey suggested Stephen Thomson would sit with the Utd fans fearing for his safety in the directors box. Cue faux outrage by everyone’s favourite st mirren fan.
Missed the end of it. Please tell me RFC can’t guarantee the peace (if not the safety) of their own directors in the box, never mind anyone else’s
Dave
Do wings “glint in the sky”. on their way out or is it just inbound?
Please tell me someone pointed out…
As you were.
Surely, AJ, it will be the SFA who should be collecting and allocating ALL the gate money? That would be what would happen at Hampden I would think. ❓ ❓
UPTHEHOOPS says
Ibrox is unavailable due to post commonwealth games work, including the pitch being relayed, as is Celtic Park and Hampden. Wasn’t going to get involved in this but I see unnecessary pot-shot’s taking place now.
————————————
Fair enough didn’t know about Ibrox and the commonwealth games.
Ianagain re Albion Rovers
Not a chance will they win against The Rangers.
It just won’t happen infact if it does I’ll donate 50 quid to the TSFM fund.
The Rangers/Albion Rovers v United match should be at Parkhead or Firhill
Aberdeen v St Johnstone should be at Easter Road/Tynecastle
It’s not rocket science it’s just common sense ffs
Ryan G
is this why you get frustrated – from RR
—————————————————-
15 Mar 2014 07:44:17
A hibs fan at work is saying we are 4 weeks late with our accounts to the league? Anyone heard anything -ed?
mullad
{Ed039’s Note – I cant see anything in SPFL articles of association about having to adhere to certain dates, Rangers have until end of March to lodge their interim results with the stock exchange at the latest
Interim accounts late. but that’s nothing unusual in the big business world. they were due March 14th. but no big worry. they will be out for end of month most likely with details of loan being the reason for lateness?
ALLY
{Ed039’s Note – They arent late, they have 3 months from the end of the accounting period to publish the accounts, the end of the accounting period was 31st December 2013. This is AIM rules)
Bill1903 says:
March 15, 2014 at 7:42 pm
Not a chance will they win against The Rangers.
It just won’t happen infact if it does I’ll donate 50 quid to the TSFM fund.
_______________________
Do you know something we don’t? 😉
upthehoops says:
March 15, 2014 at 4:47 pm
Ibrox is unavailable due to post commonwealth games work, including the pitch being relayed, as is Celtic Park and Hampden.
——
Fair comment, upthe. This wasn’t explained in the article I read, and my first thought was similar to Bill’s.
As for capacity concerns, Palacio – do Celtic get upwards of 50,000 for Euro Qualifying games (please don’t quote “official” attendance figures)? I genuinely don’t know. Infrastructure cannot be a problem, or HSE would have stopped games being played there already.
scottc says:
March 15, 2014 at 7:40 pm
But TRFC will be getting a fee for the use of Ibrox (X2) for the semis, possibly a percentage of the crowd (alternatively a fixed fee), something Dundee United will never be in a position to enjoy.
My motivation for making this point, though, was to introduce a comparison (unstated) with the Aberdeen/Inverness scenario where the match is played at a completely neutral venue with both sides benefitting equally financially from the enhanced Aberdeen support, though Inverness will be disadvantaged by the much larger Dons’ support. While, I’m sure, ICT will welcome the extra cash, despite being disadvantaged by the enhanced support for their opponents, I’d suggest that Dundee United would rather see the total crowd reduced, with a few more thousand of their fans there to even out the vocal support, and maybe reduce the chances of honest mistakes (that quip was perhaps unfair 🙄 but if honest mistakes can be excused, it’s usually when one side’s support drastically outnumbers the other’s by putting pressure on the ref), or play at a totally neutral ground where one of their opponents advantages is removed.
Hey Angus
Have you left your lovely wife yet? 😆
The Rangers statement is so unprofesional that you would be led to think it was one of the Easdales that penned it,bully boy undertones,the real puzzler for me is the bit about the finance plan that will be released in a few weeks ,just before season book renewal deadline ,do they mean the bears have to fork out for next season before this season is finished,reads that way to me ,oh deary deary me.
FIFA says:
March 15, 2014 at 8:30 pm
No matter who wrote it, if that was the sum total of things discussed, and King didn’t blow his top, what was the point in him ‘jetting in’? No mention of anything King had to offer, no mention of how the board approached his ‘plans’ for the season ticket boycott that’s not a boycott. I will be very surprised if King doesn’t tell a totally different tale. Then again, I won’t be surprised if King says nothing much.
