Scottish Referees and VAR. Is it time for dialogue on the elephant in the cave?

With the introduction of VAR to Scottish football our football media, exposure to the on line, audio and print world has been akin to living in Plato’s Cave where debate/discussion  concentrates on the shadows reflected on the wall by the light of a fire: (PLATO ON: The Allegory of the Cave – YouTube )

The shadows take the following shapes.</p?

  • Was it handball?
  • What is handball?
  • Was it a penalty?
  • Was it offside?
  • What are offside rules anyway?
  • Do referees know them?
  • Do they apply them with any degree of consistency?

All are of interest as they are scrutinised, dissected and disputed, but they all ignoring the biggest shadow of the biggest animal in the cave:-  that of the elephant called ” trust”.

In the context of Scottish football, ever since the game became professional, referees in Scotland have never been trusted because of the demographic peculiarities of Scotland, a peculiarity created as a by-product of historical events in Scotland and its near neighbours Ireland and England.

With such a diverse populace tribal distrust of the other is a fertile breeding ground to grow and take life, like unattended weeds choke a garden.

In the Plato’s Cave allegory the commentator suggests the way out of the cave is by philosophical education and if you watch the video, one description of his guidance  on such education is “dialogue.”

So what is dialogue?

“ Dialogue is a conversation on a common subject between two or more persons with differing views, the primary purpose of which is for each participant to learn from the other so that s/he can change and grow. This very definition of dialogue embodies the first commandment of dialogue.

If we approach another party to either defeat them or to learn about them so as to deal more effectively with her or him, or at best to negotiate with him or her. If we face each other at all in confrontation–sometimes more openly polemically, sometimes more subtly so, but always with the ultimate goal of defeating the other, because we are convinced that we alone have the absolute truth, we are indulging in debate and not dialogue.

But dialogue is not debate. In dialogue each party must listen to the other as openly and sympathetically as s/he can in an attempt to understand the other’s position as precisely and, as it were, as much from within, as possible. Such an attitude automatically includes the assumption that at any point we might find the other party’s position so persuasive that, if we would act with integrity, we would have to change, and change can be disturbing.

The parties must be prepared to come to the dialogue as persons ready to put aside their own needs and wants, at least for a time. They must be ready to listen, without judgement, to the thoughts and feelings as expressed by the other person in the exchange. The parties must be prepared to accept that reaching agreement may not be achieved, although that might occur, but dialogue will lead to both parties, through a better understanding of the others’ needs and wants, to being able to live amicably with their differences.”

How, then, can Scottish football supporters as key stakeholders in the game  via their own club supporter organisations and the likes of The Scottish Football Supporters Association (SFSA)? How can the clubs themselves effectively engage in a meaningful dialogue?

There are 10 “Commandments in the Original Dialogue Decalogue by Leonard Swidler that can be read at

but the following two are particularly apt in terms of acknowledging the presence of the particular elephant in our own Scottish football cave in order to drag it out and into the light?

SEVENTH COMMANDMENT: Dialogue can take place only between equals. Both must come to learn from each other. Therefore, if, for example, one party views the other as inferior, or if one party views the other as superior, there will be no dialogue. If authentic relationship dialogue is to occur between the parties, then both must come mainly to learn from each other; only then will it be “equal with equal,”. This rule also indicates that there can be no such thing as a one-way dialogue.

EIGHTH COMMANDMENT: Dialogue can take place only on the basis of mutual trust, which must be built.  A dialogue among persons can be built only on personal trust. Hence it is wise not to tackle the most difficult problems in the beginning, but rather to approach first those issues most likely to provide some common ground, thereby establishing the basis of trust. Then, gradually, as this personal trust deepens and expands, the more thorny matters can be undertaken. Thus, as in learning we move from the known to the unknown. So in dialogue we proceed from commonly held matters, which, given our mutual ignorance resulting from possibly years of misunderstanding and possibly hostility in the relationship, may take us quite some time to discover fully–to discuss matters of disagreement.

Philosophy/dialogue is all very well but what can it do to bring about the required level of trust?

