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

1. 
   

   Here’s some competition news.

   Money distributed down the leagues in the new model.

   This year here’s who lost the most:

   Celtic 1 £2,405,000 (-£315,000)

   Motherwell 2 £1,718,000 (-£682,000)

   Motherwell loss for season at January 2014 – £184,500 (Guess “they” got a ‘Well player for their slice)

   Equity my A==
2. 
   

   justshatered says:

   March 1, 2014 at 10:19 pm

   Isn’t it strange that it was only Three Years ago that Craig Whyte was the greatest and everyone was wrong.
   Then in February 2012 Craig Whyte was bad, very bad, but Duff and Phelps were good.
   Then Duff and Phelps were bad, but still not as bad as Craig Whyte, but Charles Green was great.
   With the bold Charles came Brian Stockbridge and Imran Ahmed along with Margarita and Blue Pitch. As this group purchased the assets I don’t remember anyone, except us bampots, saying that they were not to be trusted and that it would end in tears. Tears of ‘The Rangers’ fans and tears of laughter for most onlookers who were derided for telling it as it was.
   Still, roll on a year and Imran has to go because he is bad, Charles has to go as he was an embarrassment and bad but still not as bad as Craig Whyte who seems to remain the devil incarnate. Lately Brian has also gone because he was very bad joining a rather large gang of bad men who had been linked the purchase of the assets.
   In the meanwhile Laxey’s and the Easdales have joined the throng. The Easdales were originally the new ‘good guys’ but now the jury seems to be out on them as well.
   ================================================================
   the Easdales have joined the throng. The Easdales were originally the new ‘good guys’ but now the jury seems to be out on them as well.

   Excellent post. Watch out for the above.

   I think King may be flying in to GLA and getting a non airport taxi to wherever he holes up and it wont be on the Clyde coast
3. 
   

   justshatered says:

   March 1, 2014 at 10:19 pm

   Breaking Bad? 🙂
4. 
   

   justshatered says:

   March 1, 2014 at 10:19 pm

   Isn’t it strange that it was only Three Years ago that Craig Whyte was the greatest and everyone was wrong.
   Then in February 2012 Craig Whyte was bad, very bad, but Duff and Phelps were good.
   =================================================================

   You forget the roll of very badness:

   Mr Ng had a look and it was bad.

   Mr Bill Millar (tow away king) was Good then bad (for looking under the hood)

   The brilliant sooper brainier than totally everyone guy was good for looking under the hood, spent millions and ran away. See above.

   There are probably more, however, be sure. Its all their fault and NOT Pretendygers. Who have been victimised.

   So there.
5. 
   

   Lack of competition ……..

   That could just as easily mean :

   The SPL would be a very competitive league if Celtic were not in it, and playing elsewhere. In fact i suspect that the Celtic CEO’s comments referred precisely to that scenario
6. 
   

   ianagain says: March 1, 2014 at 10:21 pm

   Here’s some competition news.

   Money distributed down the leagues in the new model.

   This year here’s who lost the most:

   Celtic 1 £2,405,000 (-£315,000)

   Motherwell 2 £1,718,000 (-£682,000)

   Motherwell loss for season at January 2014 – £184,500 (Guess “they” got a ‘Well player for their slice)

   Equity my A==
   ==============================

   That’s not the reason that Motherwell lost money last season..

   The distribution until RFC went bust (Season 2011/12) was as follows:
   1st 17%
   2nd 15%
   3rd 9.5%
   4th 8.5% and 0.5% less per position below that.

   For some reason ALL the SPL clubs agreed, for one season only, to change the distribution model for Season 2012/13 to:
   1st 17%
   2nd 10.5%
   3rd 9.5%
   4th 9.0% and 0.5% less per position below that

   It appears that ALL the “diddy clubs” agreed to take a little more with no Rangers in the equation, but leaving 1st (Celtic) intact, hence it was a unanimous vote. The result was that the amount received by the 2nd place club was significantly reduced from previous seasons but actually higher than Motherwell had received in any other season. Motherwell was one of the clubs who voted for that distribution model so they shouldn’t be whinging about it now.

   Given that the arrangement was for one season only, did all the clubs expect a new SPL setup for 2013/14 e.g. SPL1 and 2 with the tribute Rangers included?

   Anyway, the new distribution model which you illustrate above was based on the difference in the distribution between this season and 2011/12 and not 2012/13.

   The sad thing is that all the diddy clubs the clubs still appear to remain subservient to Celtic and the club that now calls itself Rangers, despite having the clout to change both the financial distribution model and the voting structure.
7. 
   

   Are the comments all down the left hand side of the page? Or is it just my computer
8. 
   

   Barcabhoy says:

   March 1, 2014 at 10:56 pm

   Lack of competition ……..

   That could just as easily mean :

   The SPL would be a very competitive league if Celtic were not in it, and playing elsewhere. In fact i suspect that the Celtic CEO’s comments referred precisely to that scenario
   =============================================

   Barca

   Agree, may well be what he was on about then why doesn’t he just say that and get on with it in that case?
9. 
   

   Here is where I took it from.

   http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/celtic/214554-financial-distribution-model-for-scottish-league-reconstruction-revealed/

   easyJambo says:

   March 1, 2014 at 10:59 pm

   0

   0

   Rate This

   ianagain says: March 1, 2014 at 10:21 pm

   Here’s some competition news.

   Money distributed down the leagues in the new model.

   This year here’s who lost the most:

   Celtic 1 £2,405,000 (-£315,000)

   Motherwell 2 £1,718,000 (-£682,000)

   Motherwell loss for season at January 2014 – £184,500 (Guess “they” got a ‘Well player for their slice)

   Equity my A==
   ==============================

   That’s not the reason that Motherwell lost money last season..

   The distribution until RFC went bust (Season 2011/12) was as follows:
   1st 17%
   2nd 15%
   3rd 9.5%
   4th 8.5% and 0.5% less per position below that.

   For some reason ALL the SPL clubs agreed, for one season only, to change the distribution model for Season 2012/13 to:
   1st 17%
   2nd 10.5%
   3rd 9.5%
   4th 9.0% and 0.5% less per position below that

   It appears that ALL the “diddy clubs” agreed to take a little more with no Rangers in the equation, but leaving 1st (Celtic) intact, hence it was a unanimous vote. The result was that the amount received by the 2nd place club was significantly reduced from previous seasons but actually higher than Motherwell had received in any other season. Motherwell was one of the clubs who voted for that distribution model so they shouldn’t be whinging about it now.

   Given that the arrangement was for one season only, did all the clubs expect a new SPL setup for 2013/14 e.g. SPL1 and 2 with the tribute Rangers included?

   Anyway, the new distribution model which you illustrate above was based on the difference in the distribution between this season and 2011/12 and not 2012/13.

   The sad thing is that all the diddy clubs the clubs still appear to remain subservient to Celtic and the club that now calls itself Rangers, despite having the clout to change both the financial distribution model and the voting structure.
10. 
    

    jean7brodie says:

    March 1, 2014 at 9:19 pm

    18

    1

    Rate This

    john clarke says:
    March 1, 2014 at 8:41 pm

    I am incandescent with rage over this and I am informing others about it.
    Is there a link to his comments in full?
    Thanks for posting your letter.
    =================================
    Scottish football is an industry in major trouble beset by many difficulties of which lack of competition is but one.

    It will be a number of years before it becomes competitive in terms of Rangers offering it. It really cannot wait that long nor can it be arranged or planned for, so I doubt that is what was meant.

    It could just as easy mean Celtic moving elsewhere which at a stroke would do the trick.
11. 
    

    ianagain says:

    March 1, 2014 at 9:54 pm

    6

    1

    Rate This

    Was trawling back a bit.

    Genuine question.

