Scottish Football and the case for a Bismarck!

Avatar Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

Scottish Football and the case for a Bismarck!

Good Evening.

When considering any type of protracted negotiation or discussion that seems to be going on too long, there is a story that is always worth remembering– whether it is actually a true story or not as the case may be.

It is said, that heads of state all met at a congress in what is now modern Germany sometime after the Franco Prussian war of 1870-1871.The entire congress was being run almost singlehandedly by the then Prussian Chancellor Otto von Bismark and he was keen to get all the necessary signatures on paper to seal some deal or other.

However, others at the congress were not too keen to sign up to certain elements of the proposed deal and so they hithered and dithered and in the eyes of Bismark they simply waisted time by concentrating on the minutiae- the little matters, with a view to ensuring their own interests were best served in these small areas– and did not focus on the big issue.

Having tried to talk these others round and educate them in his own beliefs and point of view on the bigger picture without any success, Bismark grew weary of the continuing delay and the posturing of his colleagues. All attempts at reason and diplomacy had failed in his eyes and so he decided to take a different tack.

Accordingly, it is said that whilst others were still inside debating endlessly on this matter or that, Bismark left the building and began simply shooting the windows in with the aid of a riffle which he just happened to have handy.

Those inside were naturally alarmed at this turn of events. They soon forgot about the minutiae under debate, they abandoned the previously expressed self interest and simply signed up so that they could get away from the mad chancellor and his house.

Job done so to speak.

Whilst I do not in anyway condone the behaviour of Otto von Bismark in this instance, and have no doubt that he was an autocrat, what I will say is that he believed that there was too much time being spent on the unimportant stuff and not enough time recognising what really needed doing– from his point of view of course.

Today– and it seems every day for months— we have endless debate about the future of Scottish Football. League reconstruction and the redistribution of footballing wealth has become a marathon– even before it has started.

Yet I believe that at the moment all parties concerned are not focusing on the radical reform that is fundamentally needed which is the creation of one, strong, properly structured and constituted body which is capable of the proper and ethical governance of Scottish Football and the business that surrounds football.

No matter what system you try, or distribution you agree, without proper sensible strong governance you are wasting your time.

Further, whatever body is set up, and whoever is chosen to be its CEO (or whatever the head honcho is going to be called), they must tackle the issue of corporate and fiscal compliance and the proper administration of any body corporate which actively takes part in Scottish Football– and that includes any such body or person who is involved in the running of a member club.

In addition, in so dealing with any corporate malfeasance or chicanery or whatever, the rules have to be applied with a rod of iron by an iron body.

As we can now clearly see, Football clubs and football in general is not, and never will be, immune from the effects of bad corporate governance and on occasion downright manipulation of facts, figures and contracts.

Whilst great play has been made of the fact that Gavin Masterton has handed over his shares in Dunfermline FC ( or its holding company ) the fact of the matter is that this in no way solves the problem faced by the football club. Whoever gains control of that club will still have to rent the ground from Mr Masterton’s company– and it is a rent that the club may just not be able to afford.

Ever!

It is only my opinion of course, but I am of the view that Mr Masterton has sealed a loan deal with his bankers which is of a type and duration which could not normally be achieved by other borrowers. The Loan has a lengthy period during which no repayments are necessary and interest can continue to accrue.

All very good you may say, but the level of debt concerned is not one that appears to be sustainable by Dunfermline FC and so whoever buys the club as a going concern ( if anyone buys it at all ) will have to pay an agreed rental to Gavin Masterton– and if the rental is not sufficient to repay Mr Masterton’s lenders, then I suspect that the end game here will be a search to find a buyer for the ground at some point over the next twenty years or so, with the hope that as part of the deal a space will be found somewhere for a new ground like New St Mirren park– the difference being that in that instance St Mirren were in charge of their future whereas Dunfermline are not.

The Governance of that club and the financial arrangements behind the club should have been looked at and examined by the SFA long before now– and the Dunfermline fans warned about the dangers of any such arrangements. Effectively those finance arrangements, should they continue, will probably mean that the club will have no option but to move from its established home!

All to suit one man!

Thankfully Dundee were spared a full takeover by Giovanni Di Stefano, however is it not a bit worrying that this man who has been jailed for over 14 years for various fraudulent acts, was allowed to roam around Scottish Football for a prolonged period?

Not so long ago Di Stefano did play a part at Dens, was in line to buy almost 30% of the shareholding, and was oft quoted in the papers and so on. The thing is that there were those who were prepared to give him a place at the Dundee table and in so doing invited him into Scottish Football.

Surely the SFA, had they been inclined to, could quite easily have pointed out that many of the claims of Mr Di Stefano were at least dubious if not completely incorrect? Yet nothing was being said at the time and silence prevailed.

Whilst not in the same calibre as Di Dtefano, Vladimir Romanov has now been at Hearts for a prolonged period. While I have no quibbles about the legality of Romanov’s takeover of Hearts, any money of a sizeable size which is transferred into Scotland from a foreign country will be subject to scrutiny by the Crown office to ensure that it is clean. Lithuania in particular is said to have a banking system which is governed loosely and sometimes does not meet the compliance standards expected in this country.

With his bank having gone bust, Romanov still retains the majority shareholding at Tynecastle, but there are questions still to be answered about what has happened at Hearts but life will be very different for the Edinburgh club going forward.

Again– could the SFA have done more to monitor the situation and could they have demanded clarity and detail from the Hearts owner as to his business dealings and the detailed arrangements with his bank?

At Ibrox, well things just go from the weird and inexplicable to downright astonishing– and all through a tremendous amount of smoke and mirrors.

It is clear that the SFA have no idea what to believe from Charles Green or for that matter Craig Whyte. On the face of it, there are clear links between Whyte and Green with the former paying over a six figure sum in return for absolutely nothing it would appear– with similar transactions going between Whyte’s colleague, Aiden Early, and Charles Green.

What is clear is that Green gave a clear undertaking to the SFA that he had nothing whatsoever to do with Whyte and would have nothing to do with Whyte going forward. Now, at the very least he is admitting that he met Whyte on several occasions, and whilst he may have made representations to Craig Whyte— these were all lies designed only to get Whyte to where Green wanted him.

This is hardly the act of someone who has been bona fides in his business dealings either with Whyte or with the SFA as the licensing body.

It is against this background that the Scottish Football Agencies need to wake up before they find the fans of the game ( at least those who want to stay interested in the game ) doing a Bismarck and panning in the windows of this whole house of cards.

