3,234 thoughts on “Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?”

1. 
   

   Greenock Jack says:
   March 20, 2014 at 9:47 am
   0 0 Rate This

   Auldheid

   Without going into the merits or otherwise of your particular crusade I’d like to once again make a general broadbrush comment that concerns society at large, how it seems to operate and the consequences.

   At a national political level (UK), if the powers that be can “manage” judicial enquires when it is themselves that are being looked into (“Hutton style”:Blair quote) then what message does that send out and what tone does that set?

   Subsequently, if the people just accept it because “that’s how things are” and that they really can’t be bothered then it enboldens others to do the same in a trickle down cultural effect. If people are interested in a society with reasonably even-handed accountability then I repeat for the XXth time, it has to start at the top. Until it does then it isn’t really in the interests of those in power to buck a particular trend.

   One unified and successful big battle at the top would suddenly make all those smaller fights a lot easier.

   On the way you’d have the added bonus of reducing the power of the professional liars and misleaders of organisations (“PR”) that help facilitate the pathway society is embarked upon. One that rewards those best able to spin the truth into something else.

   The above should be considered as you look towards your children and think about what the parental generation of today are going to leave them.
   ==================================
   I agree with your sentiments that change needs to take place at the “top” of our society. However, we as a group are unlikely to effect this change no matter how much we want to. Auldheid’s crusade (if that’s the right word) is certainly one were we can make a difference.

   Better to fight the battles you can win than to lose those you never stood a chance in.
2. 
   

   ecobhoy says:
   March 20, 2014 at 9:08 am
   ‘… I believe that the Bryson ‘Definition’ was known to the SPL before the Hearing began and the decision was made not to contest it…’
   —————
   Looking at it in the cold light of day, it is extremely unlikely that Bryson suddenly and of his own initiative thought up that ‘definition’. It is so manifestly absurd and so out of kilter with any ordinary understanding of the purpose and meaning of the rules that not even he would have been stupid enough to ‘ad lib’ on his own initiative. He must have known that there would be no challenge to his nonsense. And that would have been the case only if there had been prior,cabalistic agreement and assurances (can we imagine that any of these guys trust each other?) that there would be no come-back.
   I think we are dealing with extremely devious and calculatedly cynical men, long accustomed to ignoring truth and to being sheltered from hard questioning and serious critical examination by the MSM.
   Not only SDM provided succulent lamb, perhaps.
3. 
   

   Within the corridors of power, there is something very rotten. The more we investigate, the more the stench becomes stronger. The liquidation of rangers and the consequent back flips from the games rulers has not only backed them into a corner with nowhere to go but has shown our legal system to be totally incompetent.

   LNS is a learned man and assumed to be fair and impartial. So how can his decision leave such a bad taste? Bryson’s interpretation should’ve been dissected as to leave him looking the fool that he is but instead it’s left the highest echelons of our judicial system looking like the fools.

   As I said, something is sitting askew and I pray we get to the bottom of what has happened because until we do, this festering sore will never heal
4. 
   

   TomTom
   Better to fight the battles you can win than to lose those you never stood a chance in.
   ————————————————————–

   I can understand that logic but until their is a cultural shift then you swim against a very strong tide.

   To effect change at the “top” is increasingly difficult as relatively recent and ongoing legislation is designed to upgrade the strong tide to as close to tsunami level as they can push it. The way it’s looking is that we are heading effectively into a non-accountable world where ignorance and fear feature strongly.

   This brings me back to Scottish football.
   The Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 is actually a good example of how things are progressing and could almost be labelled as a “political experiment” to see how far they could push things on a particular group within society / precedent.
5. 
   

   Donegaltim says:
   March 20, 2014 at 10:17 am

   If a striker is faced with an open goal but ends up blootering the ball into row Z the referee can’t award a goal.
   He has to say it is a goal kick to the opposition.
   I may be wrong but did LNS not find himself in a similar situation by having to deal with the evidence as it was presented to him as opposed the type of evidence and hard questioning we all hoped for?
6. 
   

   IMO any trial, investigation, hearing with respect to WTC, FTTT, UTTT, player registration and ANY illegal or possible illegal action, or form of cheating from this Govan club will never be dealt with in an honest and truthful way. The reason why is because it is all being dealt with in Scotland. No other country’s Football Association would defend a team as such as our established Govan club. Hopefully I will be proved wrong as we all live in hope. Over the past 2 years the evidence seems overwhelming against them on many issues yet they are really still unscathed and also no Club Chairmen have taken up any challenge (although the licence issue was raised at Celtic AGM and is ongoing) against them, why? Heavily conflicted Campbell Ogilvie is still in power to this day why? Even today I read that the SFA and D. Utd want to deal with the ticket issue in private, why?. The 5 way agreement was conjured up in private and to this day the true details are not known of it’s content. Shameful that a team called rangers still play football, while claiming all their history when they were supposed to be going through liquidation, again unchallenged by our SFA. Do not say they are now called the rangers as it insults the whole of Scottish football fans intelligence, well the ones outside Govan. As fans we know and feel they should be made accountable for their actions and as one when the SFA cowardly left the decision to us supporters we all stood together and as a result of this the Govan club plied their trade in the 4th tier of Scottish football (this was not what the SFA foreseen or wanted). They will never give us the chance again as they know we without fear or favour demand sporting fairness, we also do not like secrets. Certain organisation do things in secret and privately, this is football our sport why have secrets? What are they scared of ? Why can every football club not be treated the same? IMO one football club is treated differently and it is no secret who they are.
7. 
   

   Coaching and management are key to results in football.

   Bryson was well “coached” and Lord Nimmo Smith was “managed”.

   Beautifully managed.
8. 
   

   wottpi says:
   March 20, 2014 at 10:36 am
   2 0 Rate This

   Donegaltim says:
   March 20, 2014 at 10:17 am

   If a striker is faced with an open goal but ends up blootering the ball into row Z the referee can’t award a goal.
   He has to say it is a goal kick to the opposition.
   I may be wrong but did LNS not find himself in a similar situation by having to deal with the evidence as it was presented to him as opposed the type of evidence and hard questioning we all hoped for?
   ===============
   I disagree. This was not a court of law, but an internal hearing by a private organisation, LNS was free to conduct the hearing in any way that he chose. He decided on an adversarial basis, but it was still open to him or his fellow panel manners to question Bryson on the nonsense he was spouting. I have experience of the old tax tribunal, the Special Commissioners, which was run on an adversarial system, but the Commissioners were very quick to raise any doubts that they had direct with the witnesses. And that was a court of law. So I just do not accept the line that poor old LNS had to sit and listen to this garbage, but couldn’t ask any questions. He and his colleagues CHOSE not to ask any questions. Don’t ask me why, or else I’ll answer and cause TSFM problems. The whole thing was a stitch up from start to finish, in my opinion.
9. 
   

   Why has no other club (most recently Brora ) seen fit to exercise the precedents set in the application of the rules by LNS.