    Where is BRTH?
    ===============
    If there were two of him, one could open up in Edinburgh.
12. 
    

    ianagain says: March 1, 2014 at 11:15 pm

    Here is where I took it from.

    http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/celtic/214554-financial-distribution-model-for-scottish-league-reconstruction-revealed/

    =============================
    I’ve got a copy of that saved on my PC, along with last season’s SPL Rules which detail the distribution for 2011/12 and 2012/13.

    I remember being really angry at the time I became aware of the “one season” deal, but the clubs voted for it so they need to live with it.

    From STV’s perspective they are not wrong in showing the changes in this way they did. This season’s model was due to revert back to the 2011/12 model, but was superseded by the start of the SPFL. However it might have added some clarity had they mentioned the one-off arrangement last season and who got what, but for some reason it mustn’t have been deemed newsworthy.
13. 
    

    Barcabhoy says:
    March 1, 2014 at 10:56 pm
    ———————————
    Barcabhoy, I agree entirely. Jean, cool your jets.
    How many times is Lawwell going to be blamed for things he hasn’t said or done?
    It is crystal clear that the team playing under the name Rangers won’t be a power in Scottish football for a very long time, if at all. Rangers died, remember that, everything else flows from that fact.

    Meantime in answer to an earlier post, the reason for the TRFC accounts not being filed is simple; they don’t want anyone to see them; it is not incompetence by anyone, it is a deliberate policy often seen when a business is in trouble.

    For instance the disgraced former accountancy firm Tenon, which spent most of its life peddling what were in the main obscene tax avoidance schemes, went bust in September. For the previous year, the plc accounts were duly filed but those of the main trading subsidiary, which contained all of the murky secrets, were never filed even though you cannot prepare a holding company’s accounts without also preparing those of the subsidiary.

    TRFC holds the detail of who got paid what; the super salary goes through that company as does the no doubt reasonable remuneration of the board and any other payments to interested parties. More importantly the TRFC accounts would need to show the balance sheet at 30 June 2013 and contain a note about post balance sheet events, of which there have been many. Most importantly the auditor’s report would have to qualify the accounts if the auditors had concerns as to the future sustainability of the company.
14. 
    

    I’ll make a wee intervention here as undoubtedly we are headed for another bot of the big two in the EPL.

    Both think they have huge supports which would travel anywhere.

    Fact is they have huge supports which can easily get to their grounds in Glasgow.

    When working in England, particularly the north East it is very noticeable the amount of Newcastle and Sunderland fans both travelling to and from matches.

    I truly think these guys have the most mobile fans. I mean they come from everywhere.

    I really don’t see this happening with Celtic or Rangers moving around England.
15. 
    

    Barcabhoy says:
    March 1, 2014 at 10:56 pm
    ‘…The SPL would be a very competitive league if Celtic were not in it, ‘
    ———
    I know what you mean,barcabhoy.. But any club desirous of playing in another Association’s leagues doesn’t need the permission of its own association: it would simply give the required period of notice of their intention to leave their association, and leave at the appropriate time.
    That is, It doesn’t need to offer,as a solution to lack of competitiveness in its own association, its willingness to move to another association , as some kind of bribe to the SFA to facilitate the move.
    Celtic may be, perhaps probably are, playing a long game.
    But it’s as irritating as hell to hear Celtic players, and now(implicitly at least) the CEO, parroting the mantra that Scottish football needs ‘Rangers’ in the top division.
    And it’s irritating not because it is ‘Rangers’ but because it betokens a readiness to accept cheatery, bend rules , kow-tow to bullyboy ( bUllyboy) threats , blustering Yorkshire conmen, beknighted megalomaniacs,etc etc etc. while abandoning any kind of sporting principle.
16. 
    

    Auldheid says:
    March 1, 2014 at 11:21 pm
    Thanks for that Auldheid but he could have qualified his statement or said something slightly different to avoid confusion, especially for the SMSM! 😥
17. 
    

    easyJambo says:

    March 1, 2014 at 11:28 pm

    0

    0

    Rate This

    ianagain says: March 1, 2014 at 11:15 pm

    Here is where I took it from.

    http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/celtic/214554-financial-distribution-model-for-scottish-league-reconstruction-revealed/

    =============================
    I’ve got a copy of that saved on my PC, along with last season’s SPL Rules which detail the distribution for 2011/12 and 2012/13.

    I remember being really angry at the time I became aware of the “one season” deal, but the clubs voted for it so they need to live with it.

    From STV’s perspective they are not wrong in showing the changes in this way they did. This season’s model was due to revert back to the 2011/12 model, but was superseded by the start of the SPFL. However it might have added some clarity had they mentioned the one-off arrangement last season and who got what, but for some reason it mustn’t have been deemed newsworthy.
    ==============================================

    EasyJambo

    As you say and our accounts say. the real bottom line apart from the SPL dough was the fact we never sold anyone, the SPL NOT getting a sponsor, which affects EVERY CLUB
18. 
    

    Re the prize pot distribution. The spread of prizes became skewed simply by the arguement that it was unfair on the team second to invest, push for the title, come second and then suffer the double whammy of a financial shortfall. I have no doubt it was sold as incentive to invest to provide competition hence it’s relevance here. Look how well that worked out for everyone hence the change. Doesn’t explain the 1 season only duration right enough.
19. 
    

    Auldheid says:

    March 1, 2014 at 11:26 pm

    0

    0

    Rate This

    ianagain says:

    March 1, 2014 at 9:54 pm

    Rate This

    Was trawling back a bit.

    Genuine question.

    Where is BRTH?
    ===============
    If there were two of him, one could open up in Edinburgh.
    =======================
    😀
20. 
    

    Smugas says:

    March 1, 2014 at 11:56 pm

    Re the prize pot distribution. The spread of prizes became skewed simply by the arguement that it was unfair on the team second to invest, push for the title, come second and then suffer the double whammy of a financial shortfall. I have no doubt it was sold as incentive to invest to provide competition hence it’s relevance here. Look how well that worked out for everyone hence the change. Doesn’t explain the 1 season only duration right enough.
    —————————————————————————————————-

    The only reason this was done was to spread money down the leagues as in DOWN the way in the direction of you know who, cause they were “skint” AGAIN.
21. 
    

    The scenario being painted that Lawwell may have been referring to Celtic leaving the SPFL, opposed to the return of Rangers is plausible in logic but falls down in the real world.
    Is it some pipedream that has been covered pointlessly in kilometres of column inches or is going to become reality in the forseeable ?

    In the absence of evidence or even plausible heresay I can’t agree that Lawwell had that in his mind when making the comment that JC wrote his letter about, although he may dream about it at night.

    He simply stated an important problem in the Scottish game that there may not be a realistic and practical solution for at this point in time.
22. 
    

    I am struck by the behaviour of Graham Wallace. He has stated on the record that there will be no administration.

    Whether that referred to RIFC or TRFC is unclear but a reasonable expectation would be that without any specific exclusion the statement covers both entities. This has implications for Mr Wallace in the event that his assurance is found to be inaccurate.

    As has also been pointed out his claim that he needed a 120 day period to assess the situation and draw up plans would be considered ludicrous in any normal business situation. He was employed for his relevant experience and skills and a normal expectation would be a prompt and efficient application of them to the situation he found. This is no complex undertaking he has joined. It has simple revenue streams and a well-established and contractual cost structure.

    A failure to raise funds via transfer window sales was a surprise.

    A failure to raise funds from the City was less of a surprise and was also surely enough evidence that prompt action was needed rather than waiting 120 days.

    A failure to engage with the fans who have had funds available for share purchases and possibly loans at no/low interest is also surprising. Better to have money injected into the company itself rather than buy out existing shareholders.

    The negotiation of a short term loan from two existing shareholders on terms that raise eyebrows does not indicate a safe and incisive pair of hands. Engaging in press release slanging matches perhaps betrays both a lack of resolve and inexperience.

    I have looked back at Mr Wallace’s career and it seems to me that he has never really been in this kind of situation before. It is unclear whether he was adjudged the prime candidate or just one who would look reasonably credible for whatever period was necessary.