Football Clubs, football fans, and indeed football itself needs protected from the financial and corporate shenanigans, and the governing body must be much more active and permanently vigilant in watching out for and if necessary anticipating the people and the transactions which have and will jeopardise clubs and the game in general going forward.

It is clearly no longer acceptable to rely on self regulation or mere declarations and undertakings from the clubs themselves. The Administrators must be much more active and employ far greater professional expertise in carrying out an almost constant analytical and reporting function in relation to club finance and corporate regulation.

All and any changes in funding, boardroom changes, investor changes and anything else major should be the subject of immediate and proper scrutiny by the SFA and there should be fair, immediate and stiff sanctions for non compliance, and any type of dilatory behaviour on the part of club officials who would seek to conceal the truth or who fail to properly disclose vital matters which should be out in the open.

Further, the funding detail– such as the never ending loan re Dunfermline should be a matter of public record in all its detail so that fans and investors can make information based value judgements when dealing with any club.

Such stiffer regulation should not develop into anything like a corporate witch hunt or any kind of draconian big brother syndrome, however the need for change given all of the current troubles is obvious to one and all.

Further, the attempted fudge surrounding Rangers league status last summer and the ongoing disquiet surrounding the position of Campbell Ogilvie does nothing to boost faith in and the reputation of Football Administration in Scotland.

Things are far from clear and there appears to be continual dithering and fudging. No one has any idea where the Nimmo Smith Report has gone nor what import it is to have— if any. Why is that?

Dithering and bumbling over detail is no longer an option. Strong clear governance is required to protect the game from being hijacked by those who have their own corporate and financial agendas.

Such people cannot be allowed to determine the way Scottish Football runs  or to conduct themselves in a fashion that leaves football and everyone involved in limbo.

It is time for Scottish Football to find its own Iron Chancellor!  There is a need for someone who will, if necessary, come along and shoot the lights out of any club or Company Director who wishes to play fast and loose with the game of football.

About the author

Avatar

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

Boot wearing football, sport & total nonsense fan-- Gourmet, Bon Viveur and eedgit! - Oh and I write a bit occasionally!

5,402 Comments so far

Avatar

wottpiPosted on11:48 am - May 7, 2013


Night Terror says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 11:27

Phil Mac obviously was a leading light in the Tax Case issue and the financial fall of the oldco but I tend to agree that over the last wee while some of the tweets are a bit like a psychic’s cold reading.

To be fair to Phil he has on a number of times said he knows no more than the rest of us and he is following his instinct based on history, what snippets of info he has, combined with the information in the public domain.

The problem is, as you imply, some people are guility of hanging on every word and hint as if it is gospel in the hope the big hoose will fall down as soon as possible.

This one still has a long way to go and no one should be surprised when the turnstiles keep rotating with people going to Ibrox to see a team playing in blue.

For me I see a similar story to Portsmouth, where people will try and take control of the club and assets all with varying views on how best to proceed. Given the club’s following there is no reason why it cannot use the considerable income stream (when compared to other clubs) to get back towards the top. However, unless there is a catclysmic event, it is going to be a hard journey involving a ‘one step forward two steps back’ situation for a few years.

View Comment

Avatar

aramintamoobeamqcPosted on11:51 am - May 7, 2013


Paul at CQN has written a decent short piece on this morning’s news. Summary: MM wanted to do the right thing and he was the one who insisted on Pinsents and Deloitte. Reports in, bad news, he wanted to publish and then got ousted.

View Comment

Avatar

carntynePosted on11:59 am - May 7, 2013


Lord Wobbly says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 20:21

Rangers FC Official @RFC_Official 19m
£75,000 was raised for @UNICEF and the The @RFC_Charity
Foundation as Rangers beat Manchester United today!
bit.ly/16NDcsf
=================================================

I wonder if UNICEF will ever see any of the money.

View Comment

Avatar

Forres Dee (@ForresDee)Posted on11:59 am - May 7, 2013


Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 11:51

Paul at CQN has written a decent short piece on this morning’s news. Summary: MM wanted to do the right thing and he was the one who insisted on Pinsents and Deloitte. Reports in, bad news, he wanted to publish and then got ousted.
========================================

Murray being ousted was a dead cert after the filler pieces on rangers blogs questioning the need for an internal investigation.

The desperation to just do this quietly behind closed doors (all over Glasgow) is palpable

View Comment

Avatar

verselijkfcPosted on12:00 pm - May 7, 2013


Night Terror
Thanks for your measured response Night Terror though the main thrust of what I was trying to say relates not to the footballing part. The current club setup is built on quick-sand and until firm foundations are implanted, the football will remain a forlorn afterthought. Getting rid of all current and refusing to countenance rehiring of the, “Rangers” men is essential to a fresh start but.

FWIW, I also think Levein would do an admirable job (at most SFL/SPL clubs) and if this could ‘effect’ a positive change towards decency and palatability down Govan-way then I would warmly welcome and support such an appointment. Neither would or could I take issue with any sporting success that followed such an appointment on the basis it was done transparently on the field of play.

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on12:10 pm - May 7, 2013


verselijkfc says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:00

Night Terror
Thanks for your measured response Night Terror though the main thrust of what I was trying to say relates not to the footballing part. The current club setup is built on quick-sand and until firm foundations are implanted, the football will remain a forlorn afterthought. Getting rid of all current and refusing to countenance rehiring of the, “Rangers” men is essential to a fresh start but.

FWIW, I also think Levein would do an admirable job …

I appreciated your point, but by appointing Levein in particular you address that. He is not one to just focus on football matters and let the board attend to everything else, or be one to make hopelessly naive or misinformed statements like the current football manager at Ibrox.

If you have Levein as a manager, you had better be prepared to have him familiar with everything that goes on at the club or you will have trouble with him. Conversely, if his remit is to just take care of on-the-pitch matters and not worry his beard about all that complicated boardroom stuff, you’d be best avoiding him altogether.

He’s a natural Director of Football with a seat on the board, but we don’t really do that role in Scottish football so he has to get the training gear on. He does seem to enjoy the latter, but it’s not where he is at his strongest.

I am not Sir Craig’s agent.

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on12:11 pm - May 7, 2013


neepheid says:

Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 11:09

If Murray has lost a vote of confidence, I wonder how Walter voted? And if Murray goes, can Walter stay? It will need to be sorted out very quickly, that’s for sure.
………………………………

The spivs need to retain a credible face to try and sell ST….