   I’m a bit thick, but I think the reason is because the LNS commission does not offer a precedent, in fact it had only one purpose and that was paid for by those who wanted it. A whitewash.
   IMO the decision not to appeal it, was more corrupt than the worthless opinion it arrived at.

   And then there is the topic of who paid for it, was that ever disclosed? No wonder CG didnt want to pay it, the SFA needed it as much as he did.
10. 
    

    Greenock Jack says:
    March 20, 2014 at 9:47 am

    “One unified and successful big battle at the top would suddenly make all those smaller fights a lot easier.”
    —————————————-
    Many a formidable fortress has had its foundations undermined by simpletons wielding picks and shovels. The authority of those in governance will only be wrested from them when their position becomes precarious. Those who might wrest control will be unwilling to make the attempt if there is a significant chance of failure. They must await their moment. That moment will arrive upon the last few strikes of pick and shovel.
11. 
    

    neepheid says:
    March 20, 2014 at 11:06 am

    As I said I may be wrong and happy to go with your suggestion.
    I too am surpised LNS didn’t ask any pertinent questions.
    It is unlike a Sheriff or Judge not to throw in their tuppence worth when faced with nonesense.
12. 
    

    Castofthou.
    Many a formidable fortress has had its foundations undermined by simpletons wielding picks and shovels. The authority of those in governance will only be wrested from them when their position becomes precarious. Those who might wrest control will be unwilling to make the attempt if there is a significant chance of failure. They must await their moment. That moment will arrive upon the last few strikes of pick and shovel.
    ————————————————–
    ETA?
    Pounds and pence (holding back) will get you further than direct (legal) correspondence.

    ps. For every Ten words you use I will but employ One !!
13. 
    

    Slightly O/T

    Budget Summary March 2014

    Users of tax avoidance schemes to be required to pay tax upfront before
    arguing about it in court
14. 
    

    Greenock Jack says:
    March 20, 2014 at 11:48 am

    “ETA?”
    ———————————-
    Hope doesn’t rely on an estimated time of arrival. It springs eternal. A small trickle of water can over time wash away all the fines from a building foundation leaving it balanced on a mound of rounded rocks. The only notice you get of imminent collapse are a few hairline cracks.

    If you want a timetable to the future then for me you are mixing up the future with the past.
15. 
    

    Castofthousands
    Hope doesn’t rely on an estimated time of arrival. It springs eternal. A small trickle of water can over time wash away all the fines from a building foundation leaving it balanced on a mound of rounded rocks. The only notice you get of imminent collapse are a few hairline cracks.
    ————————————————————

    Modern day management of such situations has evolving and ever more effective ways of filling any hairline cracks. Therefore today we enjoy less accountability, then spin-doctors or relevent techniques are employed to find ways to make us believe that 2+2 = 5.

    For every ten people who may “get it” there will be a thousand who don’t and like the bookies, they play the numbers.
16. 
    

    Valentinesclown @ 10.48
    Totally agree;one further point to add;throughout all these hearings,tribunals etc,only one person engaged in and ruling on all of this has truly had a dissenting view,a woman.I regard this as hugely significant,there’s much more to this,much more than the fortunes of an ailing football team
17. 
    

    @Auldheid.
    You have my utmost respect in not only all you have done, but in how much you care about the game, and the way we would all like to see it run. That is properly, and openly.
    Having the LNS decision re-visited, I feel may be a very steep, upward battle. Maybe a wee stepping stone is required to help in the climb.
    Do you consider that there may be a stepping stone, a window of opportunity if you will, whereby, rather than take the LNS verdict head on. use the interim period, between the conception of the SPL and the starting date of when LNS was asked to begin his investigation from, to have a new inquiry opened into this period.
    If pressure can be brought to bear on the SPL/SPFL, to open a new inquiry into evidence relating to wrong-doing during the 1998/ 1999 SPL beginnings to the 2000 start date of the inquiry, then a favourable outcome, would surely impact on how the LNS decision is viewed, and indeed show it to be flawed.
18. 
    

    Exo hoy
    The money frozen to cover the wee tax bill was allocated to other tax debt.
    HMRC told Rangers this and Rangers were not happy bunnies. It’s all in CF.
    The wee tax bill has never been paid in collection terms.

    There is an unforeseen benefit for TRFC arising in that if UEFA did not rule TRFC as a different legal entity requiring three years SFA membership, then TRFC would only get back into UEFA competition if they paid the wee tax bill plus of course the other tax money CW stiffed HMRC of not to mention the possibility of any tax due if HMRC winning the appeal at the UTT.

    So three years away seems not a bad deal. 🙂
19. 
    

    NTDEAL says:
    March 20, 2014 at 12:43 pm
    15 0 Rate This

    Valentinesclown @ 10.48
    Totally agree;one further point to add;throughout all these hearings,tribunals etc,only one person engaged in and ruling on all of this has truly had a dissenting view,a woman.I regard this as hugely significant,there’s much more to this,much more than the fortunes of an ailing football team
    —————————————————————————————————————————————–
    Really good point and I agree this reaches outwith our game and the often used squirrel phrase paranoia is only a term that the SMSM use to hide their shame and cover the truth and as such is not even an answer to the problem, or in any way an aid forward in this sham.. There are hidden agendas and issues among certain powerful people whose attitudes and beliefs seem to be able to be allowed to influence our sport without fear or favour and sadly this seems to be embedded in the corridors of the SFA and beyond. Terms like the fabric of society an institution and the famous social unrest, do we really think these are related to football and one club in particular and nothing else, really?
    One man, Campbell Ogilvie sums up our game. We know where his allegiances lie, he is suppose to look after our game and all it’s clubs. He is looking after IMO only one club which is classed as the fabric of our society. I will never trust any decision from the SFA while he is still there.
20. 
    

    incredibleadamspark says:
    March 19, 2014 at 5:29 pm
    40 51 Rate This

    The venues had the potential to benefit both Glasgow teams and it was stupid to announce them before the semi final stage was reached and the teams known. Rangers are left in the tournament and Celtic aren’t so many on here, predictably, get all worked up and view this as yet more ‘proof’ as bias towards one club. I’ve read some on here speculate whether Rangers have been paid already for the games at Ibrox and if this in normal practice for the SFA. No speculation if Celtic have been paid already for use of Parkhead for the final, though.

    Whataboutery and petty Old Firm rivalry is alive and well.

    —————————————————————————

    More than a grain of truth in this post….love when the TU/TD hits a fault line among the users! There is little doubt in my mind that the unavailability of Hampden presented the SFA with a problem that must be solved in the usual manner…that is to satisfy both sides of the Glasgow divide or there will be hissy fits all over. The decision to award the final to CP meant a rapid and equivocal awarding of the semis to Ibrox, in an effort to ‘even’ things up. (remember the media coverage of Ally’s dissatisfaction at not ‘getting’ the final?) If you happen to support another team…..well…..as usual just suck it up. What must never happen is fans of either of the Glasgow giants having to travel, this natural order is of course very much the agenda of the hacks. Hampden must be the only ‘neutral’ stadium in the world where the two biggest clubs in the association have their own ends.

