Good Afternoon.
Announcing outstanding financial successes for Rangers PLC the then Chairman of the club opened his Chairman’s report in the annual financial statements with the following words:
“Last summer I explained that the Club, after many years of significant investment in our playing squad
and more recently in our state of the art facility at Murray Park, had embarked on a three year business
plan to stabilise and improve the Club’s finances. The plan also recognised the need to react to the
challenging economic conditions facing football clubs around the world.
Following a trend over a number of years of increasing year on year losses, I am pleased to report that
in the first year of this plan we have made important progress by reversing this trend. Our trading loss
for last year of £11.2m reflects a £7.9m improvement versus the £19.1m loss for the previous year and
although it will take more time to completely reach our goals, this is a key milestone. We also intend to
make significant further progress by the end of the current financial year. This improvement is the
consequence of having a solid strategy and the commitment and energy to implement the changes it requires”
Later on in the same statement the chairman would add:
“Another key part of our plan is associated with the Rangers brand and our Retail Division goes from strength to strength. Our financial results this year have been significantly enhanced by an outstanding performance in merchandising Rangers products, in particular replica kit, which makes our Retail Division one of the most successful in Europe.”
In the same set of financial reports, the CEO would report:
“To further strengthen Rangers hospitality portfolio, a new dedicated sponsor’s lounge was unveiled this season. The Carling Lounge is a first for the Club and was developed in conjunction with our new sponsor, Carling. ”
and
“Our innovative events programme continues to grow and this year saw a record number of official events including the highly successful annual Hall of Fame Awards Ceremony, Player of the Year and 50 Championships Gala Dinner, all of which catered for up to 1000 guests.
At Rangers, we continually develop our portfolio of products and as a key area of income for the Club, we evaluate the market for new revenue opportunities on an ongoing basis in order to exceed our existing and potential customer expectations and needs.
Demand for season tickets reached an all time high last season with a record 42,508 season ticket holders in comparison with the previous season`s figure of 40,320. Over 36,000 of these season ticket holders renewed for this season – a record number.
For the new season, we are delighted to welcome brewing giant, Carling on board as our Official Club sponsor. Carling is one of the UK’s leading consumer brands with a proven track record in football sponsorship.
The Club also continues to work with a number of multinational blue chip brands such as National Car Rental, Sony Playstation 2, Bank of Scotland and Coca-Cola. This year, we will also experience the evolution of the Honda deal via Hyndland Honda and welcome the mobile communications giant T-Mobile to our ranks.”.
The year was 2003 and in the previous 24 months Rangers Football Club, owned and operated as a private fiefdom by Sir David Murray, had made operational losses of some £30 million.
Yes – 30 MILLION POUNDS.
Of course the chairman’s report for 2003 was written by John F Mclelland CBE and the CEO was one Martin Bain Esq.
As Mr Mclelland clearly stated, by 2003 the club already had a trend of increasing year on year losses covering a number of years and was losing annual sums which stretched into millions, if not tens of millions, of pounds.
However, the acquisition of Rangers Football Club was absolutely vital to David Murray’s personal business growth, and his complete control of the club as his own private business key was more important than any other business decision he had made before buying Rangers or since.
When he persuaded Gavin Masterton to finance 100% of the purchase price of the club, Murray had his finest business moment.
By getting control of Rangers, Murray was able to offer entertainment, hospitality, seeming privilege and bestow favour on others in a way that was hitherto undreamed of, and he bestowed that largesse on any number of “existing and potential clients” and contacts – be they the clients and contacts related to Rangers Football Club or the existing and potential clients of David Murray, his businesses, his banks, or anyone in any field that he chose to court for the purposes of potential business.
His business.
It wasn’t only journalists who benefited from the succulent lamb treatment.
Accountants,lawyers, surveyors, broadcasters, football officials, people in industry and construction, utilities, financiers and other areas of business were all invited inside the sacred House of Murray and given access to the great man of business “and owner of Rangers” while attending the “record number of official (hospitality) events”.
Twelve months on from when John McLelland made those statements in the 2003 accounts, David Murray was back in the chair at Ibrox and he presented the 2004 financials.
In the intervening 12 months Rangers had gained an additional £10 million from Champions League income and had received £8.6 million in transfer fees from the sale of Messrs Ferguson, Amoruso and McCann. Not only that, the Rangers board had managed to reduce the club’s wage bill by £5 million. Taking all three figures together comes to some £23.6 million in extra income or savings.
Yet, the accounts for 2004 showed that the club made an operational loss of almost £6 million and overall debt had risen by an additional £7 million to £97.4 million.
However, the 2004 accounts were also interesting for another reason.
Rangers PLC had introduced payments “to employees trusts” into their accounts for the first time in 2001 and in that year they had paid £1million into those trusts. Just three years later, the trust payments recorded in the accounts had risen to £7.3 million per annum — or to put it another way to 25% of the annual wage bill though no one in Scottish Football asked any questions about that!
By the following year, the chairman announced that the 2004 operational loss had in fact been £10.4million but that the good news was that the 2005 operational loss was only £7.8 million. However Rangers were able to post a profit before taxation if they included the money obtained from transfers (£8.4 million) and the inclusion of an extraordinary profit of £14,999,999 made on buying back the shares of a subsidiary company for £1 which they had previously sold for £15 million.
All of which added up to a whopping great profit of ……… £12.4 million!
I will leave you to do the maths on 2005.
Oh and of course these accounts included the detail that 3000 Rangers fans had joined David Murray in participating in the November ’94 share issue where the club managed to raise £51,430,995 in fresh capital most of which was provided by Mr Murray… sorry I mean MIH ….. sorry that should read Bank of Scotland …… or their shareholders……. or should that be the public purse?
The notable items in the 2006 accounts included the announcement of a ten year deal with JJB Sports to take over the merchandising operation of the club and increased revenue from an extended run in the Champion’s League. However, the profit before tax was declared at only£0.1 million in comparison to the £12.4 million of the year before but then again that £12.4 million had included player sales of £8.4 million and the £15 million sweety bonus from the repurchase of ones own former subsidiary shares for £1.
Jumping to 2008 Rangers saw a record year in terms of turnover which had risen to £64.5 million which enabled the company to record a profit on ordinary activities before taxation of £6.57 million although it should be pointed out that wages and bonuses were up at 77% of turnover and that a big factor in the Rangers income stream was corporate hospitality and the top line of income was shown as “gate receipts and hospitality”.
However, 2009 saw a calamitous set of figures. Whilst Alastair Johnston tried to put a brave chairman’s face on it, the year saw an operating loss of £17.325 million which was softened only by player disposals leading to a loss before taxation of a mere £14.085 million.
Fortunately Sir David did not have to report these figures as he chose to stand down as chairman in August and so Johnston stepped in and announced that he was deeply honoured to do so.
In 2010, the income stream jumped from £39.7 million to over £56 million with the result that the club showed a profit before taxation of £4.209 million.
However, by that time the corporate hospitality ticket that was Rangers Football Club was done for as a result of matters that had nothing to do with events on the football field in the main.
First, the emergence of the Fergus McCann run Celtic had brought a real business and sporting challenge. This was something that Murray had not previously faced in the football business.
Second,the Bank of Scotland had gone bust and Lloyds could not and would not allow Murray to continually borrow vast sums of money on the basis of revalued assets and outrageous hospitality.
Third, the UEFA fair play rules came into being and demanded that clubs at least act on a semblance of proper corporate governance and fiscal propriety.
Lastly,Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs tightened up the law on the use of EBT’s which meant that Rangers could no longer afford to buy in the players that brought almost guaranteed success against domestic opposition.
On average, since 2002 Rangers PLC had lost between £7 million – £8 million per year – or roughly £650,000 per month if you like – yet for the better part of a decade David Murray had been able to persuade the Bank of Scotland that this was a business that was worthy of ever greater financial support or that he himself and his MIH business was of such value that the Banks should support him in supporting the Ibrox club whilst operating in this fashion.