    If we do now see an insolvency event at TRFC I struggle to envisage a situation where Mr Wallace’s position remains tenable. From mis-statements to a failure to act appropriately and prudently prior to the insolvency event will leave fingers pointed towards him by both fans and authorities.

    As I say I am struck by the behaviour of Graham Wallace. I am unsure if he is a patsy or part of the problem. Perhaps Monday will bring an answer.

    Whatever, Scottish Football needs fans to be strong in the months ahead to ensure that whatever transpires is dealt with without fear or favour.
23. 
    

    It’s now almost 2 seasons since Armageddon.

    Increased competition was never going to happen overnight.

    However the man charged with bringing funding to the league has a) devalued it with his initial panic ridden comments, then disappeared. (Since the change to the SPFL I can’t recall him publicly saying anything meaningful and relevant about the state of the game) and b) been found woefully short in locating a sponsor / funding.

    Totally unacceptable.

    In addition.

    The 11-1 voting system inexplicably remains in place. Aberdeen’s mysterious behaviour remains unexplained. Obviously all the subservient diddy clubs are waiting for whatever version of the boys in blue from Govan are around at the time to turn up and start dishing out their medicine again.

    Totally unacceptable

    Obviously only two of a myriad of reasons that our clubs and governing bodies are an infuriating and mysterious closed shop, that does little to deflect any accusations of ‘jiggerypokery’
24. 
    

    john clarke says:
    March 1, 2014 at 11:37 pm
    8 1 Rate This

    Barcabhoy says:
    March 1, 2014 at 10:56 pm
    ‘…The SPL would be a very competitive league if Celtic were not in it, ‘
    ———
    I know what you mean,barcabhoy.. But any club desirous of playing in another Association’s leagues doesn’t need the permission of its own association: it would simply give the required period of notice of their intention to leave their association, and leave at the appropriate time.

    ——————-
    John,

    The reality is The English FA would not accept Celtic or any other Scottish Club , if the act of leaving the SFA was not with the blessing of the SFA. Thats an entirely understandable courtesy to extend to a neighbour and fellow member of UEFA.

    It also explains why Celtic are not in a position to engage in all out war with the SFA over their treatment of Rangers. It’s easy for people to suggest Celtic “get all medieval” with the SFA , but this would be at the likely cost of torpedoing any ambitions to play outside of Scotland.

    For the avoidance of doubt i’m not suggesting you want Celtic to take this aggressive line. I’m also not suggesting Celtic should leave Scotland , certainly not on their own. My personal view is a league in which 8 Scottish Clubs competed in the Championship , with the opportunity for promotion to the EPL , would be an attractive option for football generally in Scotland.

    Whatever options may be available in future , should only be explored if football in Scotland was safeguarded and could benefit overall.

    Greenock Jack

    Peter Lawell has made it very clear Celtic have absolutely no dependence on Rangers, he doesn’t spend or waste any time thinking about what future they may or may not have. Armageddon was forecast and gleefully endorsed by huge sections of the Rangers support. It was the “proof ” they needed that they were not just relevant they were essential to the well being of Football in Scotland and for Celtic in particular .

    The reality is the opposite has been proven to be true. Celtic are in the best financial health of their life. Other clubs have been reinvigorated and are thriving. Hearts and Dunfermline who’s problems started when they played in the same League as Rangers, have shown exemplary fortitude in saving their clubs.

    The other huge benefit is that nobody is playing against a club who had cheating ingrained in their DNA. Nobody wants to go back to playing in the environment created by Murray’s toxic policies of financial irresponsibility, cheating and deception.

    It seems that every club has learnt from the mistakes of the past, except Rangers. They continue to be the poster child for bad governance and irresponsible management.
25. 
    

    Barca

    I think PL is best advised by the bunnet, do what you do and keep it silent.
26. 
    

    DOS CLUSTERF*&K UPDATE!!

    Just want to take some time out to explain the problems we had. At the beginning of last week, the site was slowing down to a crawl. I thought at first it was a WordPress issue, but it became clear very quickly that our firewall was being dragged all over the place by a DOS attack.

    It took a day or so to find the source of the attack, which was the Far East (at least that’s what the network guys say 🙂 ).
    To make matters worse, the TSFM mail server had been hijacked by a spammer (via a WordPress vulnerability) and was sending literally millions of spam mails, ironically for short term loans :-), from the server, making it grind over even more slowly.

    We do pay a little over the odds for security here – for obvious reasons – but although the integrity of data was intact at the end of it all, we had three or four people madly chasing up a rebuild of the site. We did plan to give the site a wee revamp in the coming weeks, but we had to accelerate those plans to get to where we are today. Sadly some of the impact of the new site look will now be lost as some of it you can already see 🙁

    The unfortunate thing is that attacks like these cost us dearly in terms of time, money and inconvenience. Approximately 130 man hours (over half of that unpaid) were involved in getting us back on course, including the double switch from server to server. The reason for the attack is probably related to our success in terms of numbers, but probably not related to ay Scottish Football politics.

    The network guys who were busy in midweek putting out the fires were at first suspicious that it may have been a paid for attack – due to the persistence of the attackers – but their final impression was that our WP numbers had just attracted some unwanted attention. The sources have now been blacklisted and hopefully we can go back to a peaceful existence 🙂

    My thanks to the people at our hosting company who worked so hard to track down the wee rascals who were causing the other, and to those people who gave of their time and expertise to get us back up and running. One heartening aspect of it all is that there are so many people who immediately offer help in a situation like this. We are in their debt.
27. 
    

    Thanks all at TSFM.

    Put the light back to red and we willl get going again.

    Meant to say my air breaking post from 36000 feet via Norwegian wireless was a victim. ( I think it was good too)
28. 
    

    john clarke says:
    March 1, 2014 at 9:27 pm
    ……………………….

    You’re right John…I was getting ahead of myself…we need to wait until he submits his application to the SFA…

    However I would be interested to know on what grounds Craig Whyte was publicly declared not fit and proper by Mr. Regan of the SFA in March 2012…
29. 
    

    ianagain says:
    March 1, 2014 at 11:37 pm

    5

    3

    Rate This

    _________________________

    Nailed it.
    The ‘toon army’ trawl the length and breadth of the country in their thousands, win lose or draw.
    More often the latter two.
    They are the antithesis of Rangers fans.
    Their loyalty is assured, but it is down played, not trumpeted. Success is a surprise, nevermind a bonus, not some divine right!
    When things go wrong, they always turn on the board, not the club!
    They shrug off relegation and bounce back barely missing a beat.
    But they are nobody’s fools… and when they are not happy with the board they will turn on them as on a sixpence
    But they don’t whine.
    And they can take a born anodyne loser like Alan Partridge, and turn him into a berserker who would bite through his shield and head butt an opponent in a game they were winning, such is their passion!

    Wonder what it is Mike Ashley sees in the TRFC crowd 😆 ?

    Ahaaa!
30. 
    

    TSFM says:
    March 2, 2014 at 1:08 am
    …………………………….
    Generally it can be an unrealted web site through the hosting company that is under attack…with the result that it affecst all the Companies who operate through the hosting company on that particular server.

    How and ever the TSFM team have done a terrific job in getting things sorted…well done.
31. 
    

    Barcabhoy says:
    March 2, 2014 at 12:48 am
    ……………………………….

    The simple fact is Barca…the structure of the English league system would not permit any form of leapfrogging by one club into their pyramid system…the legal challenge and litigation that followed would ensure this did not happen…why would a 4 billion pound league jepordise its success to suit 1 club?…it just wouldn’t.

    The only way…and it is the only way…is for the 4 home associations to dissolve and reform as the UK Football league, which would then require a complete restructure of football in the UK…is that likely to happen?…I doubt it.

    I have said many times there are those within FIFA who want that to happen as they see the current 4 UK votes in the main council as patently unfair and wrong..
32. 
    