    I have to say the coverage of the league cup final similarly reflected another dimension of the ‘natural order’. I lost count of the number of pundits and journalists who commented on the ‘importance’ of a Dons victory, how it is ‘absolutely vital’ for the dons to win. I accept of course Aberdeen lifting the cup in front of 40k is on a level is ‘good for the game’ (and congratulations to you all), but I would have thought it equally ‘important’ and ‘vital’ for ICT to win the cup, a club who have achieved extraordinary success on limited resources, and desperately need a couple of thousand on their gates and a gala day parading the cup would have helped. What a story! joining the senior league set up only 20 years ago and lifting the League Cup, this too would be ‘good for the game’. But for the 2nd week in a row, I witness an official bottle the big call late in the game and in effect hand the tie to the club with 40,000 fans.
21. 
    

    Corrupt Official

    Good suggestion to offer as an option and could be the minimum required although the decision will be the SPFL’s.

    In that respect they will have to decide on the best course for them.

    In their shoes, given the long term harm that allowing the LNS findings to overule what most thought the rules were for, and given the nature of payments not reported is the core difference between clerical error and cheating, I would suspend LNS wait for the FTT and use the time to get a ruling from FIFA on registration and clarify the principles that justify points deduction for administration and articulate them in the rules for avoidance of doubt. Then with all the information to make a decision let the cards fall. That is what I would to unravel a bad “fix”.

    Hearts supporters should be asking under what principle they got points deducted for going into administration.

    We all know the rules say so but why are there rules? What fair play principle are they trying to protect and does that principle read across to other activities other than administration?
22. 
    

    NTDEAL says:
    March 20, 2014 at 12:43 pm
    ‘…only one person engaged in and ruling on all of this has truly had a dissenting view,a woman.’
    ——————-
    And interesting to note that Judge Bishopp ( England based President of the Tax Chamber) rather thought it was a nonsense that anonymity was granted to all of the allegedly cheating businesmen and footballers in what was a run-of-the-mill tax avoidance/evasion case!
    And it’s odds on that certain golf clubs in Scotland would not welcome the truth-seeking Dr Poon.
    These two honourable persons are clearly not part of the incestuous nexus of legal, press, political and business types across the central belt of Scotland,who see nothing untoward in, for example, Army chiefs celebrating with a bigoted minority or in politicians trying back-door methods to strong-arm the Revenue.
23. 
    

    Crisis loan at extortionate rates to keep the lights on and Ally wants more players…Perhaps their wages would come from the £400k he gave back in salary or the £200k the ex CFO gave back in bonus. Maybe the players will come from the American academy Bocanegra was setting up for Green…
24. 
    

    For the avoidance of doubt, Ally’s scouting needs are another squirrel

    Remember he and McDowell flew over all the way to Honduras to watch Peralta themselves before signing him….

    http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/22753154

    “We’re delighted Arnold has agreed to join us,” said McCoist. “We went over and watched him playing for Honduras against Panama and he performed well.

    He subsequently signed a 4 year deal – but has only played 11 times this year in the 3rd tier of Scottish football – and has already stated he wants to leave this summer…….

    http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/265606-rangers-arnold-peralta-plans-to-look-for-another-team-this-summer/

    Scouting dept? Who needs them…………
25. 
    

    @Auldheid.
    I agree with all your points, and in finality it will be an SPFL decision. I also believe that they were not outflanked, and were happy to concede to the verdict of LNS without reply, mainly because it suited.
    The powers that be don’t like being told they got it wrong, and when backed into a corner, will react like a caged animal. They need an escape route, and comforted that you mean them no harm. It is not an attack on them, so to speak.
    Separating the DOS from the EBTs, the legal from the illegal, at the time, will throw a new perspective on LNS’s adjudication, but gives him the “If only I had known” get out clause to review his original decision.
    If Doncaster can be persuaded that he will be portrayed as the dogged Mr Chips, or the Mountie who got his man, I think he might jump at the chance to have some credibility restored. He can hide behind the complexity of events issue.
    If he goes for it, I will certainly give him some credit. It is a fact that he is crucial to moving this issue forward. Having him onside, could be key. I believe someone will need to be granted an amnesty. It might as well be the one who can kick the chocks away from the wheels.
26. 
    

    Up The hoops 7.10

    On its own this narrative might run into the sand but it is a narrative involving CO that is very well know by now in the SPFL and the msm although they have not engaged yet.

    Then there is Res12 asking questions about the SFA monitoring of the UEFA licence in 2011 where either failure to follow the rules can be identified or the rules need changed to meet purpose. The former can be restricted to the SFA, the latter would involve UEFA. Either way it is a snooker.

    Then there are SFA sponsors. Ralph Topping is CEO of William Hill, sponsors of the Scottish Cup and the SPL Chairman who had concerns over the leniency of the LNS decision. Although no longer at SPFL and due to retire from WH, he has a very good idea of the whole LNS process and if he now sees it was misguided he might want W Hill to consider it’s sponsorship of an organisation that his punters will increasingly see as corrupt especially if the SPFL do nothing on LNS. Well that point has been put to him to consider and other sponsors might start asking questions rather than have their product (particularly betting) associated with an enterprise that is incompetent at best and corrupt at worst.

    The bad publicity surrounding the semi final at Ibrox is a case in point. I mean a club chairman preferring the safety of being surrounded by his own fans rather than the traditional director’s box. What kind of sporting event is that to be associated with?

    Scottish football is sponsored in other ways locally. That is another pressure point that will force change. I mean why put hard earned money into a corrupt enterprise?

    Heid doon, keep gaun.
27. 
    

    Corrupt Official

    They have been offered the perfect escape route from a hole the SFA dug for them.

    Everybody was misguided by D&P withholding the DOS documents.

    Only one person, could have provided the correct guidance and yet in spite of excusing himself on grounds of being conflicted, actually gave testimony that made no reference to the irregular nature of the early ebts that were known to be so from April 2011 when Rangers made provision for the liability arising. A liability CW publicly took on at takeover in May 2011.

    The SPFL will never get a better opportunity to modernise the SFA to be the much more professional set up it needs to be to meet the challenges of modern day football in Scotland and Europe.

    If only someone of vision and leadership would step forward.
28. 
    

    @Auldheid says.
    “A liability CW publicly took on at takeover in May 2011”
    If I remember correctly, it took CW by surprise, and was almost a deal breaker.
    You have got some memory my man. Your encyclopaedic knowledge is invaluable to sieve brains like myself. 😉
29. 
    

    Test. No postings since 4:44pm?
30. 
    

    Doubt this would have happened if they were ‘THE’ Rangers.