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on12:15 pm - May 7, 2013


Forres Dee (@ForresDee) says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 11:59

Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 11:51

Paul at CQN has written a decent short piece on this morning’s news. Summary: MM wanted to do the right thing and he was the one who insisted on Pinsents and Deloitte. Reports in, bad news, he wanted to publish and then got ousted.
========================================

Murray being ousted was a dead cert after the filler pieces on rangers blogs questioning the need for an internal investigation.

The desperation to just do this quietly behind closed doors (all over Glasgow) is palpable

If all of that is true, it’s shameful.

If the fans allow it to happen, doubly so.

If nobody now steps in to sort it out once and for all…

View Comment

Avatar

aramintamoobeamqcPosted on12:21 pm - May 7, 2013


Expect Alex Thompson to show his hand this afternoon – let us hope he has something nuclear.

View Comment

Long Time Lurker

Long Time LurkerPosted on12:21 pm - May 7, 2013


From O.G.Rafferty, On CQN. I believe that he has an excellent reputation amongst internetbampots as a reliable source with his/her finger on the pulse.

11:58 on 7 May, 2013

Thumbs up from the lawyers. An interesting afternoon ahead

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=12781&cpage=2#comment-1803178

View Comment

Long Time Lurker

Long Time LurkerPosted on12:23 pm - May 7, 2013


Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:21

F5 key at the ready 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on12:23 pm - May 7, 2013


I was interested in this observation by Les Gray (Hamilton Academical chairman) as quoted in the Herald (or was it the Scotsman) today:

“…….David Longmuir has described us as desperate men but we’re anything but. We’re a group of businessmen who are trying to take control of our own destiny. I would say I’ve had positive feedback about the stance we’ve taken.” ”

His choice of words ( ‘trying to take control of our own destiny’) is perhaps an indication that some clubs have finally twigged that their servants ( the board members of the SFA, SFL and SPL) have been allowed to get away with levels of inefficiency, ineffectiveness and downright obstruction that are seriously threatening the whole structure of the football business.

Maybe a bit of momentum is building up to try to clear the unhelpful people out.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on12:34 pm - May 7, 2013


I know I am being pedantic 🙁

There have been several references to the new club’s “Licence”.

Sevco Scotland’s Rangers have no licence. They did not apply for a licence nor have the SFA and SFL gave any indication that a licence was required for the season just gone.

The club licencing procedures take place once a year (around now). Sevco Scotland’s Rangers did not exist as a football club when the last round of licences were handed out. The SFA board could not transfer the licence from Rangers FC (even if the old club had met the licencing conditions – which they did not!). The SFA board does not have the power to grant a club licence – this power rests solely with the licencing committee.

The Club Licencing articles & rules simply did not foresee the possibility that a new club could be granted last minute admission to a league and SFA membership with no history. There is simply no process available that can grant a licence to a new club. Or, more correctly, there was no process until they changed the rules for the current round of licencing.

What was transferred to Sevco Scotland’s Rangers in 2012 (as part of the 5-way agreement) was the SFA membership previously held by Rangers FC.

Let me say again – Sevco Scotland’s Rangers do not and have never held a Club Licence.

If they are granted a Club Licence for season 2013/14 it will be for the first time.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on12:35 pm - May 7, 2013


Long Time Lurker says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:23

Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:21

F5 key at the ready

————————————————————————————————————————-

Alex Thomson seemed on the ball saying there was a meeting but then said it was cancelled only then to be trumped by Chris McLaughlin.

Clearly things are going on but those waiting on the nuclear outcome have been disappointed so many times that I won’t be holding my breath.

Another interting twist in the saga yes. Nuclear – no.

Frankly I wish it was nucelar then I could maybe get on with some work 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

goosyPosted on12:38 pm - May 7, 2013


BRTH
Have I got this right ?
I sign a side letter acknowledging tax may be due on my EBT loans from the trust
I only sign because my employer promises to pay any tax due to HMRC if the worse comes to the worse
My employer goes bust
A new employer emerges and claims to be the old employer
The new employer gets a licence from the SFA recognising it as the old employer
HMRC win the UTT
They want their tax
They claim my new employer is indeed my old employer according to the SFA
My new employer now denies he is the same entity as the old employer
The SFA support HMRC and claim that’s why TRFC didn`t get a full licence
HMRC then claim me for the tax due
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
My only defence is
Both TRFC and the SFA are lying
TRFC = RFC so they must pay the tax I owe
Meaning
It’s the Legends v TRFC

View Comment

Avatar

Forres Dee (@ForresDee)Posted on12:38 pm - May 7, 2013


HirsutePursuit says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:34

I know I am being pedantic

==========================

Nothing wrong with that, it’s the reason I come here, to hear the things that are difficult for some with a wider audience (in some cases paid by us) to say!

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on12:41 pm - May 7, 2013


john clarke says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:23

Yes but what is interesting, for me anyway, in the “good people versus bad people” revolt is that the club, the infamous ethereal 11 men in blue cloudy thing that the masses follow is being increasingly resigned to a bit part role and will have to ride with the consequences of that relative obscurity. That is not a ranking that will sit well I fear. In some ways, it being close season, could actually now turn into a weakness for the old guard. I said on here previously that the hordes were hounding the wrong man, that CW had the sense to keep the ‘club’ and the assets as one. CG (as well as others) have split the two, like ice in a fissure and that may well prove to be establishment’s biggest ever mistake.

Shame.

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on12:47 pm - May 7, 2013


therampantbaron says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 10:55

the mild concession by HMRC’s counsel that these were loans on the face of it was enough to demonstrate intent, whereas of course counsel for HMRC then went on to provide more than sufficient evidence that, although they were loans, they were by almost every conceivable measure utterly sham loans.

I’m not sure how your interpretation fits with the FTT(T) opinion expressed by the majority:

Mr Thomson accepted that both the trusts and loan arrangements were not “shams” (although certain detailed criticisms were made) but, rather, urged us to view these structures in a broader context, viz a practical and commercial reality in which payments were made by the companies in the Murray Group, and where these were invariably received by the favoured employee or footballer and enjoyed in effect absolutely by him. As we understand
too, Mr Thomson did not attack the principles affecting the primary interpretation of
earnings and emoluments and the tax and NIC charges in respect of these as set out by
Mr Thornhill. Rather, Mr Thomson submitted, as this was a scheme devised purely
for tax avoidance purposes, an extended sense including monies advanced into trust
and then lent, should be adopted.