Just a wee thought, though. With Super Salary’s bear cred at an all time low, could King be the lure this time round for the season ticket push? His bear cred is sky high; suddenly he finds the board have everything under control and that all have Rangersitis! The GSL heads back to SA.
Allyjambo says:
March 15, 2014 at 8:08 pm
7
0
Rate This
scottc says:
March 15, 2014 at 7:40 pm
though Inverness will be disadvantaged by the much larger Dons’ support. While, I’m sure, ICT will welcome the extra cash, despite being disadvantaged by the enhanced support for their opponents,
_______________________________________________
The Don’s forty-thousand-and-twelf-ths man will possibly give them an advantage. But I for one do not consider it an unfair one. Quite the opposite. Just wish Caley could get anywhere near those numbers!
The Pars fans have got the message 😀
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/03/16/thumbnail/5ubyju7e.jpg
Hope link works, knowing my luck with technology…
Allyjambo says:
March 15, 2014 at 9:12 pm
6 0 Rate This
The Pars fans have got the message
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/03/16/thumbnail/5ubyju7e.jpg
Hope link works, knowing my luck with technology…
———————–
Unconfirmed rumours that the flag was taken off them by The Rangers supporters outside the ground 😡
valentinesclown says:
March 15, 2014 at 6:43 pm
1 0 Rate This
Statement from Govan Club
http://t.co/DsSDfZyyYu
————————
In response to Mr King’s concerns about the security of Ibrox and Murray Park, the Board reiterated that it has no intention of using these properties for any measure of security.
really….?
“Easdale has offered Rangers a £500,000 sum on a no-fee basis, while Laxey Partners will lend the club £1m, with both sums secured against the Edmiston House and Albion car park facilities near Ibrox”
and if the b******t re the “loan” wasn’t enough it looks as though strong drink had been taken…
“Both parties agreed that the aims of the Club are to compete at the highest levels of Scottish and European football. “
Resin_lab_dog says:
March 15, 2014 at 9:00 pm
It is fair because everything else is equal, there is no, what Mr McCoist called, home advantage.
Would it have been the same if, say, Hearts – well capable of taking 30,000+ to Ibrox, well they do to Hampden – were already there? Or Hibs? Or Aberdeen? Wait a minute, what if it was Celtic? If the ground, for whatever reason, isn’t capable of handling a 50/50 split, then it should never have been chosen, and should be out of the running for future prestige games if it doesn’t get sorted out.
Bill1903 says:
March 15, 2014 at 9:29 pm
What? Surely not. They gonna wave it at their next home game?
But sadly, I would not be in the least surprised if what you say is true. And that the custodians of law and order stood back and watched it happen.
parttimearab says:
March 15, 2014 at 9:31 pm
0
0
Rate This
valentinesclown says:
March 15, 2014 at 6:43 pm
1 0 Rate This
In response to Mr King’s concerns about the security of Ibrox and Murray Park, the Board reiterated that it has no intention of using these properties for any measure of security.
________________________
…is this something to do with disputed title? i.e. Much as we’d love to, we have no intention of trying to raise finance against assets whose ownership is disputed because we know that could land the directors into serious legal bother.
Allyjambo says:
March 15, 2014 at 9:36 pm
4 0 Rate This
Bill1903 says:
March 15, 2014 at 9:29 pm
What? Surely not. They gonna wave it at their next home game?
But sadly, I would not be in the least surprised if what you say is true. And that the custodians of law and order stood back and watched it happen.
————–
I’ve seen a picture online of Sevco ultras holding the flag upside down which is meant to be an insult.
Smugas says:
March 15, 2014 at 7:16 pm
======================
I think you will find it on record that Neil Lennon did not sit in the Ibrox Directors Box due to safety concerns. The Rangers response was it was Celtic security that did not want him to sit there. I guess that makes it okay then.
I listened to what’s-his-name-Craig Houston- last night and again to day.To give him his due, he articulates well and is a committed fan of his club.
But having read the Board’s version of the meeting with the ‘Glib and shameless one’, I think the said Craig might properly be committed…… into medical care!
Even I was ready to believe that the Board might have accorded King a degree more respect than a patronising and dismissive “he has been helpful” !