    I am holding out some hope that Brora will perhaps put forward the Bryson defense if the SFA and HFL the lad’s original registration was accepted and the error was discovered later. It was clearly discovered after the game was played.
    That would throw the cat amongst the pigeons.

    Perhaps a email from Auldheid and others to the Brora Chairman may be in order??

    http://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Brora-Rangers-consider-legal-action-over-cup-expulsion-20032014.htm

    BRORA Rangers are to consider taking legal action against the Highland Football League unless the club is reinstated in the Highland League Cup.
    It follows a decision taken at an emergency meeting of the HFL on Monday night to expel the team from the cup for fielding an ineligible player.
    Youngster Liam Watt came on in Brora’s 3-0 victory over Clachnacuddin in the preliminary round earlier this month.
    By a majority vote the committee decided to award the tie to Clach – a decision which has angered Brora Rangers club chairman John Young.
    He said: “Liam was brought on in the dying minutes of the game. Brora were winning 3-0 at the time. We later discovered that the player was not properly registered, due to an oversight by the club, the first such occurrence in over 20 years.

    “While we fully accept this oversight, it is only right to expect any sanction to be fair.

    “This decision simply beggars belief. We have been subject to a decision being made behind closed doors.

    “We are even denied the basic right to appeal by both the HFL and SFA (Scottish Football Association). There is no justice in this whatsoever.

    “This is about fair play in sport. We have sought legal advice and will be asking the HFL to revoke its decision.

    “We fully intend to take this all the way – our players, management and supporters deserve nothing less.”

    The club have instructed a solicitor, who has written to HFL president Finlay Noble, demanding that the decision is rescinded.

    Also reported here

    http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/News/Brora-Rangers-to-contest-cup-ban-20032014.htm
31. 
    

    Corrupt official says:

    March 20, 2014 at 4:44 pm

    18

    0

    Rate This

    @Auldheid says.
    “A liability CW publicly took on at takeover in May 2011″
    If I remember correctly, it took CW by surprise, and was almost a deal breaker.
    You have got some memory my man. Your encyclopaedic knowledge is invaluable to sieve brains like myself
    ==========================
    It was almost a deal breaker earlier in 2011 (March?) but got sorted as part of the takeover discussions.

    I happened to be researching the matter last week and my memory is good at recalling fuzzy links that Google sharpens.

    http://scotslawthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/shareholders-circular.pdf

    (e) The Rangers FC Group is to contribute to the Club the amount required to meet a liability
    owed by the Club to HM Revenue & Customs in relation to a discounted option scheme tax;
32. 
    

    wottpi says:
    March 20, 2014 at 7:16 pm

    “… We later discovered that the player was not properly registered, due to an oversight by the club,…”
    ——————————-
    Not sure if we have equivalent context but here is LNS para 86:

    “Evidence was given by Alexander Bryson, Head of Registrations at the SFA, who
    described the registration process. During the course of his evidence he explained that, once a
    player had been registered with the SFA, he remained registered unless and until his registration
    was revoked. Accordingly, even if there had been a breach of the SFA registration procedures,
    such as a breach of SFA Article 12.3, the registration of a player was not treated as being invalid
    from the outset, and stood unless and until it was revoked.”

    I can’t put my finger on SFA article 12.3. I have the following references only (via HirsutePursuit):

    2006

    FINANCIAL RECORDS
    12.All clubs and recognised football bodies shall keep and maintain for a minimumperiod of 5 years detailed financial books and records in connection with theirtrading activities including without prejudice to the foregoing generality details of the ground and stand admissions, members tickets, turnstile arrangements and allother related activities. The Board may arrange for an inspection of all such books,records and details for the purposes of National Club Licensing and/or by theAssociation’s auditors or other professional advisers duly appointed by it on givingto any club or recognised football body reasonable notice of its intention to do so.Furthermore, all payments, whether made by the club or otherwise, which are tobe made to a player solely relating to his playing activities must be fully recordedwithin the relevant written agreement with the player prior to submission to this Association and/or the recognised football body of which his club is in membership.

    2009

    FINANCIAL RECORDS
    12. All clubs and recognised football bodies shall keep and maintain for a minimum period of 5 years detailed financial books and records in connection with their trading activities including without prejudice to the foregoing generality details of the ground and stand admissions, members tickets, turnstile arrangements and all other related activities.
    12.1 The Board may arrange for an inspection of all such books, records and details for any purpose, including but not limited to, National Club Licensing. Such inspection may be conducted by the Board, such authorised employees of the Association, the Association’s auditors or other professional advisers duly appointed by the Board on giving to any club or recognised football body reasonable notice of its intention to do so.Furthermore, all payments, whether made by the club or otherwise, which are to be made to a player solely relating to his playing activities must be fully recorded within the relevant written agreement with the player prior to submission to this Association and/or the recognised football body of which his club is in membership.
    ———————————–
    Perhaps someone would be able to post the pertinent article 12.3?
33. 
    

    Corrupt official says:
    March 20, 2014 at 4:44 pm

    If I remember correctly Craig Whyte had agreed to pay between £2.5M-£3.5M for the club when the Wee Tax Case came to light. This was knocked off the value of the club and, in accepting this liability, the club was sold for £1. What is the betting that the £2.5M-£3.5M saved in the purchase price was squirrelled away into some offshore trust or fund?

    It is difficult to keep a grasp of the facts with all the revisionism being carried out by the print media and radio pundits. In a few years time no one will be allowed to mention Craig Whyte. He will be whitewashed (no pun intended) from “The Rangers” marvellous/incredible 140 year history!!!
    Keep remembering. Write down each sorry chapter and keep it for this will be the true account of the greatest sporting scandal ever NOT to be witnessed in the UK.
    That will be the biggest legacy of the last few years, that when a truly huge story was there for anyone who wished to scrape the surface, no one, NO ONE within the entire journalistic community in Scotland wanted to break the story. No one wanted to ask the difficult questions. In fact no one wanted to ask any questions. Everyone of these so called journalists should have carved on their headstone; “I came, I saw, I queued for a press release, and went away again.”
    Shame, shame, and shame on them again.

    As and aside. Dear me, it just seems that Brora Rangers are just not Rangers enough to avoid all repercussions against any misdemeanours they may have committed.
34. 
    

    Found it. It’s not really pertinent but I’ll post it for completeness.

    “12. Financial Records
    12.1 All clubs and recognised football bodies shall keep and maintain for a minimum period
    of 5 years detailed financial books and records in connection with their trading activities,
    including details of the ground and stand admissions, members tickets, turnstile
    arrangements and all other related activities.
    12.2 The Board may arrange for an inspection of, and may require the relevant club or
    recognised football body to provide copies of, all such books, records and details for any
    purpose, including but not limited to Club Licensing. Such inspection may be conducted
    by the Board, or by such authorised employees of the Scottish FA, the Scottish FA’s
    auditors or other professional advisers duly appointed by the Board on giving to any club
    or recognised football body reasonable notice of its intention to do so.
    12.3 Furthermore, all payments, whether made by the club or otherwise, which are to be
    made to a player solely relating to his playing activities must be fully recorded within the
    relevant written agreement with the player prior to submission to the Scottish FA and/or
    the recognised football body of which his club is in membership.”