(Majority Opinion, p43-44)

To me it is very clear that HMRC’s counsel was going after everything paid to each employee resultant from their employment, rather than arguing the fine detail of whether individual trusts or loans were a sham.

That is a bold strike at the very principle of these arrangements, rather than a picking away at the detail, intent or administration of each arrangement.

I’m not convinced this was an intentional strategy by HMRC – they may have misjudged the strength of their case and neglected to appreciate the importance of defining the loans & trusts as shams.

However, from where they are now, it might be an opportunity to establish precedent in the UTT to view all monies paid to the employee, in the extended sense as liable for tax and NIC, which was not possible at the lower level of the FTT(T).

View Comment

Avatar

bigsausagefingersPosted on12:56 pm - May 7, 2013


@ night terror

So you think Phil is objective on his views on the whole issues surrounding newco/oldco. Please name me a subjective SMSM hack on the case.

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on1:02 pm - May 7, 2013


bigsausagefingers says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:56

@ night terror

So you think Phil is objective on his views on the whole issues surrounding newco/oldco

Huh?

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on1:05 pm - May 7, 2013


upthehoops says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 11:28

scapaflow14 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 10:03

“Chris McLaughlin ‏@BBCchrismclaug 2m
BBC Scotland learns #Rangers Chairman Malcolm Murray could be on his way out after losing vote of no confidence at board meeting yesterday”
=======================================================

I wonder what the position of Walter No Surname will be if Murray goes? If he also leaves might the messy stuff really get into the internals of the fan?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There’s a bloke called Phil drinks down my local says he’s heard a whisper that Walter will change his surname by Deed Poll to Murray and will apply for the soon to be vacant Chairpersons position. He won’t let on where he heard it from as he doesn’t want to lose any Allyies.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on1:06 pm - May 7, 2013


Night Terror says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:47
0 0
==============
It was VERY important to HMRC that they did not win this case on the basis that the loans were (in the technical sense) shams. Winning on the basis of “sham” loans, would relate only to the specific circumstances of this case.

It all goes down to a purposeful construction of the transactions and the hierarchy of legislation.

Dr Poon argued that the Tax & NI legislation trumped the legislation for loans. Even if, taken in isolation, the loans were valid and appropriately covered by the existing legislation, a purposeful construction of all the transactions led her to the conclusion that the players received taxable benefit, and therefore the more important tax & NI legislation should take effect.

If they win on this basis at the UTT, it would give HMRC a vital precedent to strike down the vast majority of similar schemes without having to argue the relative merits of individual loan structures.

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on1:08 pm - May 7, 2013


Heard much the same as Paul this morning, doesn’t mean its true of course! If its true, then it looks like despite the employment of a Tabloid Titan, they have learnt nothing. Whether the report is good or bad, if they publish it themselves, they can control the story at least for a while. Now, it will all come out in the most damaging way possible, leaked in dribs and drabs by the various factions, spun to hell, and an already chaotic and febrile atmosphere will be made immeasurably worse.

Who in their right mind will shell out for a Season Book in these circumstances?

View Comment

Avatar

bigsausagefingersPosted on1:13 pm - May 7, 2013


@ night terror

“As it is, he just seems to like being the bearer of good news to his target audience. I’m not in that target audience, and consequently find that approach somewhat less than admirable. A fair few in his target audience think so too, as I’m sure…….”

I think the above that you wrote suggests that in your opinion Phils views are objective. To counter the argument I asked you to name a Scottish MSM hack who has a subjective view on the topic. As I understand there were 23 complaints from SMSM hacks concerning threats from Scottish football fans of a certain ilk so you have a score and more to choose from.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on1:13 pm - May 7, 2013


Long Time Lurker says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:21

From O.G.Rafferty, On CQN. I believe that he has an excellent reputation amongst internetbampots as a reliable source with his/her finger on the pulse.
=====================================================

He, or indeed she, displays a track record of being on the ball.

View Comment

Tartawulver

TartawulverPosted on1:16 pm - May 7, 2013


Night Terror says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 11:27

Think of all the outlets you might criticise for only reporting the good news for Rangers. If PMG takes the same approach, but for the other side of that equation, is that OK?
———————————————
My view is that that’s not comparing like with like, it’s apples and…well, pears let’s say. PMG has a clearly stated agenda, which he pursues, to which end he investigates and proposes ways in which various stories might fit together. We can assess his contributions in that light, just as we can assess someone making the case from a Rangers’ point of view, allowing us to give whatever weight we want to their leanings. The news outlets at least purport to be neutral, however, and that’s the essential difference. Despite having that potential basis of authority, they too often shun any attempt at investigation, simply regurgitate press releases, or pass on information without adding a level of journalistic scrutiny.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on1:16 pm - May 7, 2013


I see that the MLS has published their latest salary figures

Here is a sorted list with Henry, Keane and Cahill as the top three earners and Kenny Miller 8th in the list

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Apl-DIto6nOadEdrMlM4SllIbTV3RUhOY1BPWnVHckE#gid=0

Wouldn’t it be good if the SPL was as open and transparent. Might help HMRC with tax assessments too.

Not a hope in hell that it will happen though. 🙁

View Comment

Shooperb

ShooperbPosted on1:19 pm - May 7, 2013


bigsausagefingers says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:56

Ah, classic whataboutery. Brilliant.

For what it’s worth, I’m of a pretty similar opinion to Night terror. Phil does seem to be very much of the ‘I know something you don’t know, but it’s all on the QT and very hush-hush’ like he’s auditioning for L A Confidential or something.

If you’ve got something to say, then say it, instead of irritating us with little cryptic bits of gossip that can be made to fit the facts later.

P.S. I should say that I do peruse Phil’s stuff, and find some of it quite readable – it’s the whole sweetie wife approach that does my head in…..

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on1:20 pm - May 7, 2013


In case it hasn’t been posted here, the BBC story on Mr Murray’s potential resignation

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22432251

Chairman Malcolm Murray could be on his way out at Rangers after losing a vote of no confidence at a board meeting.

BBC Scotland has learned that Ibrox board members are keen for Murray to stand down.

This follows an internal investigation into ex-chief executive Charles Green’s links to the former owner Craig Whyte.

Green brought Murray to the Glasgow club last June on the day he completed his purchase of Rangers’ assets in a deal worth £5.5m.