Surely Houston must now acknowledge that King is a man of straw, decidedly unwilling to part with any sponduleks of his own,and unable to mount any kind of life-saving exercise by some crazy season- ticket Trust scheme? And as easily and contemptuously brushed aside as a mildly irritating South African bush-fly?
The Union of Fans have to realise that there is to be no saviour, and that common sense dictates that they throw no more of their money to the leeches in hope that they will come good.
I can’t quite get my head around the SFA’s twisted decision to allow a “home” semi final for one club rather than ensure a neutral venue.
And then the insult of not even offering an even split of the tickets should enough fans take them up.
Its mind boggling stuff.
Add these to the silent acceptance (approval?) of one member club leading a boycott against another last year, and Dundee United really do seem to be getting shat on by the SFA at every turn right now.
Perhaps time they took the SFA to the courts, as this seems to bring no penalty from the SFA they have nothing to lose.
The cup final tomorrow has an uneven ticket allocation. The initial allocation will have been based on an assessment of likely take up. If Dundee United take up all their allocation then they can likely apply for more. If there is no more available then they can complain about the allocation at that point. I’d agree that a neutral venue should indeed be neutral but tomorrow Celtic Park will be a neutral venue. This is currently a moot point in my opinion.
I’ve thought for a while that SFA headquarters should be moved out of glasgow to gently ease them out of the glasgow football mentality that seems to pervade the whole organisation. More convinced as each season goes by.
Stirling seems a nice central location for both a national governing body and (should it build one) a football academy.
Might be the start to a slight opening of the eyes within the corridors of “power” ?
Castofthousands says:
March 15, 2014 at 10:58 pm
0 0 Rate This
=================
Tomorrows final would have been equitably split if enough fans were prepared to take them up. Thats not an uneven allocation, thats an uneven take up.
So have Dundee Utd have been told 13,000 is an initial allocation? Can you point to that anywhere?
Seems to be suggested that this is their final and full allocation.
TSFM says:
March 15, 2014 at 6:21 pm
“…I think that there may a slim opportunity to construct a dialogue.”
—————————
I can only imagine that the Harper McLeod response is a holding statement. If, as ianagain so usefully discovered, the Charlotte materials become admissible in the Collyer Bristow case then it becomes a whole new ball game.
If the LNS enquiry can be shown to have been misled by its own appellate body then the whole process can be called into question. This is a Pandora’s box that a lot of people will want to sit on the lid of. Just keeping the conversation going until the CB case resurfaces in January 2015 may be all that is required to bring excruciating pressure to bear. In the mean time it is possible that the UTT will return a verdict.
Perhaps you want to draw a line in the sand indicating that in certain circumstances you would consider it appropriate for these matters to be revisited.
Matty Roth says:
March 15, 2014 at 11:03 pm
“So have Dundee Utd have been told 13,000 is an initial allocation? Can you point to that anywhere?”
———————————
No I can’t.
I’m not defending the decision just putting forward the logical retort that might be employed by those who would. If DU do take up their full allocation and it transpires to be the final allocation then they will be stuffed. However it will be difficult for them to argue they have been stuffed until they take up their full current allocation. It is a far from satisfactory situation but I think that being able to predict opposing arguments puts you in a better place to advance your own argument. DUFC can speak for themselves and I’m sure their fans will rattle a few cages if demand looks like its going to outstrip supply.
Club statement
==============
The 6 paragraphs could have been condensed:
“… investment in the Club will be required as part of the medium term strategy…
The Board and Mr King agreed…that both parties share a common vision for the future of the Club.”
==============
So ‘Smiler’ must be relieved that he is not having to put his hand in his own pocket – he and the Board are united in their belief / expectation that the fans have to step up… 🙄
Castofthousands says:
March 15, 2014 at 11:19 pm
0 0 Rate This
Matty Roth says:
March 15, 2014 at 11:03 pm
“So have Dundee Utd have been told 13,000 is an initial allocation? Can you point to that anywhere?”
———————————
No I can’t.
I’m not defending the decision just putting forward the logical retort that might be employed by those who would. If DU do take up their full allocation and it transpires to be the final allocation then they will be stuffed. However it will be difficult for them to argue they have been stuffed until they take up their full current allocation. It is a far from satisfactory situation but I think that being able to predict opposing arguments puts you in a better place to advance your own argument. DUFC can speak for themselves and I’m sure their fans will rattle a few cages if demand looks like its going to outstrip supply.
===============================
Thats true CoT.