Of course, had Murray’s Rangers paid tax on all player remunerations then the losses would have been far larger.
Meanwhile, all the other clubs in Scottish football who banked with the Bank of Scotland faced funding cuts and demands for repayment with the bank publicly proclaiming that it was overexposed to the football market in Scotland.
But no one asked any questions about why the bank should act one way with Murray’s club but another way with all others. No one in football, no one in the media and no one from the world of business.
Looking back,it is hard to imagine a business which has been run on such a consistent loss making basis being allowed to continue by either its owners or by its bankers. However, a successful and funded Rangers was so important to the Murray group that David Murray was clearly willing to lose millions year after year to keep the Gala dinners and corporate hospitality going.
Rangers were Murray’s big PR vehicle and the club was essentially used by him to open the doors which would allow him to make more money elsewhere on a personal basis and if it meant Rangers cutting every corner and accumulating massive losses, unsustainable losses, then so be it.
Today, the new regime at Ibrox run the current business in a way which clocks up the same colossal annual losses whilst the club competes outwith Scotland’s top division. Each day we hear that the wage bill is unsustainable, that the playing staff are overpaid, that the stadium needs massive investment and that the fans are opposed to the stadium itself being mortgaged and the club being in hawk to lenders.
Yet, in the Murray era the Stadium was revalued time and time again and its revaluation was used as the justification for ever greater borrowing on the Rangers accounts. The playing staff were massively overpaid and financially assisted by the EBT’s and most years the Chairman’s annual statement announced huge losses despite regular claims of record season ticket sales, record hospitality income, European income, shirt sponsorship and the outsourcing of all merchandising to JJB sports instead of Sports Direct.
The comparison between the old business and the current one is clear for all to see.
It should be noted, that since the days of Murray, no major banking institution has agreed to provide the Ibrox business with any banking facilities. Not under Whyte, not under Green, not under anyone.
Yet few ask why that should be.
The destruction of the old Rangers business led those in charge of Scottish football to announce that Armageddon was on the horizon if it had not actually arrived, yet today virtually all Scottish clubs are in a better financial and business state than back in the bad old days of the Bank of Scotland financed SPL. Some have succumbed to insolvency, and others have simply cut their cloth, changed their structure, sought, and in some cases attracted, new owners and moved on in terms of business.
In general, Scottish Football has cleaned house at club level.
Now, David Murray has “cleaned house” in that MIH has bitten the dust and walked down insolvency road.
What is interesting is that the Murray brand still has that capacity to get out a good PR message when it needs to. Despite the MIH pension fund being short of money for some inexplicable reason, last week it was announced that the family controlled Murray Estates had approached those in charge of MIH and had agreed to buy some key MIH assets for something in the region of £13.9 million.
The assets concerned are land banks which at some point will be zoned for planning and which will undoubtedly bring the Murray family considerable profit in the future, with some of those assets already looking as if they will produce a return sooner rather than later.
However, what is not commented upon in the mainstream press is the fact that Murray Estates had the ability to pay £13.9 Million for anything at all and that having that amount of money to spend the Murray camp has chosen not to buy any football club down Govan way.
Perhaps, it has been realised that a football club which loses millions of pounds each year is not such a shrewd investment and that the Murray family money would be better spent elsewhere?
Perhaps, it has been realised that the culture of wining, dining, partying and entertaining to the most lavish and extravagant extent will not result in the banks opening their vaults any more?
Perhaps, it has been realised that the Rangers brand has been so badly damaged over the years that it is no longer the key to the golden door in terms of business, finance and banking and that running a football club in 2015 involves a discipline and a set of skills that David Murray and his team do not have experience of?
What is clear, is that the Murray years at Ibrox were not good for the average Rangers fan in the long term and that when you have a football club – any football club – being run for the private benefit of one rich individual, or group of individuals, then the feelings and passions of the ordinary fan will as often as not be forgotten when that individual or his group choose to move on once they have decided that they no longer wish to play with their toy football club.
David Murray did not make money directly out of Rangers Football Club. He used it as a key to open other doors for him and to get him a seat at other tables and into a different type of “club” altogether. He did not run the club in a day to day fashion that was designed to bring stability and prolonged financial, or playing, success to the club. its investors and its fans. He did not preside over Ibrox during a period of sustained financial gain.
Mike Ashley will not subsidise 2015 version of Rangers to anything like the same extent that the Bank of Scotland did in the 90’s and naughties.
However, Ashley, like Murray, will use his control of the Rangers brand to open doors for him elsewhere in the sports retail market, and he will use the Rangers contract with Sports Direct to make a handsome profit. He will also control all the advertising revenue just as he does at Newcastle. In short, Mr Ashley is only interested in The Rangers with a view to using it as a stepping stone to achieve other things elsewhere.
However, don’t take my word for any of this, take the opinion of someone who knows.
Mr Dave King is quoted today as saying the following about the current board of Directors who are in charge of the current Ibrox holding company.
“History will judge this board as one of the worst the club has ever had. There is not one individual who puts the club above personal interest.”
That is an interesting observation from a man who became a non executive director of the old Rangers holding company in 2000 and who had a front row pew for every set of accounts and all the financial statements referred to above.
Whether or not Mr King is a glib and shameless liar is a matter of South African judicial opinion. Whether or not he can spot someone who puts their own self interest ahead of the interests of Rangers Football Club and the supporters of the club is a matter that should be discussed over some fine wine, some succulent lamb and whatever postprandial entertainment you care to imagine.
I wonder if he has ever read the accounts of Rangers PLC and compared them to the corresponding accounts of MIH for the same period?
How about this for a new sponsor – MASH 😈
Allyjambo says:
February 11, 2015 at 5:11 pm
easyJambo says:
February 11, 2015 at 4:45 pm
…. There can be no doubt he knew exactly where Carrick was, he put him there. He jumps as if to avoid his victim but doesn’t lengthen his stride to clear him and, as can be seen, uses a straight leg well direct to the top of his thigh with all his weight on it.
___________________________________________________________________________
I watched the video a couple of times and what strikes me is that he clearly increases pressure on the contact with Carrick. If you use the seats behind as a fixed reference then you will see that his head rises half a head height during contact. If you were trying to avoid causing injury that shouldn’t happen.
Folks,
I am as dismayed as anyone here by the two incidents involving Lee McCulloch – as I was by the incidents involving Jason Talbot. What worries me though is that as a Rangers player, there are very little in the way of checks and balances on TSFM (since TRFC fans are not represented in significant numbers). Consequently, it is a bit like shooting fish in a barrel.
If this had involved a player of any of the well-represented clubs here, I am sure we would be having a handbags showdown over it. I am therefore asking that we refrain from making the same points over and over again in what is becoming a character assassination of Lee McCulloch.
I think the points (with which I agree) have been made eloquently. Can we draw a line under it for the time being please?
Thanks for your understanding.
I see Shackleton – the Rangers Nomad – has a sense of humour but can’t count. He has also concluded that shareholders are entitled to attend the general meeting – Even if King doesn’t win the battle I reckon Shackleton will be getting his jotters – he appears to be totally off-message IMO.
He seems to think they’d done well in booking a 500 seater luxury venue and points out that many small Plcs hold general meetings in their brokers or solicitors offices. Now that’s fallen through I wonder if it’s going to be the lawyer’s or brokers?
He says that for cost reasons it’s normal market practice for there to be a smaller venue than the theoretical maximum number of voters.
So that explains it – it’s simply about cost saving so if there was 2,000 shareholders at the recent annual general meeting youi save money by only allowing 500 into the egm.
But the agm in Ibrox cost buttons compared to hiring a luxury London Hotel – so how does that add up? Mibbe an onerous contract kick’s in if the stadium is hired more than once a year for a general meeting 😆
Shackleton wrote:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-egm-put-many-fans-5144167
AyeRightNaw..5.04
Excellent well articulated post .Well Done !
Thank you!
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/you-guys-dont-understand-how-5142602
The DR ‘charm’ offensive begins – against Llambias and co! Pity they couldn’t unearth this kind of stuff when Ashley first arrived. Still, that would have been right out of character for the Record, to get the dirt before pushing the PR.