Murray, who has a fund management background, has little to do with the day-to-day running of the club.

There was widespread reporting of a rift between Murray and Green earlier this year.

But Green and commercial director Imran Ahmad have since resigned their posts following allegations over the dealings with Whyte, who steered the club into administration in February 2012.

The pair deny any wrongdoing and retain their shareholdings in the club.

Whyte has claimed that he still owns Rangers’ assets and that Green had agreed to be his front man before the consortium involving the Yorkshireman and Ahmad took control of Rangers’ assets.

The claims and counter-claims led to Whyte and Green threatening one another with legal action.

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on1:21 pm - May 7, 2013


HirsutePursuit says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 13:06

It was VERY important to HMRC that they did not win this case on the basis that the loans were (in the technical sense) shams. Winning on the basis of “sham” loans, would relate only to the specific circumstances of this case.

How sure are you of this? Do you know first hand HMRC’s approach to this case?

View Comment

Avatar

Lord WobblyPosted on1:23 pm - May 7, 2013


Not that there is any real comparison, but…

A CHARITY football match featuring a Hollywood star, several
comedians and some legendary players helped raise £300,000 for famine victims in east Africa.

The game between Celtic and Manchester United “legends” ended 5-2 last night, with Parkhead hero Henrik Larsson scoring a hat-trick for the Hoops.

A 55,000-strong crowd watched the game at Celtic Park, arranged as a tribute to former Celtic defender John Kennedy who had to retire because of injury.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/celtic-v-manchester-utd-legends-1080369

View Comment

Avatar

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on1:34 pm - May 7, 2013


Hirsuite Pursuite

Absolutely correct to be pedantic.

Licences Cannot be transferred– what was transferred was the membership as I recall ( not in a position to do any checking at the moment ) and I had always assumed that having gained temporary admission they had been granted some sort of licence to play?

Surely you cannot play without a licence? That would be bizarre.

Goosy

Yes follow that logic through. If the UTT find that there is indeed a tax liability that arises from wages paid through what has been deemed to be a set of contracts which have been properly registered with the governing body and the licensing authority for the professional game, and the same body take the view that this is still the same club– then that liability may well exist and be claimable from that same club.

Remember that Green argued that TUPE applied to the rebel players and that they transferred over to Sevco.

The tribunal disagreed as Sevco did not appear to buy a going concern– but— if by way of an agreement with the licensing body they have agreed that they are the same club, will pay all footballing debts and argue repeatedly that they have bought over the players contracts– then what do the SFA say?

More importantly what do the players say if the taxman comes knocking?

View Comment

Avatar

bigsausagefingersPosted on1:36 pm - May 7, 2013


areyouaccusingmeofmendacity on Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 13:19
1 1 Rate This
bigsausagefingers says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 12:56

Ah, classic whataboutery. Brilliant.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////

I fail to see the analogy of asking a question, as I have done and “whataboutery” as you suggest.

View Comment

Avatar

Celtic Paranoia (@CelticParanoia)Posted on1:36 pm - May 7, 2013


TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 10:37
32 0 i
Rate Down
If Murray is truly on his way, then presumably somewhere out there at the moment there is an employment agency scouring its books for everyone whose surname is either ‘Murray’ or a colour in order to headhunt a replacement.

————————————————————————

Perhaps someone with surname Brown, to match the colour of the stuff that is going to hit the Sevco fan at some point?

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on1:37 pm - May 7, 2013


So we have the CEO and another key employee resigning from the board, because of allegations that they were involved with the previous owner. Basically in a scheme designed to shaft the creditors of the previous club, by disposing of the assets for an amount way below what they are truly worth. Indeed the new businesses own interim accounts tells us that what they bought was worth £20m more than what they paid for it.

We now have a meeting of the remainder of the board (some of whom are associated to the people who recently resigned under a cloud) and allegedly the current Chairman lost a vote of no confidence. One wonder what he said or did, or didn’t do, to cause this vote to take place at all. His position is now surely untenable.

These are the people who are running the new club, these are the people who are supposed to change the business model to make it workable, these are the people who will put the club on an even keel, these are the people who the Rangersfans have put their faith in.

Not only is the business model unworkable, I really don’t see how the people charged with fixing it are going to do it. I don’t think they have either the ability or more importantly the inclination.

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on1:41 pm - May 7, 2013


TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 13:16

Night Terror says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 11:27

Think of all the outlets you might criticise for only reporting the good news for Rangers. If PMG takes the same approach, but for the other side of that equation, is that OK?
———————————————
My view is that that’s not comparing like with like, it’s apples and…well, pears let’s say. PMG has a clearly stated agenda, which he pursues, to which end he investigates and proposes ways in which various stories might fit together. We can assess his contributions in that light, just as we can assess someone making the case from a Rangers’ point of view, allowing us to give whatever weight we want to their leanings. The news outlets at least purport to be neutral, however, and that’s the essential difference.

Fair point, TW. Up to a point, anyway.

PMG is indeed at least honest that he has, or at least doesn’t try to hide that he has, a particular point of view to promote.

I’m fine with that, and wish others could be as honest. However, having a particular angle should not prevent you from reporting stuff that you find out in your investigations, indeed, pursue investigation to find them out, that does not help the particular cause you support. When has he ever reported an inconvenient truth? He must have stumbled upon plenty, surely?

It is possible to have a particular opinion whilst being an honest and reliable reporter. I’ve seen enough of PMG’s stuff to find him wanting in that regard. Further, it’s not always clear with him where opinion starts and reporting stops amid his desperation to provide his audience with what they want to hear. Those who laud PMG seem to have a problem with various SMSM hacks for doing the same for a different audience.

I’m not sure being up front about your allegiance fully compensates. Not for me, anyway. If a contrary version of events is barely even acknowledged, I get suspicious that confirmation bias is clouding judgment and giving an incomplete understanding.

The constant seeking for agendas in every reporter or commenter makes me weak. I’d much rather judge output on its merits rather than divining some hidden intent or rating it on a Rangers/Celticometer.

And the innuendo bugs my funkies.

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on1:55 pm - May 7, 2013


I have a question, just a nagging thing.

Why did they not do it as a pre-pack administration. A lot of poeple thought that was what was going to happen.

There would not need to be a CVA (as I understand it) and it would have been a transfer of a going concern with the staff staying in their jobs. So it would have been the same business, but a different limited company. They could probably even have stayed in the SPL. It would unquestionably have been the same business, but without the debt attached to it. It may have had issues with credit and the like, but that seems to have happened anyway.