    The archive section of the site is up and running (see menu link at top of page). There is a wonderful amount of content there – teeming with prescience as well 🙂

    Be glad to have feedback on that.
33. 
    

    PaulMac2

    It was our (dedicated) firewall that got hit. Happily, we just moved to a new server weeks ago with our own firewall – otherwise we would have been dragging half of Manchester down with us 🙂
34. 
    

    Seems someone appears to be getting fed up with the constant FOI requests from the Tax Havens folks – there is now a website published for everyone to have access to all the information and letters – and these of course appear to be showing that the Tax Havens sleuth is indeed (no surprise to Ecobhoys avid readers) making a lot of noise about nothing………

    Sale of land at former Lennox Castle Hospital, Lennoxtown

    This information has been created in order to respond to requests for information received by NHSGGC on the subject of the sale of land at the site of the former Lennox Castle Hospital

    http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/content/default.asp?page=s81
35. 
    

    Administration in 30 hours if my time zone calculations are correct
36. 
    

    TSFM says:
    March 2, 2014 at 3:11 am
    ========================
    TSFM, I know you have previously stated you don’t want to rush into ‘Rangers team bus allegations’ over the attack on the site. I must admit I’m struggling to think of reasons why the site would be attacked.
37. 
    

    Apologies for my ignorance but what are the penalties for not submitting audited accounts? Will it really prevent them getting a licence to play next season or will it be ‘overlooked’ coz they ur rainjurz?
38. 
    

    Brenda says:
    March 2, 2014 at 7:32 am
    0 0 Rate This

    Apologies for my ignorance but what are the penalties for not submitting audited accounts? Will it really prevent them getting a licence to play next season or will it be ‘overlooked’ coz they ur rainjurz?
    ===============================
    Everything else has been overlooked for that reason Brenda, so I see no reason why this would be any different.
39. 
    

    Brenda the SFA should not issue a licence to any club if it has not recieved audited accounts for the club’s operators which are no older than 6 months old. If the accounts are older than this then it must be interims which from memory also need to be validated by an external auditor. From information posted yesterday it looks like TRFC accounts due to be filed Friday last, or RIFC interims due imminently would cover the SFA requirements assuming the latter are audited.
40. 
    

    WRT Wildwood’s comments on the lack of SPFL sponsorship why not give away the rights for the rest of the season to a suitable charity? There are loads of deserving Scottish organisations.

    That would secure wide publicity and perhaps help sell the rights for next year.

    Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.
41. 
    

    Morning all.
    Just on to thank,firstly,Auldheid for the sterling work on the new blog and secondly,TSFM for his untiring efforts to get us back up and running.
    Much appreciated.
42. 
    

    Exiled Celt says:
    March 2, 2014 at 3:56 am

    Seems someone appears to be getting fed up with the constant FOI requests from the Tax Havens folks – there is now a website published for everyone to have access to all the information and letters – and these of course appear to be showing that the Tax Havens sleuth is indeed (no surprise to Ecobhoys avid readers) making a lot of noise about nothing………

    Sale of land at former Lennox Castle Hospital, Lennoxtown
    http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/content/default.asp?page=s81
    ==========================================================
    Last night I had a read through all the documents on the NHS site which revealed the surprising news NOT that all their laid-down procedures for land disposal were followed to the letter.

    The Fth articles have been a disgrace with their main thrust IMO coming from a clearly sectarian-based attack on Celtic.

    Since January this year when a disgusting personal attack was made on a named senior NHS official on the basis that he had a ‘Timmy-sounding’ name (shared with a former Celtic player – who may or may not be related) I became interested in who was driving the hatred.

    In the last couple of montrhs it is clear that a lot of the energy is coming from outwith Scotland but that some of the tactics have become much more focussed with the twin aims to deflect Bears from troubles at Ibrox and also to damage Celtic and generate seeds of discontent in the Celtic support.

    Whether I am right or wrong in my conclusions I am certain that what was originally a whacky agenda with a few loonballs involved became a much more organised and directed campaign with a helluva lot of resources and thinking – albeit twisted and corrosive – being applied with deliberate lies casually thrown in to suit false allegations.

    Having read the NHS material there is no doubt in my mind that Lennoxtown is a non-starter in the State Aid complaint made to the EC. Indeed I think the EC should take note of the hard-nosed attitude taken by NHS employees who faced-down an equally hard-nosed Celtic negotiating team to maximise the return to the public purse and that’s how it should be.

    The Fth site has failed in every one of its allegations through a combination of complete ignorance of legal and planning issues involving land sales and obviously zilch experience of the type of negotiations involved particularly in a multi-agency situation involving a number of public bodies.

    And, of course, their biggest mistake was to start their campaign based on the false premise that Celtic and one individual were guilty of public corruption. That individual has been completely exonerated and I have no intention of naming him because, unlike the bigots involved in this campaign, I don’t smear innocents just because of their surname.

    I see that Fth has been reduced to whimpering about the hard-line taken by Celtic in negotiations – well it might come as a surprise to him but Celtic Plc is a commercial company with a duty to its shareholders.

    At Lennoxtown they actually paid over the odds for the site and above the independent valuation arrived at – State Aid my ersium 😆
43. 
    

    Barca @ 12:48am
    Peter Lawell has made it very clear Celtic have absolutely no dependence on Rangers, he doesn’t spend or waste any time thinking about what future they may or may not have. Armageddon was forecast and gleefully endorsed by huge sections of the Rangers support. It was the “proof ” they needed that they were not just relevant they were essential to the well being of Football in Scotland and for Celtic in particular .

    The reality is the opposite has been proven to be true. Celtic are in the best financial health of their life. Other clubs have been reinvigorated and are thriving. Hearts and Dunfermline who’s problems started when they played in the same League as Rangers, have shown exemplary fortitude in saving their clubs.
    —————————————————————————————————

    To broach or solve a problem, you have to first admit it’s existence.

    When PL states that the lack of competition is a major problem for Scottish football, the remark flies in the face of what you type about having Celtic having “absolutely no dependence” on their traditional and previously direct rivals. You want to believe it so much, that you offer the tired and well thumbed alternative, a move to another league as what PL had in mind when he highlighted the issue. This isn’t going to happen in the forseeable, think of it as a casino or a League attendence of over 30,000 hardy souls (despite what the BBC announce).

    Actual reallity is a closed top tier, growing lack of interest, NO move to another league, a CEO who is concerned enough to make it a headline comment.

    I grant you that the finances at Parkhead are in a healthy state and that as it stands you have an over 60% chance of making the CL group stages for each season. However, just as PL might be speaking to people about a distant possibility of moving out of Scotland, he’ll also have the more immediate worry of retaining ST numbers.

    Celtic currently operate in a profitable polarised twilight.
    Where at one end you have the sexy CL, earn lots of cash and advertise the services of footballers but can’t really compete. At the other end is the more mundane SPFL, the bread and butter where no-one else can compete.

    Sport should be about competition, without it interest will waver.
    Instead, what Celtic have is a comfortable financial model where they can substantially reduce ST prices in a bid to firefight the immediate problem.

    Here is your 2014/15
    Pre-Season: Bring in a profit on the transfer market.
    SPFL: Champions
    CL Qualifying Stages: Qualify
    CL group stages: 3rd or 4th
    Cups: OK, this isn’t predictable (but top tier closed when playing against best other team in the country was worrying)

    This brings up the Sport v Business question and where to strike an acceptable balance.

    It brings problems for Peter Lawwell that are largely outwith his control other than the firefighting method of reducing ST prices. But aslong as the business is bringing in the money, PL will be able to sleep soundly and dream of Celtic in the EPL.

    I’d agree that some other clubs are doing well in the present enviroment with Dundee Utd being the club who seem to be turning things round both on and off the park. Aberdeen are performing noteably but their finances aren’t ‘solid’. What will be important is whether or not they can keep their manager, their better players, results and increased attendences. Motherwell, St.Johnstone and ICT have been performing very well for sometime but don’t have the fanbase to be able to kick-on any further.