The advice above is via small steps and one small step but with huge benefits would be the introduction of transparency to the VAR process. This could be done in the reasonable short term by making conversation between referees and VAR assistant audible to all.

It is a technical approach but with behaviour changing consequences because observed behaviour changes that of those being observed. It need not be live during a game but at very least released within half an hour of a match ending. It brings in transparency which is the forerunner to accountability and would be a game changer.

Longer term strategy for culture change to improve professionalism of referees, which the proposal by Sentinel Celts   Calling Out Scottish Referees – SENTINELCELTS sets out should be part of a longer terms strategy for changing the culture of the referee service with the ultimate aim of making refereeing a very rewarding professional career   and be fertile territory for dialogue between all stakeholders, not least referees themselves.

This entry was posted in Blogs by Auldheid. Bookmark the permalink.

About Auldheid

Celtic fan from Glasgow living mostly in Spain. A contributor to several websites, discussion groups and blogs, and a member of the Resolution 12 Celtic shareholders' group. Committed to sporting integrity, good governance, and the idea that football is interdependent. We all need each other in the game.

712 thoughts on “Scottish Referees and VAR. Is it time for dialogue on the elephant in the cave?

  1. fan of football
    24th July 2023 at 09:08
    It’s called ‘taking one for the team’.

  2. I occasionally read the online version of ‘the Guardian’, which-credit to them- is free, but they remind you that you have viewed ‘x’ number of times and suggest that you might want to subscribe if you can.
    They say that their investigative journalism needs to be supported.
    I have just fired off a letter questioning their ‘investigative journalists’ peculiar reticence in investigating the claims of RIFC plc in its Prospectus and the FCA’s okaying of that Prospectus.
    Just for fun, but in deadly earnest!
    We will see whether I get a reply at all. If I do get a reply, I will put both my lettter and the reply on the blog.
    We know that the SMSM journalists are very selective in what they journalistically ‘investigate’ and there’s not likely to be any more courage in the veins of their English counterparts.
    But who knows?

  3. Keep up the good fight John
    The stance of the FCA is baffling to say the least and surely leaves you to wonder if their actions or inaction regards the sevco 2012 prospectus would give you confidence to invest in businesses under their watch .

  4. macfurgly
    Old Joe boy ,didn’t he get his fingers burnt dealing with the old club .
    Mr Hutton moving to spurs for IIRC a record fee for a fullback from Scottish football.
    £9m was it with no other bidders

  5. macfurgly
    I believe that Joe emptied his wallet to the tune of £30m for a share of some hoverpitches down Ibrox way. I think Levy was also involved. The deal involved basically giving them the right to but old Rangers, but even then, the press gave Murray a free ride.

  6. Hi , regarding loan players; is there a maximum number SPFL allow clubs to loan out to a n other Premiership team.
    Celtic have a large squad some of which need games under their belt and to see if they can pass the acid test.
    I’d like to see half a dozen or so loaned maybe to 3 teams especially where the managers play football …and not do not concentrate on ” hammer throwering. ”

    I’m still wondering whats happened to their 5stars.
    Intellectual property ownership not allowing it , perhaps.

    Thanks in advance

  7. Bonjour.
    Just seeing if I can get in and post stuff now after some registration problems.
    Hope the pre-season is treating you all well.

  8. TJ Falkirk
    28th July 2023 at 17:53
    ‘Buenas noches’, TJ Falkirk! Happy to see that you have overcome your registration probs!
    Whit, did the season end at all?
    I’m an auld geezer, of course, but it increasingly seems to be that football is now an ‘industry’ with almost no connection with the concept of Sport but driven by every greedy desire on the part of ‘entrepreneurial charlatans’ to make money, a la American idea of ‘sport’.
    And we, dolts that we are, are expected to buy into the whole hypocritical cant attached to the Liquidation of RFC of 1872 that tells us that RFC of 1872 did not die as a football club when the SFA withdrew its membership of the SFA.
    For rotten, ‘filthy lucre’s’ sake!
    There are bad bast.rts in Scottish Football governance, let it be known.