Would that route not have achieved exactly what they wanted.

Sorry if I have missed an obvious problem with doing it that way. Or if my understanding of the process is fundamentally flawed.

View Comment

Avatar

verselijkfcPosted on1:58 pm - May 7, 2013


chipm0nk
Is it just me or does that Chris McC piece make it sound like Murray is in cahoots with Green / Ahmad? And doesn’t this run contrary to the average-Joe’s belief that Murray is a real TRFC man, in league with Smith and actually on the other side? Bearing in mind that the BBC were banned from Ibrox on the basis of the leaked piece from Green to the same Chris McC, is this not just another nice piece of propaganda from the Green camp to blacken his reputation (he actually has a rather good one in the real world after all unlike Green) and if yes, what’s in it for the BBC? Or is Chris McC being played like a single-stringed stradivarias?

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on2:04 pm - May 7, 2013


verselijkfc says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 13:58

Chris McC is a journalist, the motivation(s) of the people leaking stuff to him will interest him, but not as much as getting the info out before someone else gets it. It’s would be a mistake to think that only one person is feeding him or anyone else for that matter.

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on2:15 pm - May 7, 2013


In the name of the wee man Walter Smith for chairman, Bill McMurdo has completely lost his tenuous grip on reality

“Rangers UnitedPosted on May 7, 2013 by billmcmurdo
Now that the vote of no confidence in Chairman Malcolm Murray has been made public, it is a great opportunity for the Ibrox board to put aside differences and present a united front to the world.

My understanding is that the vote must be reported to the necessary authorities and then it will be down to either the Chairman to resign or the board to sack him.

It is all terribly sad and need not have happened but Murray’s tenure as Chairman was a matter of contention I am told to both sides in the boardroom divide.

Fresh on the departure of Charles Green and with one other non-executive director possibly going, it is not the kind of news that will go down well in stock market circles.

In fact, Rangers have been told privately to get their act together and stop the blood-letting before it throws the club into a real crisis by severely damaging the share price.

For far more emotional reasons, Rangers fans want the infighting to stop.

That means there must be a truce between the old guard a.k.a. the brown brogues and the newbies.

I believe both can work together and am also aware that those in the newbie camp want a good working relationship with the “Rangers men” at Ibrox because they are fiercely driven to make the club a success – on AND off the park.

Craig Mather is keen to make his mark in the CEO hotseat and I think he should be given time to do so. Brian Stockbridge is a diligent professional who is working hard in his remit to squeeze the juice out of every shilling Rangers FC owns.

Combine the energy and expertise of these two with the wisdom and knowledge of Walter Smith and Rangers have a formidable team going forward.

In fact, Walter is my shout for Chairman if Murray goes, although I don’t know if he would fancy it.

Unity is vital and Rangers fans should be aware that there is no thirst for old guard blood that I am aware of in the newbie camp.

The Ibrox civil war has bitterly divided the closest of friends but the tragedy of it is that it need not have happened.

And it need not continue.

A large part of the problem is that both sides have leaked stories to a greedy media and a Rangers-hating media at that. This, for many fans, is the real bone of contention.

Having two polarised sides in the boardroom is not necessarily a bad thing – the tension created can actually be a check and balance on both sides and if they can agree common ground on key areas, that can work to the benefit of the club.

It is when those sides fight a bitter propaganda war that damages the club that it becomes intolerable.

Both sides in the boardroom must now work together to do what is best for Rangers Football Club and both camps may have to compromise some things to make that happen.

Maybe the vote yesterday was a step in the right direction. Whether or not removing Malcolm Murray is a good thing or not, I will leave for others to judge.

But if it brought the board together in a consensus, it looks like a positive move toward unity that the club desperately needs.

Now Rangers may just get a Chairman who can get everybody at the club to sing from the same hymn sheet.

And maybe the next time Craig Whyte jumps up and says “BOO!” the board won’t feel the need to appoint a top accountancy firm to look through their own filing cabinets.”

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on2:17 pm - May 7, 2013


How anyone doesn’t agree with Night Terror on the subject of PMG is beyond me.

Mr Terror has had to justify his reasoned and reasonable opinion to an unreasonable extent.

View Comment

Avatar

Philip Spicer (@BrooksBaba)Posted on2:18 pm - May 7, 2013


If as Green/Ahmad alleged that Walter and Ally where trying to take over Rangers without paying for it, doesn’t it make perfect sense for them to get rid of Murray as Chairman as quicky as possible to isolate Walter from the rest of the Board… just an idea from me 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

bigsausagefingersPosted on2:19 pm - May 7, 2013


@ night terror

I asked you a coherent question. As I said earlier you believe Phil to be objective in his writings, I then asked you to name a subjective journalist from Scotland on the case. If the difference between objective/subjective is incoherent to you then you are correct that there is no need to engage with me further.

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on2:22 pm - May 7, 2013


Has anyone got a dictionary?

View Comment

Avatar

expectinrainPosted on2:30 pm - May 7, 2013


bigsausagefingers says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 13:13
4 3 Rate This
@ night terror

“As it is, he just seems to like being the bearer of good news to his target audience. I’m not in that target audience, and consequently find that approach somewhat less than admirable. A fair few in his target audience think so too, as I’m sure…….”

I think the above that you wrote suggests that in your opinion Phils views are objective. To counter the argument I asked you to name a Scottish MSM hack who has a subjective view on the topic. As I understand there were 23 complaints from SMSM hacks concerning threats from Scottish football fans of a certain ilk so you have a score and more to choose from.

———————

bigsausagefingers says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:19
0 0 Rate This
@ night terror

I asked you a coherent question. As I said earlier you believe Phil to be objective in his writings, I then asked you to name a subjective journalist from Scotland on the case. If the difference between objective/subjective is incoherent to you then you are correct that there is no need to engage with me further.

——————–

I don’t like to get involved, but I have a feeling, bigsausagefingers that you may have swapped ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ here, and so there is rather less of a disagreement with Night Terror than it appears. If I’m right, you understood Night Terror to be saying that Phil has an agenda (i.e. is subjective in what he covers, and how), and you were making the point that the same might perhaps be said of many mainstream journalists (so that Night Terror might struggle to name an objective one).

If this is the case, it seems you both agree that Phil is not neutral, and that many mainstream journalists are also not neutral. Then you disagree about whether it matters to Phil’s reporting, but at least you start from a common understanding.