That kind of information about Ashley’s team’s MO was being posted on internet sites from the start of Ashley’s involvement, yet it’s taken a banning order to give them the kick up the backside to start searching.
johnthered says:
February 11, 2015 at 5:23 pm
How about this for a new sponsor – MASH 😈
Anything is possible,I could imagine MA sending his
lawyers to the SFA hearing and saying “let all this grief
pass ” and i will better any titchy sponsor that comes along. 🙂
ohnthered says:
February 11, 2015 at 5:23 pm
M.A.S.H. as a sponsor would come with a theme song, complete with appropriate lyrics that work on a number of levels….
theredpill says:
February 11, 2015 at 8:00 pm
The Sports Direct Scottish Premiership, The Sports Direct Arena, Sports Direct Rangers, no one would ever work out the connection 🙄
And it would all be very fair because Sandy Bryson would tell us that, because no one noticed before Pancake Tuesday…
scapaflow says:
February 11, 2015 at 8:02 pm
M.A.S.H. as a sponsor would come with a theme song, complete with appropriate lyrics that work on a number of levels….
______________________________
And there’s always Catch 22 if required 😐
During RTC days, we were continually gobsmacked at how the SMSM – and especially the DR – simply ignored public information and looked the other way until just before Administration Day for RFC.
The consensus then was that the DR was playing to its purchasing demographic – and that bad news from Ibrox was bad for sales.
So, logically, one would expect that the DR should now be sweating at this blocked access to Ibrox. Ashley seems to have a deep disregard for the media, and IIRC he has banned certain paper(s) from Newcastle for a long period.
Should be interesting to see how the DR manages this problem. :slamb:
Paul Lambert sacked by Aston Villa
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/aston-villa/11407117/Paul-Lambert-sacked-by-Aston-Villa.html
==============================
TRFC candidate ? 😉
He’ll bounce back.
StevieBC says:
February 11, 2015 at 8:35 pm
Paul Lambert sacked by Aston Villa
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/aston-villa/11407117/Paul-Lambert-sacked-by-Aston-Villa.html
==============================
TRFC candidate ? 😉
He’ll bounce back.
———–
The longest of long shots. Pity for Villa. Lambert enjoyed a lot of success before arriving there. But Aston Villa are not spending like their rivals, which I rather admire. Hard to be successful and frugal, though, when money is king. It’s the race to spend spend spend in the EPL. Villa may be heading for the Championship. I wonder which owner will off-load their club first — Ashley or Lerner?
The DR is absolutely wedded to the idea of Kings et al being in the hot seat post EGM.
Being banned by big bad Mike (sorry for the alliteration) isn’t really detrimental to them.
Not in the eyes of the target demographic.
You could argue that supporting King and being anti Ashley, being banned is in fact a dream scenario, in the short term.
That’s all providing that it pans out how they hope.
If it doesn’t, they’ll be buying their own lunch.
Scottish football needs to flip the switch on the life support and move on.
========================================================================
Scottish football would not move on,just down,anyone who thinks sponsors,advertisers and SKY share the above view is seriously deluded,i know Celtic do not,maybe they should take out an advert.
“Scottish football would not move on,just down” I have to take exception to this comment. Since Rangers went bust the benefit to the Premier league sides has been immense with the only Celtic showing any real issue. Yes Celtic claim that with Rangers gone they have dropped £10m – I don’t believe a word of it, they have dropped this because they have dropped their standards and nothing else. The current title chase is as competitive as it has been for a few years and shows every sign of continuing that way in the future. The fact is Celtic are too big for Scottish football (so were Rangers when they were bankrolled by BOS) and the best thing for both Celtic and the rest of Scottish Football would be for them to move to another league be it European based or even England, then Celtic would be among clubs of the stature that they require to improve and, based on the last 25 years final tables, Scotland would have one of the most competitive leagues in the world. Sky, sponsors and advertisers would be forming a line to try and get involved. It won’t happen though, the SFA will make sure of that.
Indefatigable says:
February 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm
Scottish football needs to flip the switch on the life support and move on.
========================================================================
Scottish football would not move on,just down,anyone who thinks sponsors,advertisers and SKY share the above view is seriously deluded,i know Celtic do not,maybe they should take out an advert.
————————————-
I can only assume you missed this bit –
“The game can only move forward and find a level from which it can start to grow if those charged with running and promoting it stop looking wistfully to the past.”
Not sure at all of the relevance of Celtic’s view here nor do I know what position you hold to be able to represent Celtic’s view.
Indefatigable says:
February 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm
Scottish football needs to flip the switch on the life support and move on.
========================================================================
Scottish football would not move on,just down,anyone who thinks sponsors,advertisers and SKY share the above view is seriously deluded,i know Celtic do not,maybe they should take out an advert.
================
Clearly I am seriously deluded, but here goes anyway. Sponsors? What sponsors? It is abundantly clear that the SFA/SPFL are deliberately discouraging sponsors, to try to ensure that their prophecies of Armageddon are vindicated. Sky? You really are having a laugh. Explain to me, please, as a poor deluded one, how it is that countries like Austria, Norway and Denmark manage to negotiate better TV deals than the highly paid suits at Hampden? Advertisers want on the telly, so you can’t detach advertising from the TV deal.
I couldn’t care less what Celtic think. If they believe that Scottish football would be better off in any way with a team from Ibrox in its “rightful place” (and I suspect you are right to assume that), then they are totally and utterly wrong, in my opinion. As for the other 40 clubs, the only hope is that they suddenly grow a pair, sort out the SFA/SPFL, and stop pandering to the spoilt infants at Ibrox.
see stewarts off the old twitter & onto here then.
This was something I brought up on this forum myself in the past, seems like at least one club chairman thinks we get a raw deal from the BBC.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/bbc-is-strangling-scottish-football-in-fight-for-tv-cash-blasts-mulraney.118336612
Indefatigable says:
February 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm
I honestly do not know anyone who wants ‘The Rangers’ to disappear however what I, and most folk I think expect, is for any club not to be constantly seeking emergency funding throughout each and every season.
I also think it is not to much to ask for a bit of stability, which will come if they live within their means.
To continually crave and desire someone to ‘invest’ when what you really mean is give you money to burn certainly will not endear the club to the wider football fan base. Now your response may be to say that you do not care what other fans say and that is your prerogative however do not expect sympathy from those same fans if things turn sour.
To speak about the lack of a sponsor for our leagues as an indicator of there being no club from Govan in the top flight as somehow seeming to justify the continual largesse of the club is strange. I would rather put that down to the utter incompetence of the individuals currently charged with ruining, sorry running, our sport.
I say ‘our’ sport deliberately because it is everyone’s sport but that must be based on all clubs being equal and acting in a responsible manner. Scottish football may not attract sponsors, or huge TV contracts, but to attempt to justify that by saying that it is because ‘The Rangers’ are not allowed to lose £10M a year to appear competitive is madness.
RFC and now ‘The Rangers’ were, and are, simply losing money hand over fist. They are not competitive and require massive amounts of money to continue the illusion, because that is what it is, that they are still relevant. The longer this nonsense continues the harder attitudes will become while ‘The Rangers’ become steadily more irrelevant.
That is the stark reality facing the new club; get your costs down and live within your means. It is the same for every club in the league so why should one club be an exception?
Indefatigable says:
February 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm
I agree with you that Rangers back in the top flight asap, is the private view of the Celtic board, whatever bon mots Mr Lawwell may make in public.
But
What puzzles me is where, do people think a competitive Rangers is going to come from? After all, Rangers are going to struggle to make it out of the Championship this season.
neepheid says:
February 11, 2015 at 10:33 pm
———-
Well, the Scandinavian countries, although small, population-wise, are independent and have a truely national game. They can establish contracts with the national and independent broadcasters of their own countries. Scotland, or North Britain, is hanging on to England’s coat-tails. It’s a lucrative region, spends a lot on Sky subscriptions, but is thrown crumbs. Other providers are available.