  9. Listening to Radio Sevilla, Barca 3- 0 against Real in ‘ el Clasico’ in Dallas, with a corner to Real just given, with seconds to go!
    I think the final whistle has just gone.
    I don’t know whether the commentators are actually at the match or just watching it streamed, but the equivalents of the Sportsound guys were all there!
    Seville I think is far from Barcelona, but I certainly got the impression that the commentators had leanings towards Barca.
    I don’t speak Spanish and am basing my observations on the BBC Radio Scotland ‘model!

  10. A brilliant article by the RangersTaxCase Blogger in the Guardian in 2012. How many media attitudes have changed?

    “It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds” – Samuel Adams, 1775

    It is easy to feel powerless in this world. “Why bother? What can I do?” Even as a student, I did not join protest marches. While most of my generation screamed: “Can’t pay! won’t pay!” about the hated poll tax, I could and I did. Raging against the machine seemed like Sisyphean futility and talk of changing the world was for poets and artists. To me, practical people just got on with it and made the best of events. Cynicism was a uniform I wore with pride. Against such a background, I make an unlikely campaigner and the last person anyone would pick to give voice to a silenced and disenfranchised community.

    Yet my blog,, seems to have done exactly that. What started as an impulse one Sunday evening in March of last year has grown into something of a Scottish cultural phenomenon. Love it or loathe it, few would dispute that this blog has played a significant role revealing the facts and shaping the debate on a subject that has taken on such importance that the UK prime minister and Scottish first minister have belatedly jumped on the bandwagon.

    This monster has grown to the point where it is now fielding daily traffic of over 100,000 views, while new arguments and ideas are fuelled by reader comments that are now coming in at a rate of about 1,500 per day. These are odd statistics for discussions characterised by accounting conventions and insolvency law. It is as if all of the cool kids in the playground suddenly want to read the swots’ algebra homework.

    In a world of free information, where most blogs die alone and ignored shortly after birth, the very popularity of carries a message about modern Scotland. It is a story of the unmet need for the straight story, uncorrupted by the sinister Triangle of Trade that renders most of what passes as news in Scotland’s media outlets as worthless. It is the tale of why things went so wrong at Rangers and why the club’s many fans seemed paralysed by disbelief until it was too late.

    If you have not spent much time in Caledonia what follows will seem a little surreal. It seems that way because it is. Scotland is a land where nothing matters like football matters – in particular within the west-central region. For over 120 years, Glasgow’s two biggest football teams have engaged in one of the world’s most bitter sporting feuds. With mindless tribalism masquerading as a religious divide, stabbings, live bombs sent through the post, and even murders have been woven into the tapestry of the recent history of Scottish football. Yet I still get challenged over my penchant for anonymity? Football in Scotland is not like football elsewhere – at least not in Europe. (Latin Americans might recognise the poison brought to the surface by the poultice of football, but few other places would understand).

    Yet for all of its ugliness, I love it. A large part of my “two score and change” years on this planet has been devoted to supporting my team, Celtic. Actually watching the team would be a very small part of the time expended. The obsession with your team colours many other aspects of life for those unfortunates who find themselves pulled into the vortex that goes along with supporting either of the Glasgow giants.

    Football clubs from places like Manchester and Liverpool can lay claim to much more success on the field, but these cities do not get close to Glasgow in terms of intensity of interest. It is this passion that serves as the growth medium for the bacillus that infects the news business in Scotland, which in turn serves as the carrier of the disease that threatens to kill Rangers.

    Selling news of any kind in Glasgow has long been a simple business: sales are driven by stories about Rangers and Celtic. If you need a circulation boost to improve advertising rates, you need more and better stories about these football teams. Good news moves newsprint. Bad news sells, too, as fans wallow in the misery of their hated enemy. However, Scotland is not evenly divided between these clubs. Celtic and Rangers may attract similar attendances to home games, but the demographic reality is that there are a great many more people in Scotland who would claim to be Rangers supporters than Celtic. Religious census figures provide a decent proxy for the numbers that sustain both clubs: in 2001, less than 18% of the population of Scotland identified as being Roman Catholic. Celtic’s support base is far from exclusively Catholic, but it would be a little daft to ignore the reality of family religious origin in determining which football team a young boy or girl is most likely to follow in Scotland. Rangers’ demographic surplus has determined the general editorial tone of the nation’s news business for decades.