[Apologies if I’m wrong, I’ll get me coat and mind me own beeswax.]

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on2:31 pm - May 7, 2013


Phil mac, when it comes to the rangers story has done, and continues to do good work. He can also be bloody irritating!. Phil is subjective, well, partisan really, and he likes to “noise up” the Rangers fraternity. Given the abuse he has had from that fraternity, I’m not going to criticise him for that.

The rest of the Scottish press pack are at the very least subjective , or downright partisan, in their outlook when it comes to this story.

The only journalists who have covered this, that I would claim had an objective view would be Douglas Fraser from the BBC, and of course, Alex Thomson

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on2:31 pm - May 7, 2013


Walter Smith taking over as Chairman (albeit in a titular role) would make perfect sense.

They have season tickets to sell.

Ally McCoist came out last year when about 3,000 had been sold and asked the fans to buy into the new club. They did, in excellent numbers.

Sir Walter being made Chairman, they’ll sell 60,000 season tickets and have a waiting list on top of that.

View Comment

Avatar

aramintamoobeamqcPosted on2:34 pm - May 7, 2013


Jim Spence says statement incoming on league reconstruction from SPL.

View Comment

Avatar

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on2:35 pm - May 7, 2013


Jim Spence ‏@bbcjimspence 5m
Stand by…….SPL about to issue a press release on reconstruction. God news or bad news

Jim Spence ‏@bbcjimspence 5m
That obviously should have said good news……although some might think they’ve been playing God with Scottish football

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on2:35 pm - May 7, 2013


CW taped CG – Done and dusted
What more do the SFA need? – Suspend them till they answer – they have no excuse not to
How hard can it be?
Or SFA have no internal `rules`? – a supervisory committee? – or audit process? – nothing at all?

View Comment

Avatar

aramintamoobeamqcPosted on2:36 pm - May 7, 2013


via Alex O’Henley on Twitter

Breaking – clubs agree on one league body, 12-10-10-10 structure, pyramid system and play-offs bet 11th and 2,3 and 4th teams in first div.

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on2:38 pm - May 7, 2013


chipm0nk says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:31

Superficially yes, but look at the role and responsibilities of a non-exec Chairman of a PLC, particularly one in perilous state of Rangers, and than ask yourself, in what way does Mr Smith fit any of the criteria.

The link is to a guide by Spenser Stuart, one of the top City head hunting firms.

http://content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/Cornerstone0108.pdf

If he wants to sell season tickets, put him in the phone bank 😉

View Comment

Avatar

verselijkfcPosted on2:40 pm - May 7, 2013


Scapaflow14
Chris McC is a journalist, the motivation(s) of the people leaking stuff to him will interest him, but not as much as getting the info out before someone else gets it. It’s would be a mistake to think that only one person is feeding him or anyone else for that matter.

Don’t disagree with that but the purpose of the BBC is to provide balance, even where none obviously exists (one can argue this lofty ambition is long since deceased); this is, again, printing PR with one side of the story, not even an attempt at balance; of course, if he’s being fed by other competing interests then he should do his job and build the story using that info too. Not like he has to “sell copy” is it? The UK license payers are gifting him his job.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on2:43 pm - May 7, 2013


April 16th

SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster indicated he did not believe “cherry-picking” aspects of league reconstruction was an option moving forward.
————————–

Neil ……… just get your coat and go now!

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on2:45 pm - May 7, 2013


Press Release ~ SPL Clubs agree change

At an all-club meeting earlier today at Hampden Park, the 12 Scottish Premier League clubs unanimously agreed on a package of measures that would deliver a merged league in time for season 2013/2014.

The principles include:

– a single merged league of 42 clubs, in line with the stated preference of SFL1 clubs
– a 12-10-10-10 divisional structure
– an all-through distribution model involving substantial redistribution to the second tier
– a ‘pyramid’ for the entire game
– play-offs involving team 11 in the SPL and teams 2, 3 and 4 in the division below

A formal proposal to deliver the above will be brought back to the SPL clubs for voting this month.

The SPL looks forward to working with the Scottish FA and Scottish Football League to deliver vibrant change for the game as a whole.

Chairman Ralph Topping commented: “I am pleased that SPL clubs have today agreed on a way forward for the game in this country. We have tremendous sympathy with the SFL1 clubs and their plight and with their shared ambition for a 42-club solution.

“Much work needs to be done in a short space of time to achieve our objective of a single merged league this summer. But, where there is a will, there is a way. The time for action is now.”

Let’s see what happens now!

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on2:45 pm - May 7, 2013


Official SPL Press Release

http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=12291

Press Release ~ SPL Clubs agree change

At an all-club meeting earlier today at Hampden Park, the 12 Scottish Premier League clubs unanimously agreed on a package of measures that would deliver a merged league in time for season 2013/2014.

The principles include:

– a single merged league of 42 clubs, in line with the stated preference of SFL1 clubs
– a 12-10-10-10 divisional structure
– an all-through distribution model involving substantial redistribution to the second tier
– a ‘pyramid’ for the entire game
– play-offs involving team 11 in the SPL and teams 2, 3 and 4 in the division below

A formal proposal to deliver the above will be brought back to the SPL clubs for voting this month.

The SPL looks forward to working with the Scottish FA and Scottish Football League to deliver vibrant change for the game as a whole.

Chairman Ralph Topping commented: “I am pleased that SPL clubs have today agreed on a way forward for the game in this country. We have tremendous sympathy with the SFL1 clubs and their plight and with their shared ambition for a 42-club solution.

“Much work needs to be done in a short space of time to achieve our objective of a single merged league this summer. But, where there is a will, there is a way. The time for action is now.”

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on2:46 pm - May 7, 2013


angus1983 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:17

How anyone doesn’t agree with Night Terror on the subject of PMG is beyond me.

Mr Terror has had to justify his reasoned and reasonable opinion to an unreasonable extent.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It’s just a pity PMG isn’t the real story really otherwise NT and BSF could batter in to the debate all day long. They need a separate blog to thrash it out.

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on2:47 pm - May 7, 2013


verselijkfc says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:40

In an ideal world yes, but it is a competitive market, I think he would argue that if he has something that is in his judgement “newsworthy” then he has a duty to run with it. The problem I have with the BBC’s coverage, is that on screen reporters do their bit, but, the story never really gets back to the second echelon reporters, like Douglas Fraser, who have the time and resource to do the in depth pieces that you’re looking for. I don’t mean documentaries like Mark Daly’s, I mean the 3 -5 minute segments, that provide analysis.

