Staying On The Problem

 

It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer.
Albert Einstein

The recent flurries of activity regarding the mis-governance of the Scottish Football authorities gave us some hope that perhaps the dam was about to be breached. Sadly, this has not proved to be the case. The independent TOG report, which highlighted the deeply flawed nature of the LNS inquiry and drew attention to the anomalous activities of the SFA in awarding Rangers FC a European competition licence in 2011, moved the discussion beyond the shores of Scotland. Subsequently, a letter from UEFA to lawyers representing Celtic shareholders reportedly confirmed that the licence had been awarded in contravention of the rules and protocols of the competition.

The TOG report concluded that there was a prima facie case suggesting that LNS had been misled, or misinformed. It suggested that Nimmo Smith may have been misled by SFA President Campbell Ogilvie when he gave evidence about the EBTs in operation at Ibrox, and that the SFA were unable or unwilling to ensure fair play in the game in Scotland. With respect to sanctions, LNS concluded that all EBTs were lawful and open to other clubs. This was of course factually incorrect, since despite the suspicious and comical FUBAR of the last-minute change to the terms of reference designed to exclude DOS EBTs, LNS still had sight of them.

The facts are pretty damning for the authorities. Rules were dispensed with over the licence issue, during which there appeared to be a curious request (to Rangers!) by the Chief Executive of the SFA for ‘permission’ to explain the SFA decision. On the SPFL side, terms of reference mentioned above were altered at the onset of the LNS inquiry to allow LNS to exclude the DOS EBTs, a strong indication that LNS was not only misled, but that he was deliberately led to the conclusion that the authorities desired.

The facts are there. So too is a very strong suspicion that evidence was falsified, and that erroneous conclusions were arrived at. The SFA/SPFL/MSM response? Silence. The same people who hold up their hands in horror at the IOC’s decision not to impose a blanket ban on Russia for alleged state-sponsored doping COMPLETELY ignore the cover up by our own authorities in the matter of systematic cheating and financial doping on our own doorstep.

The SFA, SPFL, the clubs, and their little helpers in the press are happy to sit by and enable cheating. Why? Because they see it as in their own interests?

If so. it must be personal self interest. What began as an understandable fear that tens of thousands of paying customers would be lost to the game has evolved into a trousers-at-the-ankles, Rixian farce of a cover-up.

There has been not one sentence of coherent rebuttal received from any of the above constituencies. Neither the SFA, the SPFL, the media, nor the clubs have even attempted to give us any justification for what went on.

The SFA are so rudderless and devoid of purpose that the Chief Executive feels justified in telling a group of people that he wouldn’t be motivated to do anything in response to systematic cheating, and an unremarkable former journalist turned PR operative can exclaim in a perfect study of un-self awareness, “I AM THE SFA!!” – whilst the President of that body smiles in senile obeisance, or childlike ignorance.

Yet those who present facts and ask serious questions about their behaviour are portrayed as bampots? If you weren’t a witness to this stuff as it happens, you would scarcely believe it.

There has been not one sentence of coherent rebuttal received from any of the above constituencies. Neither the SFA, the SPFL, the media, nor the clubs have even attempted to give us any justification for what went on.

Celtic have been (somewhat unfairly on occasion) on the wrong end of criticism from those of us who see the honesty of the game as paramount. They are only one club in a host of clubs whose interests have been crapped on by the failure of governance in the game in Scotland – and yet have done nothing to demonstrate their distaste for the rulebreaking.

David Murray may well have started this, but he fled the scene and lost his influence at Hampden long before the finish. Consequently, the clubs have failed the fans – wilfully so.

The Celtic issue though is more complicated. Unfortunately for them, they have a larger, and commensurately more powerful support than most – and that power was exercised by a group of their own shareholders who sought their own path to truth and justice. The fact that those shareholders gathered compelling evidence of wrongdoing at the SFA, took the trouble to set up official communications with the club, and that they then passed on their concerns along with that compelling evidence – certainly compelling enough to UEFA it seems – speaks volumes for their determination.

Our clubs are just not as invested in sporting integrity as the rest of us

That put Celtic in an uncomfortable place, but the fact that not one word of substance has emanated from them in support of those shareholders – despite the words of encouragement they may or may not have issued privately to the guys who took up the cause on the club’s behalf – is a plain enough message that they like their fellow clubs are just not as invested in sporting integrity as the rest of us.
My wholehearted and comprehensive contempt though is not reserved just for Celtic, despite the moral deficiency which has seen them ignore the excellent efforts of their shareholders to compel them to do the right thing.

My contempt is applied equally and liberally among all the clubs, for they are most deserving of it. We needn’t feel betrayed by the lackeys who run the SFA and SPFL. They do the bidding of the clubs – and the clubs alone.

Nor should we see the media as chief villains. The same media routinely print untruths and misinformation on a daily basis to deliberately mislead us on far more important issues than football. Hardly a betrayal from them – just western democracy.