    During the early 1990s when Celtic had their own brush with financial mortality, newspapers sent journalists across the globe to chase down scandal related to Celtic’s imminent demise. Such was the open glee in print, it is a wonder that the English language had to import the word Schadenfreude from German. The lowland Scots dialect would surely have had several words of its own to offer, but I doubt that the acronym GIRUY would have translated as readily across the globe. Celtic’s travails were good for the media business. There was no shortage of Rangers supporters willing to smirk at their impoverished foes while dreaming of European Cup triumphs to come. The arrival of Celtic’s saviour from Canada, the unfashionable Fergus McCann, ended the era of amateurism in the boardroom and also planted the seeds for the great divergence in the fortunes of the clubs. Few could have imagined how much could change in just two decades.

    The story of Rangers’ insolvency is already becoming a fireside tale told mostly by those who were not there. Trampled down in the rush of journalists claiming that “of course, I knew all along, but I just could not say anything” are all of the derisive newspaper articles and radio call-in panellists dismissing the risks Rangers were facing. I am in no doubt: Scotland’s media, sports and business desks alike, are complicit in the disaster than has befallen Rangers. They killed their golden goose.

    The Triangle of Trade to which I have referred is essentially an arrangement where Rangers FC and their owner provide each journalist who is “inside the tent” with a sufficient supply of transfer “exclusives” and player trivia to ensure that the hack does not have to work hard. Any Scottish journalist wishing to have a long career learns quickly not to bite the hands that feed. The rule that “demographics dictate editorial” applied regardless of original footballing sympathies.

    The last vertex of this triangle is the reader – the average football fan. Fed a diet rich in sycophantic rubbish, he lost the ability to review critically what he was reading. Super-casino developments worth £700m complete with hover-pitches were still being touted to Rangers fans even after the first news of the tax case broke. Along with “Ronaldo To Sign For Rangers” nonsense, it is little wonder that the majority of the club’s fans were in a state of stupefaction in recent years. They were misled by those who ran their club. They were deceived by a media pack that had to know that the stories it peddled were false.

    In the end, Rangers fans sat back for years and barely raised a word of complaint as their club was abused and misused. Many of these same fans who sat on their hands have had plenty to say about the motivations of my blog. Egged on by spokesmen for those doing Rangers the most harm, it is widely believed that HMRC are feeding me information to do damage to their club. Firstly, anyone reading the blog again would see that my sources of information probably lie outside of the government. Secondly, the blog has been the only dependable source of information about the sorry state of affairs within Ibrox. By revealing what has been happening at Ibrox, I have provided Rangers fans with an opportunity to do something about it. If I was really intent on harming their club, I would have said nothing at all. That this opportunity has been squandered is something for Rangers fans to contemplate. It is in helping expose this Bermuda-triangle-for-truth that I take most pride. has become a platform for some of the sharpest minds and most accomplished professionals to share information, debate, and form opinions based upon a rational interpretation of the facts rather than PR-firm fabrications. In all of the years when the mainstream media had a monopoly on opinion forming and agenda setting, the more sentient football fan had no outlet for his or her opinions. Blogs and other modern media, like Twitter, have democratised information distribution. has gone far beyond its half-baked “I know a secret” origins to become a forum for citizen journalism. The power of the crowd‑sourced investigation initiated by anyone who is able to ignite the interest of others is a force that has the potential to move mountains in our society. All that is required is an issue about which others are passionate and feel unheard.

    “Why bother? What can I do?” If it is something you care about, you can do anything you want.

  11. Can sympathise wi that RTC guy. Used to write a blog that dealt with nerdy areas of football that most folk don’t bother with myself.