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on2:50 pm - May 7, 2013


easyJambo says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:45

Official SPL Press Release

http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=12291

Press Release ~ SPL Clubs agree change
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hang on, hang on – a week or so ago it was all or nothing for a different proposal or the game was a bogey!! Has common sense broken out?

Where is the proposal to scrap the 11-1 voting gone?

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on2:56 pm - May 7, 2013


Oh – the SPL picks today of all days to add to distraction’s -Gosh – still 11-1 vote thing? – all black smoke
Scores on the doors are;
All Directors still in place
Financial Tsunami approaching Ibrox – heads buried in the beach sand – mediahoose overdrive in play

View Comment

Avatar

cowanpetePosted on2:59 pm - May 7, 2013


So if we now have one “league” which body disappears, SFL or SPL?

View Comment

Avatar

liveinhopPosted on3:02 pm - May 7, 2013


alex thomson ‏@alextomo 2m
@DelBhoyHyslop I am trying to break a story – hugeness is for others to judge

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on3:02 pm - May 7, 2013


Hopefully both, and all the execs and the board members are quietly banned from holding any position in either the new league setup or the SFA for the next 1000 years or so.

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on3:08 pm - May 7, 2013


scapaflow14 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:31
‘..The only journalists who have covered this, that I would claim had an objective view would be Douglas Fraser from the BBC, and of course, Alex Thomson.’

___

Not sure that Douglas Fraser really put his all into reporting the finance side of the saga. I feel there was a lot murky business going on that an intelligent and interested finance journo could have, and should have, got right into.

I should add, though, that the sports editor at BBC Radio Scotland is said to have told him more or less to butt out, because it was a ‘sports’ story. .

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on3:10 pm - May 7, 2013


twopanda says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:56

Oh – the SPL picks today of all days to add to distraction’s -Gosh – still 11-1 vote thing? – all black smoke
Scores on the doors are;
All Directors still in place
Financial Tsunami approaching Ibrox – heads buried in the beach sand – mediahoose overdrive in play

I find that a rather peculiar interpretation on events.

When would be convenient for you that the SPL & SFL merge, introduce playoffs, spread the money more widely and, apparently, have a true pyramid structure? Should all that be postponed until Ibrox is a haven of stability and contentment?

I, in the meantime, am very pleased, whilst awaiting the detail and expecting further changes to happen in future. 11-1 especially, if it is even still relevant.

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on3:11 pm - May 7, 2013


john clarke says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 15:08

I am told, that the second word was off, and that his sports journalists were more than up to the task, It caused much hilarity in certain Edinburgh hostelries at the time.

View Comment

Avatar

Madbhoy24941Posted on3:13 pm - May 7, 2013


angus1983 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:17
—————————–

I agree with NT on this but I would also support the rights of others to disagree, that is what great about debate. When it becomes personal is when we have problems, or when someone takes it as a pop at their club and goes on the defense.

Fact is this, PMCB has in the past delivered as a journo, he made the calls, he researched and produced reports that could genuinely be called exclusives.

On the other hand, he hears a rumour or sees a document and publishes a report containing only little hints just to stay on the right side of the law. Sometimes those rumours take a long time to become relatity and that can be deeply frustrating.

Then there are the times he just teases, maybe more in hope than based on new and concrete information and that pisses people off, especially when they come to nothing.

And he has an agenda.

So how is he different from the others? Well, he is open about his agenda, he is not afraid to publish bad news regarding his team and will also have a go at the supporters of that team when he feels it is warranted. For me, that is what makes him different from the others.

View Comment

Long Time Lurker

Long Time LurkerPosted on3:14 pm - May 7, 2013


Apologies, I have not had the chance to digest the SPL proposals – for those who have, would this mean that Sevco would remain in Division 3 in season 2013/14?

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on3:15 pm - May 7, 2013


bogsdollox says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 14:46

It’s just a pity PMG isn’t the real story really otherwise NT and BSF could batter in to the debate all day long. They need a separate blog to thrash it out.

a) There was a single agenda, literally, for today on here, and I was going off-topic? Riiiight.
b) I’m not stopping anyone talking about anything else they want to.
c) I have long stated my opinion that an irregular blog followed by a long string of comments is a poor way for this site to be arranged.

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on3:15 pm - May 7, 2013


scapaflow14 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 15:02
‘Hopefully both, and all the execs and the board members are quietly banned from holding any position in either the new league setup or the SFA for the next 1000 years or so.’
—-
This should really be quite interesting. Two companies to be formally dissolved,one new company to be set up , one board to be elected, one chairman, one CEO to be appointed.

Who goes-Doncaster or Longmuir?

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on3:17 pm - May 7, 2013


john clarke says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 15:15

Don’t forget a new water tight rule book. The timescales, look a wee bit ambitious?

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on3:17 pm - May 7, 2013


Long Time Lurker says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 15:14
Assuming no leg up, yes

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on3:20 pm - May 7, 2013


Night Terror says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 15:10

When would be convenient for you that the SPL & SFL merge, introduce playoffs, spread the money more widely and, apparently, have a true pyramid structure?

When the clubs have had sufficient time to consider the merits of the proposal, that is the full proposal with no hidden clauses or threats of armageddon hanging over them, and the administration, with the clubs and fans full support, have had the time to implement it in such a way that it isn’t a rushed incomplete botch job creating future loopholes that Bungle and Zippee would be proud of!

View Comment

Avatar

Night TerrorPosted on3:24 pm - May 7, 2013


madbhoy24941 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 15:13

I agree with NT on this but I would also support the rights of others to disagree, that is what great about debate. When it becomes personal is when we have problems, or when someone takes it as a pop at their club and goes on the defense.

Quite right, madbhoy24941 – especially the bit about agreeing with me.

I’m very happy for others to disagree civilly and constructively with me. It’s good for me and my opinions that they are tested. Stifling the contrary view is bad for everyone in the long run.

Oops – back to PMG again there!

View Comment

Avatar

Robert Wilson (@Rapscallion5)Posted on3:24 pm - May 7, 2013


John Clarke :

The SPL hold the prime commercial & particularly broadcast contracts. Because of this I think it likely the new 42 club league will be SPL on it’s existing company number but rebranded under a new name.

View Comment

Comments are closed.