So why would the SFA tell them in advance what their maximum allocation is? Or should we assume this to be an error in the BBC reporting for the moment? It all seems a bit odd to me and I think it will be felt as insult to injury by DU and their fans. With justification I think.
Nope
That Statement summarises a heated stand off between a mouse and a grumpy elephant
They are calling Kings bluff
This ticket allocation seems to be an endemic problem with TRFC. We (Raith Rovers) are getting a 3500 allocation for the match at Hibs 20700 seat capacity stadium. We are getting the Famous Five stand which my Hibs friends tell me is 7500 capacity so it looks like we’re not even getting half a stand. It’ll be like a home game for them.
If the shybrox is a neutral venue for the semi let the neutral fans buy tickets 50-50 after all it is supposed to be a football spectacle the oldest trophy. Like they do in the states and then see if it’s a home tie or not. Might let some people know what life will be like if and when there is a return to higher volume games.
Angus1983 says:
March 15, 2014 at 8:05 pm
5 3 Rate This
upthehoops says:
March 15, 2014 at 4:47 pm
Ibrox is unavailable due to post commonwealth games work, including the pitch being relayed, as is Celtic Park and Hampden.
——
Fair comment, upthe. This wasn’t explained in the article I read, and my first thought was similar to Bill’s.
As for capacity concerns, Palacio – do Celtic get upwards of 50,000 for Euro Qualifying games (please don’t quote “official” attendance figures)? I genuinely don’t know. Infrastructure cannot be a problem, or HSE would have stopped games being played there already.
————————————–
Yes, I believe Celtic get 50,000+ for Euro Qualifying games, why dont you? I have been to a few sellouts from Ajax in 2001 to present. 58,000 attendance at the most recent game against Karagandy, unless you know any different can you please enlighten me.
Good luck in the final tomorrow, these days do not come around too often, so hope you enjoy it, me, I’ll be supporting the underdog as usual 🙂
Good Morning everyone,
First time poster here but been a long time lurker.
If the South African tax cheat does somehow get the supporters cash from season ticket books is this not playing right into the hands of Laxeys and the Easdales? If the season ticket money is not available for the club then there is no chance that TRFC will be able to pay their recent loans…………bye bye Edminson House and Albion Car Park.
The spivs must be rubbing their hands together at the prospect of King coming back on the scene as he has done them one hell of a favour!
Whullie says:
March 15, 2014 at 2:11 pm
44 0 Rate This
Slightly OT (ish) but there was a real jaw-dropping quip from Derek Johnstone on SSB last night in respect of Dave King’s F&PP status, and I quote:-
“There is the law and there is football law. The SFA will use football law”
It went unchallenged by Jim Delahunt.
……………………
Another example of the WATP mindset which treats the rest of us with utter contempt.And they wonder why nobody likes them???
theoldcourse says:
March 15, 2014 at 11:48 pm
24 1 Rate This
This ticket allocation seems to be an endemic problem with TRFC. We (Raith Rovers) are getting a 3500 allocation for the match at Hibs 20700 seat capacity stadium. We are getting the Famous Five stand which my Hibs friends tell me is 7500 capacity so it looks like we’re not even getting half a stand. It’ll be like a home game for them.
===========================
You have my sympathy oldcourse. If Raith can take more than 3500 (i’d think they can personally) then they should have the opportunity.
Its really not difficult for any similar game actually, each team should be given the opportunity in principle of having half the stadium full. If as ticket sales proceed it becomes apparent one side cannot sell their full allocation then and only then should more tickets be made available to the other side.
The SFA and SPFL claim these games are neutral, so why can’t they treat fans of both teams equally?
Why must fans of some clubs be more important than others?
Matty Roth says:
March 16, 2014 at 7:51 am
‘..Why must fans of some clubs be more important than others?’
————
There are 500,000,000 people in the world to whom your question is as little meaningful as a child’s “why is the sky?”. 🙂
It is an immutable law of Scottish Football, as deeply etched in the souls of the ‘peepul’ as the law that says that ‘fair play and sporting integrity are for mugs’ is at the core of the black hearts of our Football authorities and sporting press.
Found this article on Dave King from Last year. This line leapt out at me;
“On paper therefore King has made back all of the money he handed over to Sars earlier this year –and more.”
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/moneyweb-the-money-whisperer/dave-king-and-i
Who says crime doesn’t pay. No wonder Bears want him in charge of their club, I wish he took care of money for me! I wish I had money to look after to be honest……….