  12. upthehoops
    30th July 2023 at 00:37
    ‘…A brilliant article by the RangersTaxCase Blogger in the Guardian in 2012. How many media attitudes have changed?’
    I mentioned a few days ago that I had emailed ‘The Guardian’ on an RIFC plc matter.
    Not having had even an automated acknowledgement, I copied the email to a particular Guardian’s ‘investigative journalist.’
    I have not yet had an acknowledgement of receipt of that email.
    It’s early days, perhaps.
    But I’m ready to believe that even the ‘Guardian’ might be ready to buy into untruth rather than spend any effort in showing and explaining why they think it is not an untruth!
    Which is why I have not yet been ready to subscribe!

  13. upthehoops
    30th July 2023 at 00:37
    ‘…A brilliant article by the RangersTaxCase Blogger in the Guardian in 2012. How many media attitudes have changed?’
    Uth, thanks for posting that piece which I have to say I had not seen before!
    A very telling observation is:
    “By revealing what has been happening at Ibrox, I have provided Rangers fans with an opportunity to do something about it.”
    None of them did do anything about it, except accept a disgusting lie.

  14. ‘Horse named ‘Penalty to Rangers’ finishes second in Canadian race as surprise SPFL wink catches fans off-guard’ – Daily Record.5 hours ago

    I demand that the winner be disqualified!

    (Shame there’s nae VAR in horseracin’!).

  15. bect67
    31st July 2023 at 22:36
    ‘…Horse named ‘Penalty to Rangers…’
    That made me smile, bect67.
    Fair do’s to the Andersons for their sense of humour and desire to make a very pointed observation!

  16. Ranger fans have been talking about this being the year they get their magic 56th title. I believe the 56th will come sooner rather than later, especially if they don’t concede a penalty today. That would make 56 consecutive games without a penalty conceded. The magic 56th achieved no doubt.

  17. vernallen @ 13.08

    Nice reminder!

    btw, The earliest they can win 56 consecutive title would be around 2080 – if they win every one from now on!

    In other penalty news, I was pleasantly surprised to note that Bobby Madden called out Kris Boyd on one of his (Boyd’s) pathetic, in plain sight anti Celtic narratives:-

    ‘And now we have pundits wanting a penalty because “he nearly fouled him”. Give me strength!’

    Good on ye Bobby (retiral has sure been good for his soul)!

  18. Not yet had any reply from Mr Conn of ‘The Guardian’- he might be on holiday, of course.
    So I have been amusing myself this evening drafting a letter to WH Ireland Ltd.
    Who they?
    Why, none other than the NOMAD used by RIFC plc who allowed to be published the Prospectus relating to the Initial Public Offering to the Market of its shares. [ They disconnected themselves from RIFC plc in 2015]
    What is my draft saying?
    Why, nothing else than expressing puzzlement that the Prospectus clearly to my mind suggests that potential investors in RIFC plc would be investing in the holding company of a very historic and successful football club, founded in 1872 and incorporated in May 1899 namely Rangers Football Club company number SC 004276
    How come, my draft continues, that on the ‘Rangers FC official website’, on the ‘Investor Information’ page, the holding company of RIFC plc has company number SC 425159 as the company of which it is the holding company?
    I go on to ask whether WH Ireland might themselves have been misdirected.
    I will look at my draft in the cool light of day.
    But it’s serious fun.

  19. I refer to my post of 6th August 2023 at 00:31.
    I had to remind myself that it was Cenkos Securities that was the NOMAD for the 2012 Prospectus. That led me to look at the Stock-Exchange-issued ‘AIM Rules for nominated advisers’.
    Rule 16 says ” a nominated adviser must act with due skill and care at all times”.
    So, I went into the Stock Exchange website which has a bit where you can email to ask questions.
    And I fired off a question about whether a NOMAD could be expected to question why a plc’s ‘Prospectus’ indicated that it would be the holding company of a company with a different company number from the one they show on their ‘investors information’ page, and which is the company number of an entity in Liquidation at the time of the issue of the Prospectus.
    I will not hold my breath waiting for a reply. Why not, I hear you cry.
    Well, the Rangers saga threw up some wonderful examples of the ‘business world’ and the people involved in it.