Then there’s Archie McPherson and Keevins talking down the game — the only hope was getting the OF back and now there’s only doom because newco Rangers are shite. That was the gist of it. It was like Dad’s Army on SSB tonight.
We’re all doomed
Tailothebank says:
February 11, 2015 at 7:19 pm
I’m a bit late but cheers for the positive feedback. Can never tell how one’s howling at the moon will be received.
justshatered says:
February 11, 2015 at 10:56 pm
Indefatigable says:
February 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm
I honestly do not know anyone who wants ‘The Rangers’ to disappear
=================================
Sorry chaps. I genuinely would.
Not only do I want to see The Rangers disappear, I also believe that Scottish Football will never recover until it does so. The social benefits of their non existence would be considerable. Bullying, sectarian fans perma raging are frankly unacceptable. Scotland without Rangers would be healthier, happier, saner and less trapped in divisions of the past.
I can’t understand why any self-respecting league chief exec doesn’t, at least, arrange sponsorship to cover his salary and bonus to avoid just being seen as a drain on resources.
Also, the somewhat depressing tweets from Jim Spence leave me wondering how staff at Pacific Quay deal with the stench, what with that dead elephant in the foyer.
I agree with
neepheid says:
February 11, 2015 at 10:33 pm
Danish Pastry says:
February 11, 2015 at 11:05 pm
I think if some TV exec, thought about it. Scottish football could make them money. Scottish football can hang on the coat tails of the EPL and make money.
With a little bit more input from a TV exec, to pump some real cash in. Not much, just a taster! This would easily help teams to build a viable squad of EPL wannabes, to sell on and to make the SPFL even more competitive.
Fans come back, for every team. TV companies like full stadiums, committed players. They also, probably would like a better deal than the EPL, something they can barter with.
Spanish football, is British Football in a nutshell. Super powers with all the cash and the plebs get the scraps. If only we had people of initiative, to try and sell the game. Instead of going through motions for a nice wage.
What a Scunner Campbell, Call Super Gran!! (Is there nothin, that she canny doo!)
SPFL Have nominated wee Jay Beatty for Goal of the Month for his goal against Accies… Please vote for him … make the wee guys day
wildwood says:
February 11, 2015 at 11:18 pm
justshatered says:
February 11, 2015 at 10:56 pm
Indefatigable says:
February 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm
I honestly do not know anyone who wants ‘The Rangers’ to disappear
=================================
Sorry chaps. I genuinely would.
________________________________________________________
There are 2 acceptable options to me. None of them is (a) :
(a) what we have now. Circle the drain like a drug fuelled addcit with an overblown sense of entitlemenmt hell bent on dragging everyone around down into their own personal hell, trampling rules and decency in their wake while screaming ‘Its not fair!’.
(b) ditch the sectarian baggage and the WATP attitude, re-emerge as a club with a strong fan base, playing by the same rules as everyone else, treat peers with respect, pay taxes, live within means, FPP, etc. etc.
(c) Vanish from the face of the earth.
When I see a nice bear, I think (b). When I see a nasty bear, I think (c). (a) is not on my agenda.
Nice bears… time to step up!
There is no easy way forward for the TRFC:
I am minded of a Bob Dylan song:
And I think to myself, “How does it feel?”
Which is admittedly more empathy than many get from a certain class of the Ibrox support.
This once sneeringly proud institution finds itself caught between the drug of financial recklessness and the prostitution of corporate subservience.
On the one hand we have the low rent ‘pusher’ Dave King with a needle full of class A, ready to take away the pain… but only for now.
On the other, there is the pimp of Mike Ashley, who will clean her up and see she stays clean, fed watered, presentable : but this working girl is gonna pay her way. On her knees, or on her back.
“Like a rolling stone!”
Not a pretty sight!
_________________________________
Once upon a time you dressed so fine
You threw the bums a dime in your prime, didn’t you ?
People’d call, say, “Beware doll, you’re bound to fall”
You thought they were all kiddin’ you
You used to laugh about
Everybody that was hangin’ out
Now you don’t talk so loud
Now you don’t seem so proud
About having to be scrounging for your next meal.
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be without a home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone ?
You’ve gone to the finest school all right, Miss Lonely
But you know you only used to get juiced in it
And nobody has ever taught you how to live on the street
And now you find out you’re gonna have to get used to it
You said you’d never compromise
With the mystery tramp, but know you realize
He’s not selling any alibis
As you stare into the vacuum of his eyes
And say do you want to make a deal?
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be on your own
With no direction home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone ?
You never turned around to see the frowns on the jugglers and the clowns
When they all come down and did tricks for you
You never understood that it ain’t no good
You shouldn’t let other people get your kicks for you
You used to ride on the chrome horse with your diplomat
Who carried on his shoulder a Siamese cat
Ain’t it hard when you discover that
He really wasn’t where it’s at
After he took from you everything he could steal.
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be on your own
With no direction home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone ?
Princess on the steeple and all the pretty people
They’re drinkin’, thinkin’ that they got it made
Exchanging all precious gifts
But you’d better take your diamond ring, you’d better pawn it babe
You used to be so amused
At Napoleon in rags and the language that he used
Go to him now, he calls you, you can’t refuse
When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose
You’re invisible now, you got no secrets to conceal.
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be on your own
With no direction home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone ?
enough is enough says:
February 12, 2015 at 12:21 am
SPFL Have nominated wee Jay Beatty for Goal of the Month for his goal against Accies… Please vote for him … make the wee guys day
_________________________________________
And 3 cheers for Hamilton Accies.
A breath of fresh air in more ways than one!
A stoopid suggestion, if not covered already…
In the absence of any meaningful dialogue between the SFA/SPFL and their paying customers, i.e. the fans, could the fans be more proactive ?
Apart from trying to be activist against each of the 42 senior clubs, why not request – if not demand – an audience with Ogilvie, Regan and Doncaster ?
What if the clubs’ supporters’ clubs officials arrange a venue and invite these 3 administrators initially to 2 separate sessions?
The first session would specifically exclude TRFC fans, to avoid a slanging match between the fans, and allow RFC/TRFC questions to be posed without distractions.
The second session would definitely include TRFC fans’ representatives, and they could ask their own questions.
The 3 top guys in Scottish football administration facing those who pay their wages.
Why not ?
Danish Pastry says:
February 11, 2015 at 11:05 pm
I think if some TV exec, thought about it. Scottish football could make them money. Scottish football can hang on the coat tails of the EPL and make money.
With a little bit more input from a TV exec, to pump some real cash in. Not much, just a taster! This would easily help teams to build a viable squad of EPL wannabes, to sell on and to make the SPFL even more competitive.
I think TV Execs would have already thought very carefully about it and made the offer accordingly. They would have thought – How many new subscribers would we attract with Scottish Football? – answer negligible. How many existing subscribers would we lose by not showing Scottish Football – answer negligible. At the end of the day the offer they have made is for cheap content filler.
The game needs to start again from the ground up, starting with how can you possibly support 42 teams in such a small market? How do you get more people to games across all clubs? What impact would changing to Summer football have?
Gabby
@Gabby
Agreed, a total revamp. Not sure how you decrease the number of teams without harming communities. In fact, some of the teams that have caught the imagination in recent years have been the local, community-based clubs.
Summer football doesn’t have to be such a huge revolution. In Denmark, a country comparable to Scotland in many ways, they break from about 7 Dec until 20 Feb. of course, warm up tournaments are held, so in reality it all starts a bit earlier via the cross-border friendly matches.
They then continue until the first week in June. Next sason (this year) kicks off on 18 July. 12-team top league / 33 rounds (play each other 3 x times). Since Euro qualifying starts so early, season stretching into June is helpful.
Swedish season ends 31 October and has a longer winter break. Swedish winter really is more harsh with permanent snow for very long periods. But they are big on ice hockey, bandy (a type of hockey) and wintersports in general.