    It’ll be interesting to see how the old ‘New Firm’ do in European qualifiers in the summer.
44. 
    

    john clarke says:

    March 1, 2014 at 8:41 pm

    What a brilliantly worded letter, John, and one that demands an answer through it’s sheer quality. I hope other Celtic supporters write to Mr Lawwell in a similar vein. I have the impression that what Celtic fans think matters to him and he will be forced to respond, either privately or publicly, should enough people write to him or the club as succinctly as you have. He is possibly the best conduit to introduce integrity to the SFA we have.

    More power to your pen, sir.
45. 
    

    This is a repost as the original seems to have disappeared – so apologies if it becomes a duplicate 😳
    ——————————————————————————————————————————————–
    The former chief Bear Land ‘Expert’ (demoted over his Lennoxtown omnishambles) recently claimed that Dunlop Street in Glasgow’s City Centre: ‘Doesn’t exist any more’. Funny that – Ah wauked alang it yisturday efter a wee trip taera Barras. I admit I wasn’t at the opening ceremony in 1772 but honestly it’s still there.

    So what’s going on? Some loons are cynically trying to divert Bears from questioning the financial disaster looming for Rangers. Part of the strategy is to claim there are no Abnormal Ground Conditions at Westthorn which would reinforce their false State Aid claim that the land was sold too cheaply by Glasgow City Council to Celtic.

    The lies and manipulation of facts are simply staggering and I have dealt with some of them in earlier posts. But Dunlop Street is a classic because the so-called ‘Experts’ have deliberately twisted an entry in the 1828-29 Glasgow Post Office Directory to spin a web of deceit.

    The directory clearly states that 41 Dunlop Street in Glasgow City Centre houses the Westthorn Colliery Office but the ‘Experts’ have ignored Dunlop Street’s city centre location and claimed the entry refers to 41 Dunlop Street in Tollcross and claim this is where Westthorn Colliery must have been sited and not actually on the Westthorn estate. The directory entry clearly states that Dunlop Street runs from: ‘Argyle Street to Jackson street’ in Glasgow city centre and obviously has no connection with Tollcross.

    There has never been a colliery in Dunlop Street, Tollcross, and not even a colliery office and No 41 was a simple rented house. Indeed Dunlop Street in Tollcross didn’t actually get named until a couple of decades after Westthorn Colliery closed and even the 1861 Valuation Roll simply noted it as ‘Dunlop’s Land’.

    It wasn’t until the 1898-1899 Post Office Directory that Dunlop Street was even listed in the Tollcross sub-section following the incorporation of Tollcross into Glasgow which began in 1897. This led to a number of Tollcross street names being changed to prevent confusion with similarly named Glasgow ones including Dunlop Street which became Corbett Street. The Original Glasgow City Centre Dunlop Street remained unchanged as it is to this day.

    I’m amazed these ‘Experts’ thought they could pull-off this scam but it certainly appears to have worked with the Bears because I don’t hear any questions being asked but just solid support from the Blue ranks for the fiction they have been fed.

    IMO if they can’t see through this deception then the Spivs will pick their pockets clean yet again and Tbh it serves them right. They will always end-up with the club they deserve unless they wake-up and exercise their own financial muscle IMO.

    There’s also another way of proving that the 41 Dundas Street office wasn’t a Tardis which disappeared from Glasgow city centre one day and magically re-emerged in Tollcross some 70 tears later as a coal mine. And it means going back to Tam Harvey who bought Westthorn in 1819 and, according to Court of Session records, extracted coal from the Estate and became rich enough to open two whisky distilleries at Port Dundas, near Glasgow city centre.

    If the intrepid Bear researcher had actually checked-out ’41 Dunlop Street’ in the 1828-29 Post Office Directory and not just ‘Westthorn’ then he would have discovered another entry viz: ‘Glasgow Distillery, Port Dundas, counting-house 41 Dunlop St.’ He might even have put 2 and 2 together and actually realised that Harvey owned both Westthorn Colliery and two Glasgow distilleries at Port Dundas.

    But how would the expert have explained the distilleries? Would he have sent them on a 70 year time-warp flit to Tollcross just like the coal mine. Mighty Me – that single-end at 41 Dunlop Street, Tollcross, must hae been awfy crowded but at least there would always be a dram on the table and coal in the fire
46. 
    

    Greenock Jack says:
    March 2, 2014 at 8:41 am

    There are bits of what you say that I wouldn’t disagree with – however unlike you I don’t dismiss the cup defeats lightly and actually do think it points to a growing competitiveness which I applaud.

    I have always said that in a purely business sense for TV income it makes financial sense for Scottish Football to have Rangers in the top flight. But that could be a relatively short-term scenario.

    I believe that without Rangers – or even Celtic if positions were reversed – then other teams have more opportunity to improve in league terms with hopefully a spillover into cups and Europe as well.

    In that sense I think a one-team dominated league is preferable to a 2-team dominated one and over a longer period hopefully that 1 team would be run very close by at least 2/3 others and thus create real competition, excitement and hopefully crowds or even more TV money and sponsorship.

    There will always be inequalities in football because some teams are richer than others for a variety of reasons which don’t always equate to the size of support and so are some leagues. There are ways to equalise and level the playing field like fixing a uniform wage cap for players or teams but that’s a topic all on its own.

    I also note that you appear to be completely ignoring the effects of the economic recession which is still affecting the vast bulk of the population hit by rising prices and static wages.Ppeople are hurting financially and you see it everywhere. My two local pubs have more ST holders watching games on TV because they can no longer afford to go to every home game. They pick and choose because money is tight.

    Another factor is that a lot of punters watching in the pub tend to come in dead on kick-off and maybe have a final pint at the end of the game and then they’re off and don’t make a session of it. They are watching their money and these are people with relatively good jobs. And there will be even more sitting at home watching with a couple of tinnies 🙁

    But perhaps the biggest problem I see with your scenario is that it seems to hinge on Rangers returning to the top-flight and just picking-up where it left off. I think that’s very optimistic unless they find a very wealthy Sugar Daddy. And even then how deep would his pockets have to be before he got fed-up with his new baby whose insistent cash demands will never be satisfied unless they are presnted with a new reality.

    That’s the big problem I see – the Rangers business model is broken and has been since DM bought it – probably as a giruy to the Ayr United Board – and I have yet to see any serious signs of it being fixed and even if it is – will its support continue to turn-up given the civil war that has broken-out between increasingly bitter factions of it and the possibility of being defeated by other full-time teams. All football supports can be very fickle.
47. 
    

    Just on the Wallace dilemma.

    Notwithstanding that I don’t think he is a placeman as such and does have enough sense to realise he’s being portrayed and used as such (hence the quiet leaks to Phil IMO) he has a simple problem.

    He has declared, and I believe, that they will not go into administration on creditor action. The main reason for this is that the principle creditor of TRFC has told them they won’t. What else can he now do, call his employers (and his direct employer’s principle creditors) liars? Doesn’t strike me as particularly astute.

    Similarly it is understandable that he would question why the fans would go to King who appears to have precisely no business plan when he is apparently, slowly, addressing the principle problem of revenue being below costs. Interesting his Man C background in this respect. Its not difficult to envisage a situation where he would have said to the Man C fans how he could use the Sheik’s shekels to build a long term sustainable model. Feck that say the fans lets have the CL music now, the helicopter sunday against Them – the English version at least, and bolcox to the finances.

    Look who won on that arguement? Is it sustainable though?

    I
48. 
    

    Brilliant work TSFM.

    Apropos the lack of competition in SPFL football, fact is, it’s not a uniquely Scottish problem.

    The top four in the EPL are now an elite within an elite who can harvest the mega riches of the CL. It’s the same in other Euro leagues.

    Even among the CL there is an elite within the elite of the elite. Money and financial clout is deciding who wins what.