  20. My post of 6th August 2023 at 23:58
    I have an acknowledgement of my query to the London Stock Exchange.
    Will they actually answer a ‘hypothetical question’? Or will they, as I hope, ask whether I am speaking of a real situation?
    Or will the guy or gal that reads my message know damned fine which plc I must be referring to? And like the disgraceful BBC Trust [thankfully consigned to history,]and the SMSM [sadly still functioning] insist on propagating the lie to defend the NOMAD?
    I wait and wonder!

  21. My post of 7th August 2023 at 23:33 refers:
    Oh, me of little faith!
    This is an email I received this morning from the Stock Exchange.

    “Refinitiv Helpdesk

    Tue, 8 Aug at 09:15

    Dear ……….,

    Thank you for reaching out to London Stock Exchange website support.
    I am currently working on your query, and I shall get back to you with an update within 24 hours from now.
    Meanwhile, if you have any questions, please feel free to revert to this email.
    For further details you can also visit to our FAQs section.
    URL for FAQ:
    Best Regards,
    Priyanka Tamuli

    Client Support Analyst ”

    Well, it’s a start. Perhaps I’ll be asked for details, perhaps not.

  22. My post of 8th August 2023 at 12:12 refers:
    The email I sent to the Stock Exchange was referred to the AIM Regulation team. (Been there before, I think?) However, their response in an email received today has this:
    ” We can assure you that AIM Regulation considers all enquiries and investigate alleged breaches of the AIM Rules and Nomad Rules and takes action where appropriate. We are unable to help with hypothetical questions, however if you have any specific concerns regarding the conduct an AIM company or a nominated adviser, please provide details of your concerns to this email address.”
    I will now, of course, tell AIM of my ‘concerns’ relating to RIFC plc’s launch on the market and provide the simple factual details, as I see them to be, and ask them for an explanation.
    Bearing in mind the mindset of the infamous BBC Trust which told BBC Scotland to buy into the lie that TRFC was ‘continuity Rangers’ (which, sadly, they did in a shameful act of betrayal of Truth) I am ready to suspect that AIM might well be ready to abandon truth when it suits them.
    If they are able to show that the Prospectus was not misleading about what entity RIFC plc would be the holding company of, I’ll be amazed!
    The fact that RFC of 1872 lost its membership of the SFA is, indeed, a fact!
    TRFC cannot possibly be RFC of 1872: huff and puff as it might, it is a football club admitted into SFA membership in 2012, while RFC of 1872 is in Liquidation awaiting dissolution.
    As some guy said (who was it, again?!) ‘ facts are chiels that winna ding’!
    I suspect that the spiritual descendants of the company he kept might not be too ready to accept that truth!

  23. paddy malarkey
    11th August 2023 at 12:16
    ‘…A wee bit of humour.’
    I enjoyed that post, pm.

  24. Very quiet on the blog.
    So, let me say that I have spent some time framing my letter to AIM showing why I think the NOMAD who allowed the Prospectus issued by RIFC plc in 2012 should be faulted for allowing (in my opinion) a factually incorrect and misleading Prospectus to be issued.
    In my opinion, the investing public were very cleverly told that they would be investing in a very, very successful football club, and not in a football club newly admitted into Scottish professional football.
    We’re not talking ‘sport’ here.
    We’re talking about potential corruption in the ‘Market’ and of some ‘regulators’ of the ‘Market’ who may have been party to a scam, wittingly or (unforgivably) unwittingly!
    I believe there is scope for a criminal investigation.

  25. JC, in terms of the IPO claims I think the key thing is the status of Sevco Scotland at the time.
    Much is made of the SPL/SPFL definition of “Club”; however, Sevco Scotland was by that time in membership of the SFL.
    The extant SFL constitution can be found here…

    Couple of important points…


    Football clubs or associations undertaking to provide Association Football according to the Laws of the Game as settled by the International Football Association Board and these Rules may be admitted as members of the League in accordance with the provisions of these Rules.