They start the league at the beginning of April and just continue, barring a 1-month league break from 6 June to 5 July. With all that snow you need to make the most of summer! A huge country, much of the early cup stuff is regionalized. 16-team top league (nice), 3 relegation places (nice) / 30 rounds (3rd bottom team is involved in a Scottish style H/A play-off, otherwise 2 drop out, possibly 3).
If people do need a winter fix they can see plenty of fitba on the box or just ski, play hockey, or whatever.
Btw, the best supported teams in Denmark have average gates of approx. 16,000 (FCK) and 10,000 (Brøndby). Current league leaders, FC Midtjylland, have an average gate of 7,000. Perhaps the more equitable distribution of revenue helps create a more homogenous league?
Not sure about Norway & Finland but I would guess they are more on the Swedish model due to Arctic winters.
Since Ibrox is out of the equation for a while as a major player, it’s as good a time as any for new thinking. We shouldn’t really be looking to England but to countries of comparable size and resources. In fact, maybe we should be trying to work more closely with them?
And 3 cheers for Hamilton Accies.
A breath of fresh air in more ways than one!
>>>>>> and in all likelihood one of the three expendable teams in our national team managers mind when he proclaimed we needed to get all three of the big Chsmpionship teams back in one go, somehow
@Danish Pastry
I am not talking about reducing the number of clubs. I am talking about funding them better. For example, under the current model the team that wins the Premiership gets a disproportionatley large amount of money from SPFL.
What I suggest is that all the revenue available for disbursement to clubs should be divided equally to each club in a division. For example, using silly figures, all clubs in the Premier League get 200 000 pounds, Championship 100 000 pounds, Lge 1 50 000, Lge 25 000.
The current model is way too top heavy.
A strange coincidence (no really)…
Today’s Mail online has a story about ex-Ranger Ian Ferguson. Maybe getting some PR sorted out for the next Bearly-acceptable TRFC manager?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2950115/Ian-Ferguson-s-fury-afar-former-Rangers-star-admits-heart-broken-recent-Ibrox-turmoil.html
As I read it, I remembered that Ian Ferguson had been manager of Perth Glory back in 2011 when I saw them play, he was manager there until 2013. The coincidence is that I then saw a story in the Guardian, also dated today, related to the Perth club’s “…alleged failure to disclose reportable payments. The alleged breaches involve failure to disclose benefits to players for the 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 seasons”
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/feb/12/ffa-perth-glory-show-cause-notice
Ain’t life strange?
Resin_lab_dog says:
February 12, 2015 at 12:36 am
Nice bears… time to step up!
——————————————–
Most, if not all, of the ‘nice’ Bears I know are fans primarily interested in football but – and I feel this is often missed – who are also interested in the football being played by other clubs in Scotland.
We can talk about ‘baggage’ and supremacist attitudes as being the most visible manifestation of ‘not so nice’ Bears. But for me the most dangerous and corrosive factor is the cucoon of insularity which swaddles the Rangers support and limits their footballing field of vision contained within the famous iron gates.
Over the last few years that insularity has actually developed into almost complete isolationism typified by the ‘Nobody likes us but we don’t care’ mentality. They see every hand as being turned against them.
As far I can judge the ‘nice’ Bears – if they haven’t walked away for good – have simply disengaged with their club. They have stopped buying STs or if they have one they don’t attend and they no longer turn out to watch the game on telly.
From conversations with my bluenose relatives and long-term Bear mates they don’t seem to back either Ashley or King. A high proportion are shareholders and I have specifically been asking how they will vote at the egm with the split approx 50/50 between: Defo Not Voting and Not Sure who for.
All of these guys fully realise the opportunity they lost in SFL3 and many actively called for a new start to give home-developed youngsters a start and to build a team around them stiffened with a few stalwarts from the lower leagues.
They’re not actively boycotting the Board in their non-attendance but they also aren’t declaring a definite return if the DK camp win.
I had previously thought that the way things were going that a collapse at Ibrox could give the silent majority of ‘nice’ Bears a window of opportunity to rekindle their SFL3 dream.
But I seriously begin to doubt whether that’s any longer possible. And if they are lost to Rangers IMO that will leave an even bigger % of ‘not so nice’ Bears in the support that’s left which bodes ill for the club and for Scottish Football in general.
There is nothing scientific about my informal survey and it’s on a small scale. But it involves Bears I know well who respect that I am a Celtic supporter through and through but who know my beackground and know that I am not a Rangers ‘Hater’.
Gabby says:
February 12, 2015 at 8:53 am
The current model is way too top heavy.
——————————————–
Undoubtedly it is. But it’s that way largely because of the differences in the numbers of supporters attracted by each club and therefore the money available to purchase better players and thus climb to the top of a league straucture.
That’s obviously back of a fag packet reasoning but there’s no doubt that over the piece more successful clubs tend to have bigger supports especially in League position. Obviously we all know that one-off cup games are always capable of creating upset to the ‘established order’ but that’s football.
I think we have to tackle inequalities in income but not through giving every team the same pay-out.
That I’m afraid is like the argument of some self-styled ‘socialists’ who believe poverty and all the ills of society can be cured by paying everyone the same wage.
Unfortunately – just like in football – it’s much more complex than that. Even if every club had the same amount paid to it then some Boards would be better at how they spend the money and, indeed, some would simply squander it.
In a way the TV money going into the EPL is not that different but that’s another discussion and one day it will come to a juddering halt. Nothing is forever except taxes and even then only for those on PAYE it would appear.
berrty says:
February 11, 2015 at 10:22 pm
“The current title chase is as competitive as it has been for a few years and shows every sign of continuing that way in the future. The fact is Celtic are too big for Scottish football (so were Rangers when they were bankrolled by BOS) and the best thing for both Celtic and the rest of Scottish Football would be for them to move to another league be it European based or even England”
Hmm, while I agree with the start of your message, that the top tier of Scottish football has benefited massively from the absence of TRFC I’d have to take a different tack to your comments related to Celtic.
Yes, the top league is way more competitive than it has been for years (many years as we have more than just 2 teams up there). Part of that is the smaller clubs developing, losing their debts and starting to hold onto players such that they can develop a squad to properly compete rather than selling at every available opportunity to keep the bank managers happy.
I’m not too sure about the drop in standard of player you claim for Celtic, perhaps it’s just this crop, but rarely in the past were Celtic in for “top-class” players. They tended to go for younger developers not the finished article. Your two latest captures from Dundee Utd for example – really promising characters, (scoring your first goal 1 minute into your debut must be some kind of world record TRFC can’t claim?). But that’s a moot point I’ll leave to the Celtic fans to discuss cos they’ll know better than anyone.
Now, Celtic being too big for the SPFL. First thing, this leaving to go to England isn’t going to happen. A european league idea keeps reappearing without anything happening. I think it would be appalling frankly, who can afford the fortnightly trips to see their team? Games will become sterile, with no away support, no atmosphere, no historical rivalry (and I mean that in the good sense not the infantile, boring, sectarian non-football related tripe). Would the football be any better? I doubt it, Celtic wouldn’t go into the top league anyway that would be reserved for the true big boys – Barca, Madrid, B. Munich, Man Utd etc etc. So who would you be up against? Teams from a similar standard league to the SPFL, hardly major draws for a massive crowd.
Celtic are probably too big for the SPFL, but thats the result of the TRFC/CFC stitch up over the last 30 odd years. They weren’t too big before the Murray/Souness revolution. While you see CFC standards dropping, I see the correct balance being restored. I see everyone else improving now things are on a more even keel, while perhaps CFC levels have/will drop. Once we have that re-calibration of things then the standard of the league ENTIRE should improve, the players improve and our ability to compete with clubs from outside Scotland will improve overall. One team shouldn’t be able to disappear way above the levels of everyone else. Or at least not without some form of financial doping – that’s when things go crazy, that’s what destroys sport and competition! CFC are the biggest club, they have the biggest crowd and therefore should be able to have the strongest team, but not a team that is so good that it can steamroll its way through a domestic season. The crunch comes with what will happen when the league is truly competitive – will CFC fans come back out and fill Parkhead again to see their team take on a resurgent Aberdeen or Dundee Utd or Inverness, Hearts, Hibs. Or does the devotion of the green and white hooped fans have an absolute requirement for the presence of just one club – TRFC?