    Would it not be better if the Scottish leagues took a different approach? Bigger clubs with a bigger fan base will be successful weather they receive the lion’s share of the SPFL prize money or not.

    Have we forgotten that the greatest prize is the honour of winning? I would suggest an even greater reform of the financial distribution model. Celtic will still be the big boys, as will Aberdeen, Hearts, Dundee United based on a decent support. But an even more drastic change in the distribution of monies will allow some the great teams with fine grounds — who were cut adrift after the 1974-75 season and successive league remodelling schemes — to strengthen and perhaps reach a level where they could once again be viable and competitive competitive in an expanded top tier. Look at Partick Thistle this season, good football and competitive on a modest budget. I would expect Falkirk, Dundee, Dunfermline, Hamilton, Raith, and others to challange for places in a top 16.

    As long as football throughout Europe is based on huge financial rewards for the winners and paltry prizes for those in the lower places, it will continue to polarise until there’s only a select number of teams capable of winning anything. It’s time to reverse the trend. The greatest prize is the honour of winning titles and trophies among equals on a more even playing field. I think I’m suggesting something the along the lines of a Socialist Professional Football League.

    Instead of dreaming of England, why not make our home leagues an example of fairness, where the poorest are strengthened and supported by those with the ‘broadest shoulders’ and where the strong can feel proud of winning a fairer competition — and not merely the biggest cheque. An enlightened football like that is something Europe would stand up and notice. It would help make football the game of the common man once more.
49. 
    

    Thanks Eco, you saved me doing a reposte to the Barca/Jack spat along very similar lines.

    Agree with all you say but I would go slightly further. Thinking from a top 6 competitor perspective there is absolutely no benefit in the duopoly as proven, not even to the duoploy itself. A very simplistic test (much like your bar stool survey). At the start of the season at my 5yo son’s kickabout on saturday morning there were a very creditable more RFC tops than any other (I’m at the opposite end of the country from Glasgow if that helps). Yesterday, 1, but crucially there were two hearts, a DUFC, a Burnley (who invited him?) and SIX aberdeen tops. Its a very simplistic measure as I say but I suspect when the discussion as to whether the old duopoly should be recreated the SFA board’s main discussion will not be, How can we sell more diddy tops? But it should be!
50. 
    

    Peter Lawell might just be hinting at the much talked about revamp of European football in general,the existing set up has just about ran its course and the men in charge of this have been well aware of this for quite a while now ,PW will have good insight of where this is sitting at the moment and he is not to blame for others going of in the wrong direction,Platini and co will be well ahead with their reconstruction plans and the rules that go with this will be Rangers proof at the very least along with other clubs that dont meet Platinis fair play rules.
51. 
    

    ecobhoy says:
    March 2, 2014 at 9:55 am
    ………………………………..
    I don’t see the Bundesliga asking to be fixed or more competative with the lack of competition to Bayern Munich who are 20 points clear this season…and won by 25 points last season.
52. 
    

    Barcabhoy says:

    March 2, 2014 at 12:48 am
    It seems that every club has learnt from the mistakes of the past, except Rangers. They continue to be the poster child for bad governance and irresponsible management.
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    Nope
    They dont continue
    They died
    What we see in TRFC is a real live case study of how modern day Spivs strip a business in the full view of the media
    It will end in tears for some and smiles for others
    But it will end
    The only issue to be concerned about is that nobody gets hurt
53. 
    

    Danish tried to edit my last post as below but fell foul of some fancy dan editing rules of the new site!! Hopefully still makes sense.

    EDIT: Danish, saw your post after positng mine hence the edit. Yup same arguement. Winning will always sell. Backing the immediate loser to the cost of all others to compensate them has crashed and burned. Time for a rethink.

    Personally Doncaster, for all there’s a business mind hidden in there somewhere, has shown absolutely no preference for a ‘rethink’ so ingrained is he in the old model. I’m sure his defence would be that the facts are inescapable, the Old Firm sells, and theres a begrudging acceptance that he is right. But the Old Firm Died. Selling it was and is no longer an option until one half prove they can sustain ‘the chase.’ It was and is Doncaster’s job to sell the reality, not some sunday mail hyped fantasy.
54. 
    

    Eco @ 9:55am

    Since NL took over, the domestic Cup competitions have been an enviroment where relatively speaking, Celtic have had problems. I don’t think there is any one particular reason for this series of results over several seasons. It’s probably more informative to look at each individually. Regarding the “growing competitiveness” you mention (in relation to the above), the recent Aberdeen result is IMO the only one out of them all that your point applies to.

    Regarding “my scenario” as you perceive it, you are wrong in that I wasn’t proposing solutions or lobbying on behalf of Rangers. I was merely stating the situation as I see it. Real solid solutions are much more difficult to find, probably because in the general reality it’s currently more a matter of damage limitation.

    The 11-1 voting structure reflects that the situation/challanges that currently face Celtic are different from those of the other clubs. The mystery behind the Aberdeen support for Celtic may also reflect an ambition for the the former to get closer to the latter but finance will dictate and here, the Dons aren’t on solid ground.

    I find your logic behind a 1 team domination being preferrable to a 2 team domination as difficult to comprehend. I think this is reflected by the success or otherwise of the SPFL in trying to bring sponsers/finance in. I can see that there might naturally be 2 or 3 teams who benefit from it in a more direct sense but the difficulty they have is sustaining any success and dealing with increased ambition from the fans, in relation to finance/retaining players/manager etc.

    I agree that the general economic situation makes everything that much more difficult and is an important factor.
55. 
    

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/celtic-spark-fury-among-training-3198137

    This story about Lennoxtown appears in today’s Sunday Mail under the headline

    “Celtic spark fury among training ground neighbours after traffic wrecks temporary access road – which they now want to make permanent”

    However all is not what it seems. If you read the article you will see

    “East Dunbartonshire Council have blamed delays in building the new access road on owners Mactaggart & Mickel.”
    “Mactaggart & Mickel built a new estate in the grounds of Lennox Castle hospital and were supposed to put in the new road but apparently didn’t do it because of the recession.”
    “In their latest application to East Dunbartonshire Council, Celtic say they have been unable to honour the clause to access the site from the A891 because Mactaggart & Mickel have failed to complete the new road.”

    So, not Celtic’s fault at all then.
56. 
    

    Looking to replicate the EPL model on a shoestring should have been one of many rocks that Doncaster et al perished. We have a unique situation an many problems that require a unique tailor made response.

    If you look purely at the TV situation. We have a pitiful deal that let’s us scrimp when our neighbours deal allows clubs the length and breadth of England to spend millions on players and facilities. They are obscenely overfunded we are obscenely underfunded.

    In terms of league matches they put to air many average games – plus the odd good one, played in front of a full house on a billiard table surface.

    Our crowds go down, our games are generally average with the odd good one, played on the odd good pitch but generally a glue pot.

    Doing the same thing as the EPL isn’t working for us.

    The elements requiring specific action in Scotland are – finding a scheme to up the crowds for televised games (a hint would be the admission prices would be involved in the answer).

    In terms of things like playing surfaces – could we operate a collaborative, cooperative approach with governing body subsidised equipment (horticultural lighting rigs etc) that meant we had equipment based on the fixture schedule that neighbouring clubs could share.

    Maybe pipe dream type solutions – but if we don’t start thinking differently we’ll get nowhere.
57. 
    

    Talk of Clubs leaving Scottish football to play in the EPL always amuses me. Supporters of the Clubs concerned focus on how it would improve Scottish football because those left would be capable of winning the domestic competition with all that entails.

    However, how would the SPFL fair in getting a TV deal (or sponsorship) if its largest draws no longer played in it?

    The already significant coverage of EPL football in the SMSM would only increase to the detriment of domestic coverage (remember that even though they would leave Scottish football, they would still be in Scotland, unless my preferred plan for them to relocate to alternative countries South West of Scotland is implemented).

    The amount of money in the Scottish game would go down significantly due to lower domestic crowds.