    Here’s the link (are you capturing these TSFM?).

    http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/ScottishFAPublications2012-13/SFA_HANDBOOK_53-136_Articles_of_Association.pdf
35. 
    

    Auldheid says:
    March 20, 2014 at 4:19 pm

    If only someone of vision and leadership would step forward.
    ————————————————————————————–
    If only some one who is heavily conflicted would step backward
36. 
    

    Rangers fans extend the hand of friendship as only they know how 😥

    http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/rfc-politics/320-dundee-united-are-out-of-control
37. 
    

    No1 Bob says:
    March 20, 2014 at 8:20 pm

    “Rangers fans extend the hand of friendship as only they know how :cry:”
    —————————————–
    I think that’s a bit harsh.

    Tin hat on.

    I think the ticket allocation issue may be a bit of a storm in a teacup. If DUtd sell their full allocation then they might have an argument. As I understood the SFA statement concerning allocation, further tickets may be available if called upon. DUtd should have some indication by now of interest in tickets so should be able to make representations to up the allocation if necessary. It may be that some DUtd fans are reluctant to attend the game for their own personal reasons but you can’t have it both ways; we want more tickets but we may not use them.

    Mr. Thompson will have his own reasons for not wishing to sit in the Ibrox Directors box. As has been pointed out, TRFCL’s call for a boycott of a previous cup meeting between the sides will have caused bad blood. Whether this runs so deep that Mr. Thompson feels vulnerable in the Director’s box is a wee bit inflammatory possibly. Perhaps he wishes to build a fortress mentality within the team and supporters. However this might cut both ways and inspire TRFCL to put one over them in revenge for what they see as a slight.

    Just to add, the article is a bit heated and does have a gnashing of teeth about it but when you strip away the bile there are a few salient points in there.
38. 
    

    Castofthousands says:
    March 20, 2014 at 7:45 pm
    ‘….once a
    player had been registered with the SFA, he remained registered unless and until his registration
    was revoked. ..’
    ———
    Looking at the Highland league cup competition rules,
    “(b) A player may not play for any Club unless he was registered for that club before the start of the comp
    etition OR was registered for a Club from a designated Affiliated National Association as per Article49 of the Scottish Football Association Articles of Association or theNorth Caledonian F A….”
    And Art 49 of the SFA Articles :
    “49.
    The Association’s designated Affiliated National Associations shall be: the Scottish
    Amateur Football Association, the Scottish Junior Football Association, the Scottish
    Schools’ Football Association, the Scottish Welfare Football Association, Scottish
    Women’s Football and the Scottish Youth Football Association. An Affiliated
    National Association shall not be a member of another Affiliated National
    Association”
    I wonder if young Liam Watt of Brora Rangers was registered with any of those Associations?
    If he was , then Bryson’s Rule would surely apply! Assuming that his registration had not been formally revoked, of course.
    Any Brora fans on here to express a view?
39. 
    

    TSFM, the edit function is back to normal. Thank you.
40. 
    

    Surely the simplest solution is just to drop ‘Brora’ from their name.
41. 
    

    John Clark says:
    March 20, 2014 at 9:16 pm

    It seems that Liam Watt made three apperances for Brora prior to the League Cup tie.
    Came from ICT and made his debut for Brora as a sub on 9 November 2013.
42. 
    

    wottpi says:
    March 20, 2014 at 9:32 pm
    ‘ .It seems that Liam Watt made three apperances for Brora prior to the League Cup tie.
    Came from ICT and made his debut for Brora as a sub on 9 November 2013.’
    ———-
    Thanks for that , wottpi. I hope someone comes on to give us the precise grounds on which the H L management committee decided he was ineligible. Their rules for league matches seem to be different from those for league cup matches, as far as my cursory glance at them suggests. But I would love to see Bryson’s Law being able to be invoked in Brora’s defence.
    And what an antiquated idea that there should be no right of appeal from the decision of a bunch of guys who are your cup competitors!
43. 
    

    Castofthousands says:
    March 20, 2014 at 7:45 pm
    “..Perhaps someone would be able to post the pertinent article 12.3?.”
    ————-
    Is this the one? (from SFA articles of association 2011):

    “12.3 Furthermore, all payments, whether made by the club or otherwise, which are to be made to a player solely relating to his playing activities must be fully recorded within the relevant written agreement with the player prior to submission to the Scottish FA and/or the recognised football body of which his club is in membership.”
44. 
    

    In terms of the Semi Final nonsense, it is worth recalling what happened the last time Hampden was out of commission, in 1997-98.

    Celtic and Rangers (IL) were paired in the semi final which was to be played at Celtic Park. Rangers being drawn out first were the designated home team and the SFA insisted that in the interests of neutrality the tickets be split 50:50. The capacity that day was 48,000.

    Rangers (IL) were given all of the main stand and all of the Lisbon Lions (Rangers (IL) End) in addition. Celtic were given the North Stand and the temporary wee stand (now the Jock Stein stand).

    Whilst the tickets were split 50:50, because for some unknown reason Rangers had been given the entire main stand, the TV coverage of the game picked up, in the main, only the singing of the Rangers fans.

    With the forthcoming cup semi final, whilst it may well be that Dundee United do not sell 20,000 tickets, the equitable starting point should be that they are given the West half of the main stand (so that their directors may sit in safety where they rightfully should be, the Directors’ Box), all of the Broomloan Stand and then as far into the Govan Stand as they can sell, up to the halfway line.

    TRFC should be given the entire east half of the stadium up to the halfway line, and then any seats in the west end of the Govan Stand that Dundee United cannot sell.

    That at least would be a start towards equity.

    It says everything about Scottish football today that such a notion would be dismissed by the SFA’s Darryl Broadfoot as the rantings of a madman.

    Darryl of course is one of the brainchilds behind the “let’s see how many fans they took to the semis” school of ticket allocation. If it comes to that, there were 24,000 at United’s last semi whilst TRFC has never played in a semi but the last two semi finals involving its precessor attracted 17,000 and 23,000 respectively.

    Ticket allocation has always been a black art; remember when Hampden was newly opened Celtic and Hibs were drawn together in the 2001 final. After much protest from Hibs, word came from on high that henceforth the ticket allocation for finals would always be 50:50 and so they were awarded 25,000 tickets, (having had an average attendance that season of 10,000), the same number of tickets as Celtic who in those days had 53,000 season ticket holders.

    Two years later, Rangers and Dundee qualified for the final over an April weekend. Before the Monday morning papers had gone to press, the SFA had already announced that in view of the number of Rangers fans who would want to see their team tilt at the treble, Dundee would be offered 13,000 tickets as a maximum. That was it, end of story, no debate, the 50:50 argument of 2001 quietly dropped.