StevieBC says:
February 11, 2015 at 8:12 pm
During RTC days, we were continually gobsmacked at how the SMSM – and especially the DR – simply ignored public information and looked the other way until just before Administration Day for RFC.
The consensus then was that the DR was playing to its purchasing demographic – and that bad news from Ibrox was bad for sales.
——————————————————————
I’m afraid that consensus IMO was always flawed for the simple fact that the DR/SM readership profile was fairly evenly split between the Green and Blue sides.
So it wasn’t necessarily the case that bad news for Ibrox or Parkhead was bad for sales. Indeed it was often good news for sales as people are often drawn to tragedy like a moth to a candle.
Many people claim to boycott ‘offending’ papers. In reality that means they send the wife or kids out to get them 😆
Circulation decline in the printed media is more a structursal problem for the industry and whether Rangers live or die isn’t that important set against the enormity of the problem.
Indeed I would love to see some of internal analysis because I’m quite sure that the whole furore has been beneficial for sales in an otherwise gloomy vista.
@Ecobhoy
I understand your point, however governing bodies should not allocate money based on the number of supporters a club has. They should treat each of its members equally.
The reward for success is promotion or European qualification.
The current system perpetuates Celtics success at the expense of every other member club.
It seems Celtic fans are all for reconstruction or reform right up to the point where it affects Celtic.
Given the ‘big city’ clubs from Edinburgh, Aberdeen & Dundee, given the gradations of support from there down through Killie, Motherwell, ICT to Falkirk, Dunfermline and further (eventually to fourth tier clubs with gates in the hundreds), Scotland could easily organise a Scandi-style league. The cuckoo in the nest is the Old Firm; the engorged tail that wags the wee dog. From the establishment of the largely Glasgow-focused SFL in 1890 through to WW2, then from the mid-1960s to date, the Old Firm has dominated; generations of antagonism. Historical freak. Circumstancial disaster. Even worse since the mid 1990s: two clubs throwing piles of cash at each other, waiting to see who was debilitated by a paper cut.
Gabby says:
February 12, 2015 at 8:53 am
@Danish Pastry
I am not talking about reducing the number of clubs. I am talking about funding them better. For example, under the current model the team that wins the Premiership gets a disproportionatley large amount of money from SPFL.
What I suggest is that all the revenue available for disbursement to clubs should be divided equally to each club in a division. For example, using silly figures, all clubs in the Premier League get 200 000 pounds, Championship 100 000 pounds, Lge 1 50 000, Lge 25 000.
The current model is way too top heavy.
1 4 Rate This
———–
My apologies. I misunderstood your point. I totally agree with bringing in a fairer distribution. The pool of money available could be distributed in different ways. For example, a basic lump sum twice a year to every club. Then rates based on actual league and final position at the end of the season. It’s sport not business. I think some clubs have got it the other way round.
As you say, success is gaining promotion or winning a cup or league or Euro place. Sporting excellence is the reward. Giving the lion’s share to most successful in a ‘top heavy’ way will only prolong the lack of competition which top clubs complain about.
We could learn a lot from looking at the models other countries use. A simple system: 40% distributed evenly among all 42 clubs, 30% distributed to all clubs based on league (a bit more, the higher the league), and the final 30% distrubuted from SPFL 1-42 based on finishing position.
Big clubs like Aberdeen, Celtic, Dundee U, Hearts, Hibs will always be big because of a larger following. A more even distribution may also help keep ticket prices at reasonable level and should boost youth development. Certain demands should be made when distributing sums of cash, not least FFP, F&P tests for people involved, secret agreements with some clubs are a complete non-starter.
Gabby/Eco,
And in lib dem fashion I’ll come in somewhere in between.
Yes you have to reward success. Yes I understand the ‘helping hand argument’ re European competition, dangerous though it is (ref the old split between 1st and 2nd place, and the gap then to 3rd, 4th 5th etc in prize monies). And yes, a massive nod here to the fact that ALL of the top clubs voted for that distribution – an indicator of voting preferences to come there me thinks.
At some point though you have to acknowledge that success ‘creates’ fans, fans bring money and money creates power. As strong as the brand identity of Celtic is you surely wouldn’t argue that a successful Celtic was no better supported than an unsuccessful one? Large fan bases do not just happen. They happen for a reason. Historically winning stuff, whilst by no means the only reason, is inarguably a major contributory factor.
tayred says:
February 12, 2015 at 9:14 am
I think that’s an excellent piece from my viewpoint as a Celtic fan. Of course every football fan wants to see their team win and do well.
But IMO fans driven with a love for football take no real pride in winning a league through defeating ‘cannon fodder’. I know many are like me and want to see victories built on good football and against a challenging opposition.
You’re right the whole of Scottish Football was corrupted by the reckless spending ushered in with the Murray era. But we are returning to nearer where we used to be IMO as a League when more than 2 teams dominated.
We’ve still quite a bit to go and there is an obvious disconnect with some Celtic fans who wish more to be spent than the Board is prepared to entertain. This is in many ways a circular argument and more suited IMO to Celtic fan sites so I won’t deal with it in depth.
The recent Celtic/Rangers game appears to demonstrate that there is still a surviving ‘need’ or ‘hunger’ with a major percentage of Celtic fans to play Rangers. Again this is a subject I see as more suited to Celtic sites.
However a few of my buddies who went to the game now seem a bit disenchanted and it’s almost as though they have scrathced the itch and got it out of their system. I hope that’s the case but these are individual decisions.
As a Celtic supporter who urges Bears to see the need for their club to live within its means I take the same view wrt Celtic. Nothing can remove the European glory nights at Parkhead from my memory – and that includes defeats btw.
They are special and I hope we might still enjoy them from time to time but the reality is that the top European teams have moved way beyond us financially and it’s becoming impossible to get beyond the group stage and possibly even a struggle to qualify.
These are the realities we face as does the rest of Scottish Football and to build our financial wellbeing on CL succcess is a mirage and it’s sad to see that this remain such a fixed part of the Celtic and Rangers support’s aspirations.
So it’s a bit like demanding a slice of the EPL TV money – we need either a restructure of European Competitions or more of a trickle-down from the CL revenues.
As to how the Celtic fans will respond to a resurgence in meaningul competition I would have been less than hopeful about that at the beginning of the season.
But RD seems to have built a bit of a genuine buzz and I think most supporters can now see where he’s trying to do although that has a fair bit to to go as well. But I’m more optimistic than I was and if you ain’t an optimist when it comes to football then you’re better chucking it and learning to knit 😆
However a major issue that has to be tackled is the deplorable standard of refereeing – this has to be changed as a No 1 Priority even if it means hiring whistlers from outside Scotland.
Referees must explain publicly controversial calls. This isn’t to harass but to try and understand if rule changes could assist them in achieveing better standards. It mustn’t be a blame culture but a positive step to improve the football on offer.
And protection must be given against physical assaults especially from the usual suspects. I get totally p*ssed off at cards being handed out for enthusiastic celebrating and yet career-threatening challenges don’t merit a yellow.
Good points were made in earlier posts as to the role and duties of the CO and that should be clearly explained. It also might help if the match observer publicly and quickly stated whether he was bringing any incidents to the attention of the CO.
If he states that a case is being reported then there is no need for fans to launch email campaigns. But if the observer doesn’t list an incident that is causing widespread comment then there must be a laid-down right for fans to make a valid complaint to the CO.
And if the CO decides to take no action on a complaint he/she must explain their reasoning.
It’s all about transparency and improving standards and achieving an even-handed result. Quite simply those playing football need to be fully protected and the thugs either clean-up their act or get driven from the game and it’s not just a question of yellow cards but fines against clubs for persistent offenders.
I know there are plenty of fans who want the gore, blood and snaughters. But there are many many more who want to see good football in a physical sport but without the psycopaths who are allowed to assault without any real sanction.