    Leaving aside whether UEFA would even allow it (and please don’t bore us with “look at the Welsh clubs and Berwick and Monaco, they are all grandfathered in from over a century ago”), how would the Scottish Clubs like to start in even the Championship with no prospect of the Euro pot of Gold for at least five seasons (if at all, considering the competition)?

    To us “diddy” club supporters, this is about as interesting as the bonkers Oldco-Newco debate.
58. 
    

    Greenock,

    It would appear to be currently impossible to recreate your preferred dominant 2 without massive investment from an outsider – who has stated that rather than seek to create a sustainable challenge he will lead an investment effort where the only return on their soft loans will be winning. That is at best short termism and worst simply unrealistic and unsustainable. I’m sorry, but to the rest of ‘fitba,’ and frankly whether Lawell likes it or not that, should not be good enough as Mileson, Romanov etc have proven.

    the 11-1 one relic is not a reflection of the relative strength of celtic (unless they bribed AFC of course) but a relic further back of the lengths the dominant two had to go to, inexplicably supported by the other 10 clubs granted, to try to maintain their position and I make no apology for putting this next bit in upper case AT THE COST OF ALL OTHERS.

    the rest of the clubs need to decide if riding on coat tails os all the ambition they have. If it is, good on them for being honest enough to say it, and good on the mugs that will need to continue to pile in money to recreate the myth.

    If its not, they should not be scared to say it, but are! They should be prepared to take all necessary steps to see that vision through, without fear or favour. They should also have the full backing of their employees – the SPFL board for starters – in following that strategy.
59. 
    

    Apologies as cannot see how to edit.

    Great to see Danish and Smugas citing credible approaches to fixing the Scottish game. I feel sometimes that all we do in here is gurn about how crap it is, all because of one Club and SFA leadership issues.

    We need to start looking at how to fix it.

    Perhaps we should rebrand from being a monitor to being an activist. Become a supporters club that crosses all rivalry and acts for the good of Scottish football. Engage with the likes of Supporters Direct, our own Club’s fan organisations and gain credibility through being official and use that to promote a voice which speaks collectively for the fans.

    Talk will not change things. Imagine using the collective knowledge and expertise on here to take coordinated action along the lines of Auldheid’s, Eco’s and JC’s (to name a few). Publishing not just online but perhaps guest posts in programmes, reach out into the physical from cyber space. That will get the message much further and will promote debate amongst a far greater number of fans.
60. 
    

    Motherwell, St.Johnstone and ICT have been performing very well for sometime but don’t have the fanbase to be able to kick-on any further.

    ___________________________________________

    Yes.
    Because too many of the tops you see on Academy street and in the eastgate centre are from TRFC or Celtic.
    This will change with time though.
61. 
    

    wildwood says:
    March 2, 2014 at 12:42 am
    The 11-1 voting system inexplicably remains in place. Aberdeen’s mysterious behaviour remains unexplained.
    ———————————
    I may be wrong but I seem to recall that Aberdeen have always supported the single blocking vote and that this is connected to their opposition to any reconstruction which might change the number of home games they had against the OF and their lack of a local derby.
    Can one of our resident Done fans maybe clarify this?
62. 
    

    I was wondering if there was any evidence of the Easdales actually buying Greens shares or whether he was indeed lurking in the shadows.

    DK has hinted that this is the case and as there are so many secret investors, I was contemplating if the brothers had actually bought them or just had the proxy.
63. 
    

    Yes.
    Because too many of the tops you see on Academy street and in the eastgate centre are from TRFC or Celtic.
    This will change with time though.
    -__________________
    Speaking of which,any sign of a new sponsor for TRFC?.
    Did the Blackthorn deal not run out this week?.
64. 
    

    ecobhoy says:
    March 2, 2014 at 9:13 am

    The former chief Bear Land ‘Expert’ (demoted over his Lennoxtown omnishambles) recently claimed that Dunlop Street in Glasgow’s City Centre: ‘Doesn’t exist any more’.
    —————
    I have not been following the threads on the “Celtic land deals” (apologies ecobhoy but it was too west coast specialised for myself) and I’m not familiar with city centre Glasgow. But I ventured onto the fth website to read this statement for myself which was endorsed by at least one follower (I couldn’t be bothered looking further). I then took around 30 seconds, using Google maps, to find Dunlop St running from Clyde St to Howard St. It certainly looks city centre to me and a stone’s throw from the St Enoch shopping centre. It then seems to re-appear from Osborne St to Argylle St as a pedestrian only lane. It looks to me to be an old street now cut in half by the modern development of the St Enoch shopping centre. Am I correct? Oh, and it’s on Apple maps as well.
    I’m sorry but if a stranger to Glasgow can find Dunlop St surely the supporters of TRFC can manage this.
65. 
    

    Phils latest

    http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/game-on-2/#more-4429
66. 
    

    Resin

    Motherwell, St.Johnstone and ICT have been performing very well for sometime but don’t have the fanbase to be able to kick-on any further.
    __________________________________________

    Yes.
    Because too many of the tops you see on Academy street and in the eastgate centre are from TRFC or Celtic.
    This will change with time though.
    —————————————————————–
    Here I think you might find a different and developing obstacle to overcome. One that teams of many smaller countries are encountering and that is ‘tops’ from further afield, eg. Real Madrid, Barca, Liverpool etc.

    Another challange for all clubs is to retain/nuture the younger football supporter in a very different world from when us auld yins were that age.
67. 
    

    Smugas says:
    March 2, 2014 at 10:01 am

    Just on the Wallace dilemma.
    ========================================
    I wonder if he was lured back-in to football by promises of loadsa dosh being available at Ibrox for him to emulate the situation he had at Man C?

    All he had to do was tread water to provide the money-men with a bit of time to put the dosh together – say 120 days – and hey presto everything solved and of course they would be a bit of cost-cutting as well but all that wonga for Ally to spend would have kept the fans onside – well perhaps not 🙄 .

    If that was the ploy then I think his blinkers will have well and truly slipped by now – But What To Do ❓

    He truly seems to be between a rock and a hard place and if he fell for the con then he doesn’t have what it takes to sort-out Rangers’ finances IMO or to deal with the mystery men who actually control the club let alone those who sit in offshore tax havens directing from afar 😎
68. 
    

    torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
    March 2, 2014 at 12:06 pm

    7

    0

    Rate This

    Phils latest

    http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/game-on-2/#more-4429

    ____________________________________________

    If Phil is correct (and on recent form that quaification is barely needed at all) then it seems that the bears have a real choice to make:

    – King offers a sense of the WATP and fantasy largesse of the past. Castles in the sky. Feelgood but unsustainably car crash.
    – Wallace offers a dose of reality – living within their means, and building back up organically. Austere, but sustainable

    Or they could split down the middle and face rapid oblivion.

    Pass the popcorn….
69. 
    

    I have posted my letter to Peter Lawwel.

    Just for ,as they say, the avoidance of doubt, I’ll make it clear again that my ‘target’ is, and has always been, the SFA Board as the cause of the deeper problem by their dishonest, panic-stricken, knee-jerk re-action to the failure of what-in my view-was a fundamentally dishonest club .

    Restricting myself to the saga years of dishonesty, I attribute that reaction to the inter-connectedness of senior SFA personnel with the dishonest club, and the remaining- in- office of the SFA president even when he had personal knowledge , and was a beneficiary of , the shameful footballing deceit (non-disclosure of the side-letters) practised upon the rest of the clubs, with economically distorting consequences.

    The fact that the club was RFC is of relevance only because it was the offending club. I would hold the same view of the SFA no matter which club had been the offender.

    In previous posts I have consistently defended Celtic FC from the unjustified assertions that they single-handedly should lead the charge against the whole sorry capitulation-and eager capitulation- to those who failed to take all the required, genuine action either to prevent, or to detect and condignly punish the dreadful behaviour of SDM and RFC(IL), action that their duties to Football governance demanded that they should take.