    The insidious side of Scottish football is alive and kicking and as a storm brews round the SFA’s flagship competition, the chief executive is busy sunning himself in Australia, right at the business end of the football season. It beggars belief – or rather it would, if this were not Scotland.

    27 to 27
45. 
    

    Cast of Thousands- sorry, hadn’t seen that you had found the reference! Up and down making tea and toast for Mrs C and generally not focused tonight! 😐 🙁
46. 
    

    With the continuing fiasco of the Dundee United ticket allocation for the Scottish Cup Semi – Final against TRFC at “neutral” Ibrox, the starting point for ticket allocation should be 50/50 to both teams after the deduction of any Sponsors tickets.
    Only if one team does not wish to take up their full ticket allocation, should these unsold tickets be offered to their opponents, as with Inverness only requesting 7000 tickets for the League Cup Final.
    What the SFA has now manufactured/created is the continuation of a totally corrupt organisation that will break,bend,ignore or make up any rule to ensure that their favoured club is given every possible advantage over their opponents.
    The SFA have used the argument that Dundee Utd have failed to sell more than 8500 tickets for their last two semi-final appearances. It should be remembered that TRFC have never appeared in a National Semi-final in their 2year existence and therefore there is no relevance whatsoever as to how many Dundee Utd supporters turned up for their last two semi-final visits.
    Until this totally discredited organisation of the SFA is completely reformed there is no hope of any Sporting Integrity returning within Scottish Football in the near future.
47. 
    

    While TRFC have extended their “hand of friendship” to the SPFL Division 2 and 3 club supporters during their 2 year tour of the smaller clubs in Scotland, the possible prospect of their return to the SPFL in eighteen months time must bring trepidation to the supporters of SPFL teams.
    As a season ticket holder at one of the SPFL “diddy” teams, I and many others have been subjected to years of the “minority ” TRFC supporters singing their bile at every away ground in Scotland.
    This unacceptable practice has continued during their two year tour of SPFL Division 2 and 3, despite the complete denial by the football authorities and SMSM.
    While my team have performed poorly within the last two years, there has been a significant improvement in the stadium atmosphere at all games in the SPFL, as the poison created by the TRFC supporters has thankfully been absent.
    The prospect of their future return to the SPFL is quite depressing.
48. 
    

    John Clark says:

    March 20, 2014 at 9:16 pm

    I’ve sent a short e mail to Brora referring them to Bryson Law. There is a contact page on their web site where you could expand on the issue using the rules.
49. 
    

    M8 Dreamer
    While my team have performed poorly within the last two years, there has been a significant improvement in the stadium atmosphere at all games in the SPFL, as the poison created by the TRFC supporters has thankfully been absent.
    The prospect of their future return to the SPFL is quite depressing.
    —————————————-

    Such an improvement in atmosphere that it melts and destroys many seats at Fir Park (still waiting on the promised SPFL investigation, sweep sweep), causes the worst hooliganism seen at Dens Park for many years and produces a horribly posionous affair at Tynecastle. Balance isn’t the strong point of this blog.
50. 
    

    John Clark says:
    March 20, 2014 at 10:07 pm

    “Up and down making tea and toast for Mrs C and generally not focused tonight!”
    ———————————–
    Thanks all the same JC.

    As an aside, I’ve been reading back over the LNS posts from back in February/March 2013. It is sorry stuff. I like to try and be impartial but I can understand how many would find this difficult in the light of events.

    It is a wearisome task and is designed to grind us down. A year later however there is still life in us.

    I was absent from the blog at the time concerned. The day following LNS I took the opportunity to go hillwalking. There was only a light dusting of snow on top of the Cobbler that fine first day of March. So warm for the time of year I was stripped down to my T-shirt with my trousers rolled up by the time I hit the snow line. I tried to ascend the last couple of hundred feet but I just couldn’t get a grip. For the first time in my life the prospect of an ice axe in my hand would have been most welcome. Next time I will be more suitably equipped for the escapade. Experience is a worthy tutor. So it is with many things.

    Hope you enjoyed your cuppa with the Mrs. We all need a rest now and again. Then refreshed and reinvigorated we move on, picking a careful path.

    We may not be able to easily breach the snow line. We may have to better equip ourselves to make further progress. By God though, I think we might have the measure of this terrain.

    54 (reasons to keep on keeping on) to 0 (reasons to turn back now).
51. 
    

    John Clark/ WOTTPI

    I’ve lurked on the site for a long time and been impressed by many of the posters delving into things, what has been posted about Brora has me joining in at long last, take it easy on me.
    My understanding of the Brora situation is the player was unregistered and depending on your definition of playing ( mine is being listed on the team lines) the number of games is closer to 10 than 3. The Brora website has him down for a total of 6 appearances. Brora took part in the prelimanary round of the League Cup and I am not sure how it was found out the player was unregistered.
    From reading the Handbook of the league it appears to me to be the correct decision for the League Cup and has me wondering about his appearances in the league if it is correct he was not registered with the SFA.
    Brora signed up to the Handbook, why are they complaining now about the rules other than they have been caught out.

    Fitba North is a highland website where there is a lot of posts about the matter, well worth joining to have a look.
52. 
    

    Greenock Jack says:

    March 21, 2014 at 12:01 am

    Such an improvement in atmosphere that it melts and destroys many seats at Fir Park (still waiting on the promised SPFL investigation, sweep sweep), causes the worst hooliganism seen at Dens Park for many years and produces a horribly posionous affair at Tynecastle. Balance isn’t the strong point of this blog.
    _____________________________________________________________

    Just as well we’ve got you then Jack – keep us on the right path like …
53. 
    

    Greenock Jack says:
    March 21, 2014 at 12:01 am
    ……………………………..

    I see the whataboutery is alive and strong…you seem to be suffering from the same thought process of the SMSM….

    M8Dreamer says:
    March 20, 2014 at 10:49 pm
    ……………………………………

    In future M8Dreamer my friend….can you also include any concerns you may have concerning another Glasgow club in the East end of the city as apparently…GJ and the SMSM believe it is only possible to condemn both at the same time…unless of course it doesn’t involve the club from Govan in which case it is fair game to single out one club…

    Ps..SPFL investigation, sweep sweep…it wouldn’t be the first or last time sweeping took place…think Berwick…think Northumbria Police…2 years and counting and not a single word from those at the top of Scottish football…

    M8Dreamer and his thoughts aren’t the issue…the SFA are and the sooner you realise that the better.
54. 
    

    Some discussion on the WTC and D&P’s use of the word “settled” in their creditors report. I’m not sure this matters.

    LNS recognised that their were side letters in relation to certain players that had not been disclosed. They conclude however, that these payments were not “irregular” (citing the FTTT decision) and that no sporting advantage was gained.

    What they miss is that Rangers had already accepted liability with respect to the DOS scheme. Any payments relating to side letters that referenced the DOS scheme were therefore “irregular”.