Just when we thought it couldn’t get any more entertaining; he’s back!
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/02/11/4943a5802e67148542931e069a8ae42e.jpg
To be fair, he’s probably the most honest RRM in the whole magical farce!
Smugas says:
February 12, 2015 at 10:22 am
I recognise obviously the importance of success and winning titles in building a fan base.
However – and this is where the real problem lies IMO – that isn’t the key factor. I’m talking about the underlying population of Scotland and its geographic distribution.
These form the reservoirs that provide the bigger fan base for the more successful clubs. Obviously historical factors have led to instances where there were different teams founded in the same city which might not have happened if the factors hadn’t happened.
But they did and they have probably all but disappeared in real terms except in Glasgow. However I don’t want to get into the nitty gritty of WHY but rather what we now have.
I genuinely think we have too many teams but who am I to decry that a small well-run club shouldn’t be able to reach and play in the top-flight even if it has a sparse population within its cachment area?
We have a lot of such teams in Scotland that are circumscribed by the impossibility of ever having more than a few thousand fans simply because of where they are located.
But professional football is a business and other teams simply won’t subsidise a potential competitor. There may be an argument for the Scottish Parliament to support such clubs operating on a community basis and increasing sporting and fitness facilities especially for youngesters in the area.
We need more money in the Scottish Game that’s for sure. But I don’t think tinkering about with the allocation of decreasing amounts is the solution.
We need to not only increase income but find new ways of doing so that engage and create new punters prepared to pay cash at the gate and that means improving the football product and introducing other attractions.
Not posting this with any particular incident or player in mind, just doing it to highlight just how serious elbowing an opponent can be.
This is an article on a player, Iain Hume, who suffered a serious injury as a result of an elbow into his head. The article itself doesn’t say much about the incident but the accompanying photo says enough. I think the photo should be hung in every dressing room in world football as a warning to all those who like to lead with their elbow, it’s pretty harrowing, despite being taken long after the injury occurred.
Quite a good article about a man remarkably un-bitter about what must have been a very traumatic incident! To have recovered enough mentally to play again must have taken plenty of guts and character.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/feb/10/iain-hume-tranmere-india-kerala-dreams
From Jackson in the Record-
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/spfls-cash-boost-hopes-dashed-5149427
If the article is correct, surely Doncaster must go? But then he should have gone two years ago, and didn’t. Here’s the gist of it-
neepheid says:
February 12, 2015 at 11:00 am
Hmm, almost a decent piece of journalism there, if it’s not been plagiarised! A quote from Doncaster which clearly shows his unwillingness to speak on the matter and details of a bidder in the latest EPL deal.
Just shows what he is capable of when the Ibrox puff pieces aren’t being handed to him!
If he is any sort of journalist, of course, this won’t be the last we read of this as he will be banging on the Hampden doors until he gets to the full facts; and to the truth.
neepheid says:
February 12, 2015 at 11:00 am
If the article is correct, surely Doncaster must go? But then he should have gone two years ago, and didn’t. Here’s the gist of it-
A SECRET clause in SPFL’s deal with Sky Sports has given the broadcasters the option of extending their agreement, which was meant to expire in 2017,
===================================================================
I don’t see the problem. Presumably by “secret” he means commercially confidential, like the rest of the detailed terms other than the highlights released to the media. A two year option to continue with an incremental uplift is not unusal. Any suggested equivalence betwen the EPL and SPFL deals is pure fantasy – either deliusional or intentionally misleading.
The unasked question is will Sky exercise the option – and at what price.
Given the shambolic governance I’d be negotiating a significant negative increase or be walking away without looking back.
This piece of puerile nonsense from Stewart Fisher follows the equivalance logic and is close to certifiable.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/bbc-is-strangling-scottish-football-in-fight-for-tv-cash-blasts-mulraney.118336612
Sports writers really should understand their limitations and stick to sport.
Gabby says:
February 12, 2015 at 9:40 am
@Ecobhoy
I understand your point, however governing bodies should not allocate money based on the number of supporters a club has. They should treat each of its members equally.
The reward for success is promotion or European qualification.
The current system perpetuates Celtics success at the expense of every other member club.
It seems Celtic fans are all for reconstruction or reform right up to the point where it affects Celtic.
——————————————————
Gabby – you have to remeber that Celtic is a Plc whose Board have certain duties towards the shareholders who own the business.
I’m afraid I and my club choose to live in the real world. If you read my response to Smugas above you will see my contention – which I think is valid – that the potential support available to a club isn’t necessarily solely based on its current footballing success.
What you suggest is achieveable under a franchise system. In some places franchising works in financial terms but IMO Scotland is too small a country in population terms to accommodate anything but a very truncated franchise system.
I also simply don’t think Scottish football supporters would embrace franchising with the downsides of franchise sales and transfers from one geographic area to another.
However you seem to miss the point that the SPFL does treat its members equally but the place in Europe goes to the top position league team whether that be Celtic or anyone else. Obviously there is a cup route as well but I will leave that aside.
So Celtic gets no preferential treatment from the League in earning a European place but does so on sporting merit. I think you are simply wrong in stating that the League allocates money based on the number of supporters a club has.
I also have to say that most fans of any club will most likely want to retain and support a system which favours their situation and Celtic IMO is no exception. But as long as it operates within the rules it and any other club is entitled to do so.
We still have a title race – so who knows who will end-up top this year and gain a European place. It might not be Celtic so I really don’t understand or even accept your point I’m afraid.
There will always only be one League winner who gets the European slot unless of course you pick the CL contender out of a hat – some might believe that’s a fairer way but it would be down to luck and have nothing to do with sporting ability.
OT Stat and one to ask in the pub to your pals this weekend
Q: What will happen next weekend that has never happened in the EPL before
A: No Scottish manager
@ecobhoy
In terms of money being paid according to supporter size, I was merely repeating so ething from a previous post and Inunderstand how this has caused confusion.
Money is clearly disbursed according to final league positions.
The point I was trying to make was that teams in a division should receive the same amount from the governing body and additional income can be achieved from gaining promotion or Euro qualification.
I admit I am biased in this argument. In Australia we have a culture of salary caps in professional sport. It protects clubs from engaging in spending wars, while providing close competition throughout the season.
We also have TV deals that provide clubs with a decent income. More than 90% of games across the 4 professional football codes here are shown live on TV. The surprising outcome of this has been significant increases in game day attendance across the 4 codes despite live coverage.
mcfc says:
February 12, 2015 at 11:38 am
This piece of puerile nonsense from Stewart Fisher follows the equivalance logic and is close to certifiable.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/bbc-is-strangling-scottish-football-in-fight-for-tv-cash-blasts-mulraney.118336612
Sports writers really should understand their limitations and stick to sport.
————————————————————
Childlike logic being applied I’m afraid probably more to do with political point scoring against the BBC than anything to do with football.
I’m fed-up with the continual bleating that it’s only fair that Scottish TV licence fees should all be spent in Scotland.
If that’s what people want then fine. If they don’t want to see EPL football fine or if they don’t want to see the national and international output from a plethora of BBC TV, radio and online services over numerous subject – not just football – fine.
Has the author even considered what kind of programmes and their quality that Scots could be subjected to if the only money available to provide it was the Scottish element of the licence fee.
The quality of Herald journos really is disgraceful and what about oversight of the drivel within the organisation. That seems to have simply vanished in recent years.
EPL & SPFL equivalence
A little food for thought. The value of something is how much someone will pay for it judging its value: quality, enjoyment, status, reliability, familiarity etc.
In a competitive market a product/service must offer the best mix of all of these things at any given time to win and be chosen. You get nothing for second.
A few years before MG Rover bit the dust for the final time, research showed that Rover main products ( 75 range) were highly regarded by their target market, they were seen as good value for money, premium brand values and functionally competitive; performance, mpg, owner surveys. So why weren’t they selling in millions.
One, their target market was very small, older, mainly British, middle class, premium car buyers looking for a saloon rather than a hatchback and petrol rather than diesel.