    A club or association must initially join the League as an Associate Member.

    The League in general meeting may upon such terms and conditions as it may think fit admit any club as an Associate Member or Member of the League and may expel any Member or Associate Member or terminate such membership or may accept the retirement of any Associate Member or Member, but subject always to Rule 126 (Reversion of Transfer of Registration Rights). Upon admission as a Member or Associate Member, the club so admitted shall become bound by and be subject to these Rules and any other Rules or Bye-Laws made by the League for the time being in force.

    MEMBERSHIP NOT TRANSFERRABLE Membership of the League (whether full or associate) shall not be transferrable, save that (a) a Member wishing to change its legal form (whether from unincorporated association to corporate body or otherwise where the ownership and control of both bodies are or will be substantially identical); or (b) a transfer within the same administrative group for the purposes of a solvent reconstruction only; may be permitted by the Board upon prior written application for consent and giving such details of the proposed transfer as the Board may reasonably request for the purpose of considering such transfer. The Board may refuse such application or grant same upon such terms and conditions as it shall think fit.

    RELEGATION FROM AND PROMOTION TO THE SCOTTISH PREMIER LEAGUE Notwithstanding any other provision in these Rules, any football club which is relegated, in terms of the Settlement Agreement between the League and The Scottish Premier League, from The Scottish Premier League, shall automatically be admitted to full membership of the League and shall in the season immediately following that relegation participate in the higher or highest Division of the League. Notwithstanding any other provision of these Rules, the membership of any football club promoted in accordance with Rule 92 (Champion Clubs Promotion and Relegation) to The Scottish Premier League (or otherwise admitted to The Scottish Premier League), in accordance with the Rules of The Scottish Premier League, shall automatically terminate upon the admission of such club to The Scottish Premier League and such club shall not be obliged to give any notice of its cessation of membership of the League and shall be permitted to depart from the League and become a member of The Scottish Premier League (in accordance with the Rules of The Scottish Premier League) without restriction.”

    Sevco Scotland were admitted as an associate club member of the SFL at a time when Rangers were still in membership of the SPL. The rules relating to relegation did not apply since the original Rangers Football Club simply ceased to operate when its SPL share was transferred to Dundee Football Club.

    The SFL constitution recognised that its members were either clubs or associations. It also recognises that clubs have legal form and allows, under certain conditions – such as change of legal form or a solvent reconstruction – that SFL membership can be transferred.

    It is absolutely clear from the SFL constitution that Sevco Scotland Ltd was recognised as a football club. A different football club from Rangers Football Club plc.

    Since the league’s formation in 1998, Rangers had only ever held membership of the SPL. It did not hold a SFL membership to transfer to Sevco Scotland.

    It is not disputed that Sevco Scotland purchased the intellectual property (including the name “Rangers”) but for it’s very first game against Brechin it required the permission of the administrators of Rangers to field most of the players as trialists – as these were still registered with the original club at the time.