C
John Clark says:
March 16, 2014 at 8:38 am
7 0 Rate This
Matty Roth says:
March 16, 2014 at 7:51 am
‘..Why must fans of some clubs be more important than others?’
————
There are 500,000,000 people in the world to whom your question is as little meaningful as a child’s “why is the sky?”. 🙂
It is an immutable law of Scottish Football, as deeply etched in the souls of the ‘peepul’ as the law that says that ‘fair play and sporting integrity are for mugs’ is at the core of the black hearts of our Football authorities and sporting press.
==============================
I suppose if taxes are only for the poor then governance is only for small clubs.
I’d see the whole SFA dismantled from top to bottom and a new organisation, with the sort of honesty we should expect form any sports governing body. Preferably based outside of our major cities as I think that can help a new perspective to be found.
On the subject of who gets what from the semi-finals , Rule46(g) of the Scottish cup competition (SFA Handbook)rules appears to say this:
” The receipts from the Semi-Final matches shall be pooled and shall be deemed
to include monies received from all admission charges to the matches, radio and
television fees, and any sums in respect of advertising within the stadium specially
for the occasion.
The Association shall retain 10% of the balance, after payment of the expenses of
the two matches and the clubs’ guarantees.
The remainder, after payment of the rental for the use of a ground or grounds, the
scale of which shall be determined by the Board, shall be divided, equally, between
the four clubs”
Seems reasonable?
It will be interesting ,in the least,if the powers that be attend the Rangers cup final with RR,as in all finals before, our ears will be treated to some of the sounds that ,for some reason,these guys have selective deafness,no, the more tickets they give them ,the louder the obscene singing will be,I think we should be asking them to be observant and deal with this ,oh look ,there’s 2 men in white coats comming up the path.
John Clark says:
March 15, 2014 at 10:19 pm
==========================================================================
JC(nee JCe!)…so you have been and gone and done it…!
I assume you will carry over your history…or have you arranged to buy it with a loan from Mr D King?
John Clark says:
March 16, 2014 at 9:30 am
4 0 Rate This
On the subject of who gets what from the semi-finals , Rule46(g) of the Scottish cup competition (SFA Handbook)rules appears to say this:
” The receipts from the Semi-Final matches shall be pooled and shall be deemed
to include monies received from all admission charges to the matches, radio and
television fees, and any sums in respect of advertising within the stadium specially
for the occasion.
The Association shall retain 10% of the balance, after payment of the expenses of
the two matches and the clubs’ guarantees.
The remainder, after payment of the rental for the use of a ground or grounds, the
scale of which shall be determined by the Board, shall be divided, equally, between
the four clubs”
Seems reasonable?
====================
It seems reasonable enough and with honesty from all parties would work fine IMO.
However there are 2 grey areas are there not?
1.) The expenses of the 2 matches
2.) The rent that is set
But its not as if we are dealing with the sort of people who would artificially inflate expenses to say for example rip off a charity event.
Or say the sort of people who would happily rip off the rest of the very sport that gives them an income, allow them to thrive.
Are we?
FIFA says:
March 16, 2014 at 9:37 am
====
I think we will find that Mr Ogilvie is “doing the honours” as the esteemed (but conflicted) president of the SFA, and since he is already very well acquainted with the “songbook” in question, then his ears won’t be offended in the slightest.
If I live to be 100, I will never comprehend the collective thinking of our clubs in handing the “conflicted one” another 2 years in office. These are the clubs who rely on our money, but who seem to think they can treat us like a bunch of complete chumps at the same time as banking our cash.
Matty Roth says:
March 16, 2014 at 10:16 am
John Clark says:
March 16, 2014 at 9:30 am
I presume that on the basis of good governance and transparency they will be operating an open books arrangement for the semi final finances and an audited and certified statement for the participating clubs!
calums obsession says:
March 16, 2014 at 9:02 am
5 0 Rate This
Found this article on Dave King from Last year. This line leapt out at me;
“On paper therefore King has made back all of the money he handed over to Sars earlier this year –and more.”
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/moneyweb-the-money-whisperer/dave-king-and-i
Who says crime doesn’t pay. No wonder Bears want him in charge of their club, I wish he took care of money for me! I wish I had money to look after to be honest……….
C
————
Great read. So he is worth a few bob then? The case against King gives the phrase ‘wealth off the radar’ a quite literal meaning.
Funny neither he nor McColl will stump up, though.