Two: a big influence on what people buy is what their friends, peers, relatives, colleagues buy – aspirational, herd safety, peer criticism, status
Three, while MG Rover scores were good, MG Rover typically came second or third on people’s short list, not first often enough.
Trend: sales below the level needed to sustain production and R&D.
Result: Liquidation
Meanwhile, the Audi, BMW, Volvo and VW alternative prospered
If you think this is a one off with other dominant factors, look at Saab and you will see exactly the same path.
My point is that if I have Sky or BT (virtually free), I can usually watch football from one of the four big leagues in the world. So why would I seek out Scottish football to watch unless I have a specific geographic/family connection or friends to discuss it with. Without social value or emotional value or global status, is Scottish football more attractive than Dutch, Portuguese or Albanian football to viewers and hence to Sky and BT?
Now, tell me there’s any equivalence between the EPL and the SPFL – even if the SPFL was run competently.
The SPFL needs someone like Hearne who can read the tea-leaves and not some numptie like Doncaster – or Fisher who thinks the SPFL is 8% of the EPL just because it is next door – God help us.
Gabby says:
February 12, 2015 at 11:58 am
I don’t know much about the financial mechanics of Australian Football. Is the top league a franchise operation? And whether it is or not do all teams in it get the same payment from the League irrespective of individual club attendance figures or league placement?
I’m just having difficulty in how a League can ensure that all clubs have the same amount disbursed to them. Does the League collect all ST sales and walk-up money from every club and distribute that equally.
Or is it just other money such as TV and sponsorship that is to be distributed equally irrespective of place with the only other money one club can generate being done through access to – in Europe – the CL. What would it be in OZ btw?
The problem with that system as I see it is that very quickly there could be one very dominant team which had CL qualification every year and a meritocracy of failure for every other team.
Even in the Celtic Rangers hegemony surely two teams would be better than one and even better if we can get 5/6 teams all competing for first place and we can achieve that under the current system IMO.
Just like some teams have better players and/or tactics than others I’m afraid some clubs are more astute in its player sales and purchases and the way it handles its business.
Why should they be penalised by propping-up a club that makes poor financial decisions but who is handed the same money as a more professional outfit on the field and in the boardroom?
There’s also the factor that Scottish football is very much a selling culture for all clubs at all levels – but again some clubs are much better at doing the business than others.
So do we level the playing field and equally split all the profits from player transactions throughout Scottish Football. Where do we stop trying to prop-up a poor team – I think they have to be allowed to find their own level by and large and that’s what relegation is all about.
neepheid says:
February 12, 2015 at 11:00 am
From Jackson in the Record-
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/spfls-cash-boost-hopes-dashed-5149427
If the article is correct, surely Doncaster must go? But then he should have gone two years ago, and didn’t. Here’s the gist of it-
I have to ask ‘secret’ from who? Doncaster didn’t do this on his own that’s for sure. I would imagine that every club was advised of this or, at the very least, the SPFL Board members.
@Ecobhoy
The governing body disburses money it gains from Broadcast deals, league sponsorship. Etc.
Clubs can generate their own income from ST sales, gameday tickets, sponsorship, transfer sales etc
Steve Simonson gets a 2 game ban for breaching gambling rules. One immediate and one suspended till end of season.
I think we have a good league format that is exciting but some aspects of the product we offer TV companies could be much better…
Good pitches should be an absolute requirement, either astro or very good grass. Games on poor pitches make our league look so last century and it does not stand comparison with other countries.
Clubs should not position cameras opposite empty stands (e.g. KFC, PTFC)
These are easy things to do, some other things may take more time to introduce eg Refs being being microphoned up and TV replays for controversial calls similar to tennis but without innovation our league will not be attractive to wider TV markets.
I wonder what advice Barry Hearn has given them ? (other than more beer)
A wee twitter exchange which highlights the point I tried to make earlier. Smaller leagues than ours, in any terms, negotiate much better TV deals. Why should that be?
Gabby says:
February 12, 2015 at 12:41 pm
@Ecobhoy
The governing body disburses money it gains from Broadcast deals, league sponsorship. Etc
——————————————————————–
But does every club get the same amount irrespective of position?
McCulloch ban stands, according to Sky
Hope Hibs can get a refund on those neck braces 🙂
Mabaw,
Too simplistic.
A resurgent Aberdeen/ Dutd/ Hearts/ Hibs/ whomsoever in a league sans old* firm would not create the instant differential you expect. That takes years of dominance to garner that unquestioning core support, which is kind of the point being made!
Interesting to hear the Australian stuff btw.
MaBaw says:
February 12, 2015 at 1:11 pm
Where did I say Celtic should leave the league??? Quite the opposite, I said that it is unlikely that celtic will leave, as the England move will never happen and in my opinion a european league would be a disaster.
My point was exactly the same as yours but kinda in reverse. Celtic are the big club, but at the moment I believe they are a little too powerful (a throwback to the old 2-club system). Given time with the other clubs increasing the quality of squad and Celtic perhaps reducing a little things will balance and we will have a strong league again. At no point did I say celtic should leave.
Yea ban stands. Tomorrow’s game and a cup game next season – which will never happen IMO, However I’m surprised there isn’t an added penalty for not accepting the initial ban.
However the Bears are delighted at his ban and the goalie’s as well as they think it might give them a chance tomorrow.
Great to see that humour survives down Ibrox Way 😆
tayred, apologies if i misread your post.
42
42 may be too many clubs for a country the size of scotland. But . .
Any contraction expected to enhance competition would be pointless at the level of forfar/brechin etc . These clubs “fit” thier present level. .
Any worthwhile contraction would have to come at the level of the “middling” clubs . . . cue the nimbys and my retirement from the fray . . .
But before I go . . . I would love regular competition from strong Aberdeen or Hearts (it was briefly great when burley started so well ) or hibs . . but its always going to be a war of attrition against the juggernaut that resides in glasgow . . . (tactful phrasing there btw) .
How much better for their chances if there were another 3 or four teams of a similiar size chipping away at the biggest clubs points total ? ?
” title favourites celtic have a tough run of fixtures coming up with games against lanarkshire united , renfrewshire county and ayrshire albion . This could be a chance for challengers hearts to move in front with victory un the derby while Aberdeen can hang in there with a win over 3rd placed Dundee Shire . . ”
Nah I know . NEVER goin to happen so do us a favour and quit whingin until yku are actually prepared to DO simething that will ACTUALLY militate against the natural advantage enjoyed by the likes if my club celtic generated by the simple social and population demographic inherent in the countrys biggest city . .
Listened to the John Beattie show on radio Scotland as the discussed whether it not the McCulloch appeal would succeed or fail this lunchtime.
The host, Beattie reminded us he was a former rugby international and knew a thing or two about stamps and stamping. Told us he had a definite view but incredibly stated he would not say what that was…. The old BBC fear of offending his heroes perhaps????
Then comes former ref Charlie Richmond to tell us it was impossible to know if it was or wasn’t deliberate so couldn’t offer a view. This from a former pro ref!!! Ask yourself what would YOU have decided if you had been the ref Charlie.
Jonathon Sutherland told us he felt the appeal judgement would not be overturned.
As they went to the traffic Theresa Talbot asked if she was not being asked to opine.
The bold John said it’s ok, Theresa. We know what you would say anyway. Hmmmm?
Is BBC Scoltland a parallel universe at times? Unbelievable stuff yet in a small way a wee bit entertaining and certainly enlightening on things at Pacific Quay. And to thin we actually pay to have this drivel produced.
arabest1 says:
February 12, 2015 at 1:52 pm
I just remembered another ;pronouncement on here which argued that ROI only paid the BBC £21 million annually for complete BBC TV output and this was a terrible deal wrt Scotland which raised £300 million in licence fees and Scots were therefore being ripped-off big-style.
I have undernoted the observations I made at the time 😆
It would be nice to have a Scottish tv channel that broadcasts in english and bbc Scotland mw moved to fm .