    LNS said:

    (4) The relevant SPL Rules were designed to promote sporting integrity, by mitigating the risk of irregular payments to players;

    (5) Although the payments in this case were not themselves irregular and were not in breach of SPL or SFA Rules, the scale and extent of the proven contraventions of the disclosure rules require a substantial penalty to be imposed;

    (6) Rangers FC did not gain any unfair competitive advantage from the contraventions of the SPL Rules in failing to make proper disclosure of the side-letter arrangements, nor did the non-disclosure have the effect that any of the registered players were ineligible to play, and for this and other reasons no sporting sanction or penalty should be imposed upon Rangers FC;

    Since Rangers used a cost-saving method of remuneration that was not lawfully available to its competitors, it is self-evident that a sporting advantage was gained.

    For the purposes of LNS it is irrelevant, in my view, whether Rangers later paid the debt from the WTC. The key aspect is their admission that the DOS payments were not “lawful”.
55. 
    

    HirsutePursuit says:

    March 21, 2014 at 1:08 am

    Yup it s not relevant to the pursuit of the LNS commissioning issue (although the bill never was paid, but nothing unusual in that.)

    What is helpful is I had worked from (5) and the use of the term “not in themselves irregular” (irregular for short) to justify challenging the commissioning itself but missed the significance of (4 ) which tells us what I had always thought, i.e. irregular payments meant sporting advantage.

    That definitely needs bringing out ion the response and is why the issue cannot be dropped.

    Thanks.
56. 
    

    HirsutePursuit says: March 21, 2014 at 1:08 am
    ——————————-
    We should also remind ourselves of Mr Black’s (SDM’s) evidence to the FTTT.

    From Para 36. “Mr Black did not consider the Trust as a means of tax avoidance, but rather as a means of retaining and rewarding loyal employees. So far as Rangers was concerned it enabled the Club to attract players who would not otherwise have been obtainable.”

    The same thing was stated by Andrew Thornhill (QC for Murray Group) at the UTTT.
57. 
    

    Auldheid says:
    March 20, 2014 at 11:59 pm

    I’ve sent a short e mail to Brora referring them to Bryson Law. There is a contact page on their web site where you could expand on the issue using the rules.
    ===========================================
    The difference is of course that Brora Rangers have ‘Brora’ in their name. Let us hope they go public in any questions they have that only once in the history of Scottish football have incorrect player registrations been treated the way they were with the Bryson interpretation. Yet the Scottish media have the audacity to discuss corruption at FIFA.
58. 
    

    The comments about how many seats can a two year old new club sell who have never been in a semi are pointless. For once we are talking solely about available support and although we are all agreed, sane people anyway, it’s a new club. It’s the exact same support.
59. 
    

    slimshady61 says:
    March 20, 2014 at 10:06 pm
    =======================
    Well said Slim. That’s why I find it so tiresome when posters go on about the ‘Glasgow’ bias of the SFA, when history shows bias towards only one club in Glasgow. I can think of no other club that has suffered the type of attacks from the SFA as Celtic has, yet still we have people lumping Celtic in with the club from Ibrox. Were it not for the terrier like tenacity of Celtic figures like Robert Kelly and Fergus McCann the discriminatory treatment of Celtic would have gone unreported. Even more recently, when a Referee lied to the Celtic Manager, and the then SFA Referee Supervisor backed up the lie in public despite knowing it was a lie, the SFA tried to sweep everything under the carpet. Again, the tenacity of then Celtic Chairman John Reid made it clear Celtic were unwilling to accept second class citizen status. The response from the bowling club mentality Referee’s committee was to call a strike. Yes a strike, because a club had the temerity to question why a Referee lied. No point in going over again who the media sided with.

    The bottom line is the SFA have largely favoured Rangers above all other clubs. Not just since 2012, but for the history of the game.
60. 
    

    AG66
    The comments about how many seats can a two year old new club sell who have never been in a semi are pointless. For once we are talking solely about available support and although we are all agreed, sane people anyway, it’s a new club. It’s the exact same support.
    —————————————————————————————

    [] view Rangers and it’s age dependent on what subject they are broaching. For the “nasty things” they often brush over the “new” whilst if it suits, they pointedly push it.

    As for the question of the relationship between Rangers and Dundee Utd. supporters there is undoubtedly an edge and ill-feeling that goes back a 2/3 years now since the game at Tannadice was abandoned at HT due to the weather and new tickets had to be bought. However, this as far as I know has never become violent.

    The current tribal tit for tat has been caused by SFA ineptitude, the inability of executive management (member clubs) to deal with an issue in a timely manner (October 2013) followed by the media stoking the fire. I’d say that the episode is sadly typical of Scottish football.
61. 
    

    Upthehoops
    The response from the bowling club mentality Referee’s committee was to call a strike. Yes a strike, because a club had the temerity to question why a Referee lied.
    ——————————————————————————————————

    Celtic FC had in the summer prior to the incident you mention, unofficially declare that they would use any “conflict” with the SFA/referees to wage a “war of sorts” to push their interests. This was said by the club CEO and football manager whilst on a tour of supporters clubs Q&A’s.
    On the face of it, the main bone of contention had been referees decisions, with the club itself having sent a video of perceived injustices to the SFA earlier that year. What they forgot to include were the many favourable decisions of the previous season that helped them win the championship. I’m sure supporters of some provincial clubs would have had to stifle an ironic smirk about these “injustices”.

    This style of response was pre-meditated and I have always believed the more aggressive policy/stance taken by Celtic FC months before MacDonald blew for a penalty at Tannadice was only in small part down to referees. That the main reason was the push for a siege-mentality to try and halt the dramatic fall in home attendence numbers (were down approx. 20%) and therefore revenue. Revenue being one of the main priorties for a PLC and one where action was required due to the 20% figure.
62. 
    

    Greenock Jack says:
    March 21, 2014 at 8:54 am
    —–

    Interesting , we all seem the game differently, I remember Scott McDonald getting an off side goal against Rangers at Celtic Park but other than that please can you enlighten us on how the refs swung it for Celtic …….. on any given season say since records began!

    Note, Celtic got a disputed throw in in the 1989 Cup final which lead to a goal, so discount that one
63. 
    

    EKB
    Interesting , we all seem the game differently, I remember Scott McDonald getting an off side goal against Rangers at Celtic Park but other than that please can you enlighten us on how the refs swung it for Celtic …….. on any given season say since records began!
    ———————————-

    I don’t really want to get into the lists although I do remember a thread elsewhere with a long list of favourable decisions you enjoyed that particular season. I’ll try and locate it and post it.

    One more recent and relevent example was the Samaras penalty at Ibrox.
    Background is that Rangers desperately need CL cash and therefore firstly need to win the SPL. There are 10 minutes left, it’s 0-0 and a Celtic victory would effectively take away any chance of RFC retaining options on the CL money.

    There is a collision in the Rangers penalty area (expert analysis later says/ eyes see Stokes on his way down prior to contact).