  26. HirsutePursuit
    15th August 2023 at 13:50
    ‘..It is absolutely clear from the SFL constitution that Sevco Scotland Ltd was recognised as a football club. A different football club from Rangers Football Club plc.”
    Yes, indeed, HP.
    And it was on the grounds of having become a member of a ‘recognised’ League that Sevco was allowed to apply for membership of the SFA.
    And it was only when membership of the SFA was granted that TRFC became a football club entitled to participate in Scottish professional.
    Such a simple matter of fact that it leaves little doubt in my mind that those who wrote the Prospectus knew the truth but for one reason or another chose to hide the truth, and Cenkos for one reason or another failed in its duty to check the veracity of the Prospectus.
    The clearly implied claim by RIFC plc to be the holding company of Rangers Football Club plc is denied even by RIFC plc itself!
    On the Rangers FC official website, RIFC plc (which seems to piggy-back on that site and seems not to have its own website ) says that it is the holding company of TRFC!
    Even the Ibrox board does not dare take the risk of claiming on its website to be the holding company of RFC 2012 plc!
    That’s the message I want to get across to AIM.
    Curious as it may perhaps seem I do have other interests in life, and the time I can devote to
    drafting a letter/email to AIM that can cut through the very, very clever use of language by the drafters of the Prospectus is limited.
    But I’ll get there.
    Of course, the liars in Scottish Football and the SMSM already KNOW the truth. I hold them in contempt.
    I suppose I just want to see how far up the readiness not to investigate goes.
    The SFA and SFL and then the SPFL bought into the Big Lie; BBC Scotland chickened out on reporting truthfully under orders from the BBC Trust; the print and online press very happily just propagated the Big Lie.
    I have no reason to believe that AIM is any more ‘honest’ but will always be ready to put pragmatism before truth!
    Or, perhaps, show clearly and definitively that my understanding of things is wrong, and that RIFC plc is the holding company of RFC of 1872 in Liquidation.
    As ever, I am open to correction.
    And if AIM can provide the necessary evidence that my dark suspicions about the Prospectus are unfounded, I’ll happily check the evidence and revise my view if necessary.
    ps. I was in Glasgow this afternoon and was reminded of how bloody steep some of those streets are that were shown to the world during the cycling thingy!
    Mrs C and I watched the whole of the men’s road race , with the wonderful laid-back commentary team.
    It was a great TV watch.

  27. I have this very evening finally decided on the text of a letter to AIM Regulation that I hope expresses clearly enough my view that the Prospectus issued by RIFC plc in 2012 ought to have been spotted by the Nomad as containing what I think was misleading information to potential investors.

    I have given them what I understand to be facts, indicating that if my understanding of the facts is incorrect and there is evidence to show that I am incorrect I shall happily accept the evidence.
    I have pressed the ‘send’ button.
    If I get a reply, I will post both my letter and the reply.

  28. Some things never seem to change. Rangers never getting a penalty at home in league games and have an uncanny knack of getting home draws in cup competitions usually with a lesser opponent. What is the track record over the least few years in regards to this occurence.

  29. An acknowledgement of receipt of my email:

    “AIM Regulation
    Cc:AIM Regulation Mon, 21 Aug at 12:11


    Thank you for your email, copied below, regarding Rangers International Football Club plc, which AIM Regulation will consider.
    Kind regards


    We’ll see what their consideration of it will amount to!
    Essentially, all I’m saying is why I think the Nomad seems to have believed that CG bought RFC of 1872 out of Administration as a going concern and that RFC of 1872 somehow is not in Liquidation, and that RIFC plc is the holding company of RFC of 1872 when it is in fact the holding company of TRFC Ltd.
    It will be interesting to see what they say, if anything other than ‘move on, it was years ago’

  30. From the Rolls of Court, today’s issue:

    “LORD RICHARDSON – D Allen, Clerk
    Court 7 – Parliament House
    Wednesday 23rd August

    By Orders
    between 9.00am and 10.00am

    COS/CA104-22 ATP Investments Ltd v Rangers International Football Club Plc
    CMS Brodies LLP
    COS/CA105-22 Norne Anstalt v Rangers International Football Club Plc

    CMS Brodies LLP ”

    This I suppose is about RIFC plc still trying to find out on whose beneficial behalf these two nominees hold RIFC plc shares.

  31. Companies House today:

    “..The following information is available from the company’s filing history.
    Date Form Description
    22 Aug 2023 AP01 Appointment of Mr John Combothekras Halsted as a director on 15 August 2023
    From Companies House

    Date Form Description
    22 Aug 2023 PSC01 Notification of John Combothekras Halsted as a person with significant control on 15 August 2023”
    Who he?

  32. American investor, not new to them, from private equity field, his company (or family company) Perron Investments put money in before.

  33. fitbawfan
    22nd August 2023 at 23:05
    ‘…American investor……’
    Thank you, fitbawfan.
    So what has moved the Board of RIFC plc to make him a director? A promise of funding by him in the way of loans?
    Fiddledeedumfiddledee: great wee tune, that. I love hearing it.

Comments are closed.