    My letter is to Peter Lawwell as now wearing a hat that he did not wear before- the hat of a Board member of the SFA. I want him, in that capacity, to be less ready to echo the truly appalling ‘lack- of- competition- get the- new club fast-streamed ” hacks of the MSM and hostile bloggers.
    The ‘new club” is in the SPFL only because the Football authorities yielded to rogues at the expense of truth and fairness and concepts of fair-play and sporting integrity.
    I must insist that Peter Lawwell and the other Board members make damned sure that there is no thought of, or intention to, fast-stream ,by any tinkering or re-write of the rules, the new club at any time, whether next year or the year after ( if they fail to win promotion on merit).
    For, as long as there is even just me and not even a hundred, I will argue that jiggery-pokery is no basis on which a ‘sport’ should run.
70. 
    

    Charlotte, I realise you’re very busy but if reading please could you dump the board proposal written in doncasteresque tones from last September time again. The one re newco post cva advancement . I ask since this would appear to be one possible outcome of the cluster buck that Phil is describing and I am interested why there appears to have been a change of heart in the powers that be. Thanks in advance.
71. 
    

    torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
    March 2, 2014 at 12:06 pm

    Phils latest

    http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/game-on-2/#more-4429
    ==============================================
    As with a number of Phil’s latest offerings I haven’t the slightest doubt in my mind that if they were nonsense that Rangers would have immediately gone to court and silenced Phil.

    Obviously I don’t know who Phil’s sources are but the info they are providing must be close-enough to the truth that Rangers are unable to go before a court and state they are nonsense.

    If there was any doubt as to the accuracy of Phil’s info a court would IMO immediately act to prevent further publication or dissemination because of the attendant disastrous consequences for the financial stability of Rangers.

    That they haven’t acted means as far as I can see that deep factionalism exists not only within the Rangers fanbase but at the very top of their establishment because who else could possibly know about what should be highly confidential club information and be prepared to release it.

    Of course, in such situations the ‘leaker’ or ‘mole’ is often the last person who would be suspected but the ensuing witchunt can cause utter chaos, deep mistrust and ever deeper anger when innocent parties are suspected or accused.
72. 
    

    http://www.eaststirlingshirefc.com/2014/03/02/jordan-tapping/

    There appears to have been a very unsavoury incident at yesterdays Peterhead v East Stirlingshire game.

    If there is a Peterhead FC fan on the forum will they make a comment?
73. 
    

    No1 Bob says:
    March 2, 2014 at 12:46 pm

    2

    0

    Rate This

    ______________________________________

    These idiots have no part in our game.
    Tapping should know he enjoys the full support of decent fans of all clubs.
    Great to see a robust and correct response from both clubs in response to such vile abuse.
74. 
    

    BigGav says:
    March 1, 2014 at 4:36 pm
    15 0 Rate This

    Good to be back, as I never discovered how to log in on the other site. 🙁

    Belated congratulations both to Auldheid for his meticulous work and to our intrepid Court Reporter John Clarke.

    Now, something that has come up here from time to time is Dave King’s eligibility to be a director of any company called ‘Rangers’, in the light of Sect 216 of the Insolvency Act (1986).

    The last time this was discussed, Campbellsmoney said:

    Campbellsmoney says:
    February 18, 2014 at 4:48 pm

    BigGav says:
    February 18, 2014 at 4:23 pm

    As I understand it, the Insolvency Act does not completely prevent him being a director, but he would have to apply for and obtain court approval before this could happen.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————
    Insolvency (Scotland) Rules 4.81 – he would have needed to apply within 7 days of insolvency. Its too late for him.

    I was not kidding when I said:-

    ” Mr King cannot be a director of a company in the United Kingdom which has the words “Rangers” and “Football” in its name.”

    But the other day Phil Mac said this on his blog (http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/dave-king-makes-his-move/#more-4414):

    However, I am informed by a senior legal source with a specialist practice in this field that there would not be any issue in getting court approval for this restriction to be lifted on Mr King.

    In fact it is something of a formality.

    So who is right?
    ========================================================
    In my view – neither are absolutely correct.

    Firstly the “7 day rule” only applies to one particular exemption to S216.

    http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/insolvency/docs/insolvency%20profession/insolvency%20law/insolvencyrules1986-2013ver.pdf

    4.229.— Second excepted case

    (1) Where a person to whom section 216 applies as having been a director or shadow director of the liquidating company applies for permission of the court under that section not later than 7 business days from the date on which the company went into liquidation, he may, during the period specified in paragraph below, act in any of the ways mentioned in section 216(3) , notwithstanding that he has not the permission of the court under that section.

    (2) The period referred to in paragraph (1) begins with the day on which the company goes into liquidation and ends either on the day falling six weeks after that date or on the day on which the court disposes of the application for permission under section 216, whichever of those days occurs first.

    In other words, if the applicant applies seeks leave of the court within 7 days of liquidation he/she can use the “prohibited” name for a period of 6 weeks.

    There is nothing to stop a director of a liquidated company applying at any time for permission of the court under Rule 4.227A (below).

    Applications received by the court within 7 days of liquidation gives the former director up 6 weeks to get the courts permission during which time he/she can promote/direct/be involved with the new company.

    If the application is received later than 7 days after the liquidation process has begun, the former director must receive permission BEFORE he can be involved with the new company.

    In relation to permission being granted as “something of a formality”, well I suppose that is one person’s opinion based on the facts available to him/her.

    The applicable rule is described:

    4.227A Application for permission under s 216(3)

    (1) At least 14 days notice of any application for permission to act in any of the circumstances which would otherwise be prohibited by section 216(3) must be given by the applicant to the Secretary of State, who may—
    (a) appear at the hearing of the application; and
    (b) whether or not appearing at the hearing, make representations.

    (2) When considering an application for permission under section 216, the court may call on the liquidator, or any former liquidator, of the liquidating company for a report of the circumstances in which that company became insolvent and the extent (if any) of the applicant’s apparent responsibility for its doing so.

    I do not know how the liquidators will apportion responsibility for the demise of the former club; but generally speaking, directors have a collective responsibility for corporate governance.

    http://www.morganlewis.co.uk/index.cfm/fuseaction/publication.detail/publicationID/d8933780-6b6e-4200-8578-e66974c328da

    Justice Popplewell also confirmed a number of principles regarding the scope of this director’s duty. First, he stated that, while it is acceptable for there to be a division and delegation of responsibility for different aspects of a company’s management, directors still have inescapable personal responsibilities, including informing themselves of the company’s affairs and supervising these with their fellow directors. Therefore, it is a breach of duty for a director to allow himself or herself to be “dominated, bamboozled or manipulated” by a dominant fellow director where this involves a total abrogation of the director’s responsibility.[2] Instead, each director must exercise independent judgment, including whether acceding to a shareholder’s request is in the best interests of the company.

    Is this really a formality? I think only BDO can answer that.

    http://www.bdo.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/118993/Rangers-Creditors-Report-15-November-2013.PDF

    As previously advised, this is a complex liquidation containing a number of key areas of investigation, each of which may have a significant impact on the ultimate outcome for creditors. However, due to the highly sensitive nature of certain aspects of these investigations,we consider that it is not appropriate to provide full details in respect of our investigations to date in this circular. In particular, we are not in a position to comment in detail upon the following matters:

    • The litigation commenced by the former Joint Administrators against Collyer Bristow (“the CB litigation”, which has been mentioned briefly in the Administrators’ previous reports to creditors);

    • The events leading up to the administration and the conduct of the former Joint Administrators;

    • The conduct of the Company’s directors prior to the administration; and

    • The appeal by HMRC in respect of the Employee Benefit Trust (“EBT”) decision.
75. 
    

    Resin

    The gap in the debate just now is simple. King has made your description of him virtually his banner call.

    I’m not sure Wallace has demonstrably done enough to justify your description of him.

    Anyone else feel Phil is being used to crash the bus btw?

Comments are closed.