    What happens next ?

    a. Award penalty and give CFC a gilt-edged opportunity from 12 metres to effectively win the title.

    b. Think “not sure / soft / benefit of the doubt to defender” play-on

    c. Remember I’m a Mason, play-on and try and make sure of a Rangers win because they desperately need lots of money.

    It’s incidental that Samaras missed the penalty or that Rangers failed to qualify for the CL group stages.
64. 
    

    upthehoops says:
    March 21, 2014 at 7:53 am
    tiresome when posters go on about the ‘Glasgow’ bias
    ————————————————————————————
    I agree that bias,real bias (not the odd wee silly decision during a game) is in favour of one team only. Anyone who thinks it is evenly balanced makes me despair.
    History shows they were treated differently before administration and since liquidation (oh yes it did occur) the club that we have now from Govan is taken over the same favours and bias from SFA etc….
    Fabric of our society cannot die, or will not be allowed to perish.
65. 
    

    Greenock Jack says:
    March 21, 2014 at 9:40 am
    0 2 i
    Rate This

    EKB
    Interesting , we all seem the game differently, I remember Scott McDonald getting an off side goal against Rangers at Celtic Park but other than that please can you enlighten us on how the refs swung it for Celtic …….. on any given season say since records began!
    ———————————-

    I don’t really want to get into the lists although I do remember a thread elsewhere with a long list of favourable decisions you enjoyed that particular season. I’ll try and locate it and post it.

    One more recent and relevent example was the Samaras penalty at Ibrox.
    Background is that Rangers desperately need CL cash and therefore firstly need to win the SPL. There are 10 minutes left, it’s 0-0 and a Celtic victory would effectively take away any chance of RFC retaining options on the CL money.

    There is a collision in the Rangers penalty area (expert analysis later says/ eyes see Stokes on his way down prior to contact).

    What happens next ?

    a. Award penalty and give CFC a gilt-edged opportunity from 12 metres to effectively win the title.

    b. Think “not sure / soft / benefit of the doubt to defender” play-on

    c. Remember I’m a Mason, play-on and try and make sure of a Rangers win because they desperately need lots of money.

    It’s incidental that Samaras missed the penalty or that Rangers failed to qualify for the CL group stages.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
    Boring. Really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really boring.

    Arbroath once didn’t get a cast-iron throw in. The game is corrupt.
66. 
    

    Campbellsmoney

    That’s kind of my point.
    It always cuts two ways and football supporters will be able to bring up instances when their team were “robbed”.

    However I take it back to the then new policy decided upon by Celtic FC, supposedly based upon this matter (refs) when IMO the more pertinent matter for the PLC board and main reason behind new policy was the 20% drop in home attendences in 1 season.
67. 
    

    I thought that refereeing decisions were off topic on this forum?
68. 
    

    Greenock Jack says:
    March 21, 2014 at 9:56 am
    0 1 i
    Rate This

    Campbellsmoney

    That’s kind of my point.
    It always cuts two ways and football supporters will be able to bring up instances when their team were “robbed”.

    However I take it back to the then new policy decided upon by Celtic FC, supposedly based upon this matter (refs) when IMO the more pertinent matter for the board and main reason behind new policy was financially based (20% drop in home attendences in 1 season).

    ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

    ….and would you have any evidence for that or is it just a hunch? You did say “IMO” – any fact based evidence why hold that “O(pinion)”?

    You don’t think its possible that CFC might just have been unhappy about the standard of refereeing because of the standard of refereeing? If I were running a business which had a falling customer base (and I have no knowledge about whether your assertion of falling attendances is correct or not – for present purposes let’s assume it is correct) I wouldn’t try and increase numbers coming through the door by effectively making allegations of corruption (in order to presumably get the fans to rally behind the cause – I think that is what you are saying isn’t it?).

    Do you think they should only complain about refereeing issues when attendandances are on the rise? Two things that happen at the same time don’t have to be connected.
69. 
    

    I note above reference to ‘a horribly poisonous affair at Tynecastle. ‘ I must have missed that . Are there reports from press witnesses present at the game or perhaps the report of an official investigation? Or is this a myth growing by the week?

    By way I think Tom English of BBC, among others have a cheek suggesting Thompson of DU has no reason to worry about his safety at Ibrox. The BBC alone spread the story that a manager was seriously abused and endangered at a neutral ground. It was the BBC that raised the ante.
70. 
    

    Diddy team fans don’t lump the big two together on the basis of equitable levels of SFA/MSM bias, who cares who enjoys the most favour? There is little doubt that the institutional bias is toward the team from Ibrox when the chips are down however. When they do lump them together it is because they perpetuate a joint business plan based on their rivalry (so far so good) which unfortunately includes the sectarian scam.
71. 
    

    ernie says:
    March 21, 2014 at 10:24 am

    Sectarianism isn’t a scam. It’s a part of real life, unfortunately.
72. 
    

    CM

    1. There is a great deal put forward in social media and beyond that can only be educated guesswork/hunches based on the interpretation of various facts, TSFM included.

    2. The numbers on attendences are approximately correct (within a percentage point). It was the season when they went from the high 50’s down into the 40’s. Since then they have been fairly steady although this is now down to ST sales rather than bums on seats. Last year the PLC decided to offer a large discount on ST tickets and may well repeat that for next season.

    3. “Siege Mentality” is a popular tactic within football clubs.

    4. Issues don’t have to be connected but equally they obviously can be. Policy has to have a reason/background. It’s not unreasonable to presume a PLC will look to protect it’s main income stream.

    5. If Neepheid is right about refs. then I’ll drop that side of things regards lists but I repeat that this involves the boardroom (sending SFA videos) and IMO subsequent policy decisions regards “approach/reactions”. This I believe is very much relevent to TSFM.
73. 
    

    Does McCoist need to be told that talking to players registered with other clubs about signing for you is ‘tapping up’? Does he think it only counts if you tell your pals in the media who the players are? Does he think we think his pals in the media conjured the names of the Motherwell guy and the St Mirren guy out of thin air? Does he think he can just do and say what he likes?
74. 
    

    Macheda to rangers, did I just read that…? The same rangers (players) who were asked to take a pay cut? The same rangers who recently took on an overly expensive pay day loan just to get by? The same rangers plying their trade in the lower leagues of Scottish football..? If that’s the best the man’s agent can do he should be sacked…

    Kenny Miller and Chris Boyd to rangers next season… Another story doing the rounds… How could Ally cope with that, neither can head a ball, he’d be forced to change his long ball tactics all together and try to slip the ball into these geriatrics… The rangers fans must be slavering over that possibility.

    rangers have some good young talent at the club for that not to be exploited is an absolute sin… McCoist at this moment in time with the rangers predicament is the worst man they could have in the job..
75. 
    

    JimB
    Free tip: Ignore media transfer gossip, it’s usually misinformation, part of a salesdrive or peepee.

Comments are closed.