The clubs tell us that ‘we are all in this together’, but in reality their real attitude is ‘us and them’

Hampden Towers

Hampden Towers
©Reganco

But the clubs’ betrayal of the sport and the fans is by far the most serious of all. They will tell us that ‘we are all in this together’, but in reality their real attitude is an ‘us and them’ one, digging moats around the boardroom to better defend themselves from fan participation. Based on the loyalty they know we all have for the colours, they think that with time this thing will go away, that the natives will calm down and the sophisticates in the boardrooms will see the order of things return to normal. One thing is certain – they certainly can’t all sign up Brendan Rogers (or equivalent) as manager each and every season ticket round!

But that is the game they are playing. Playing for time. Time that they hope will cloud the issue, to make it recede as a morning mist, and disappear completely in time for a free business lunch – business as usual.
Like Einstein says, being ready to spend a little more time on a problem pays dividends. Those with the wind of truth behind them don’t have to be particularly clever. They do have to be willing to spend as much time as necessary on the problem, and let the wind take them to where they need to be.

And they will get there, because those vested interests that deny the truth have (as we have shown) NOTHING to say. It is only a matter of time and patience – and staying on the problem.

It needn’t get nasty, it needn’t become abusive, it needn’t become complicated – but it might well get loud.

 

This entry was posted in General by Big Pink. Bookmark the permalink.
John Cole

About Big Pink

Big Pink is John Cole; a former schoolteacher based in the West of Scotland, He is also a print and broadcast journalist who is engaged in the running of SFM . Former gigs include Newstalk 106, the Celtic View, and Channel67. A Celtic fan, he is also the voice of our podcast initiative.

595 thoughts on “Staying On The Problem


  1. Forfolksake July 26, 2016 at 16:19
    ———————-
    The player with the most successful career from the 1989 U16 side was Paul Dickov. He had 421 senior appearances, scoring 121 goals. He also played 10 times for Scotland.


  2. easyJambo July 26, 2016 at 17:34
    I had thought about including Paul Dickov, but as I was responding to a comment about youth or young players in Scotland not getting game time I discounted him.
    Paul Dickov was an Arsenal player from 90-96 and only made 45 appearances including loans during that time.  Paul Dickov got his first cap for Scotland in 2000 after he had been at Man City for 4 years and the last of his 10 caps in 2004 while at Leicester.  It could also be said he might of gained more caps had he played more games when he was younger as well.
    It is a problem which hopefully has been addressed in Scotland and younger players are getting more game time to aide their development.
    Thanks to the money Sky are pumping into the EPL, the same issue is likely to happen with the English national team but unlikely to the same extent because they have a bigger pool of players.


  3. Talking of David Murray and the damage he has done to Scottish football; I believe BBC Scotland have produced a programme which airs next month which claims to investigate why the national team have failed to qualify for anything since 1998.
    I wonder whether Murray will get any mention on this or will one of the main reasons for the decline of our game be conveniently omitted?
    I think I can guess the answer! 


  4. AULDHEIDJULY 26, 2016 at 13:05 
    Love the references about the domestic game the integrity of which he steamrolled over starting 1999 with first ebt.
    Then that Martin O Neil turned up. I take it the article predated August 2000 when Fernado was substituted after 20 minutes.
    ================================

    The article basked in the wake of Rangers league title win. IIRC Martin O’Neill had not been announced as Celtic boss at the time. Even if he had I doubt it would have mattered to the tone of the article other than O’Neill getting ‘warned’ about the task in front of him.


  5. I would love to be able to disagree but truth is truth and all clubs are as bad as the old dead rangers none of them give a flying fig about the fans it is a case of pay your money and stfu.


  6. “Those with the wind of truth behind them don’t have to be particularly clever. They do have to be willing to spend as much time as necessary on the problem, and let the wind take them to where they need to be.
    And they will get there, because those vested interests that deny the truth have (as we have shown) NOTHING to say. It is only a matter of time and patience – and staying on the problem.”
    Well said!  The truth will out!


  7. If CFC used our UEFA influence in 2012 to do a behind the scenes deal on compensation for the EBT years, choice of opponents in CL qualifying rounds say,seeing that as a more likely source of recompense than the SFA/Scottish courts route, then it would explain our reluctance to support Res. 12.We have already done a deal with the devil.
    If PL’s appearance on the SFA and now SPFL boards was seen as a sign that the influence of RFC/TRFC within the domestic game had waned then that might reassure desperate Directors of other clubs that they would not go to Ibrox needing 3 points for a EU place only to get shafted by the Ref. Forget the past, take the “Blue Pound”.
    If the understanding therefore is that it was bad, but it’s good now, then the clubs’ position follows.
    However, apart from many “if’s”, it leaves every single instance of corruption in the Problem unanswered. It leaves the fans on one side and our clubs on the other. It also raises the suspicion that the influence of RFC has been replaced by the entrenchment of the perceived necessity of having a strong “Old Firm”, always suspected by the fans of other clubs, but now accepted as fact, as expressed by N. Doncaster.
    This prospect is rotten and unsupported by any evidence, and I would very much like to hear a better explanation.


  8. I was at a stage where hope was deserting me like sand falling though a siv, I was even contemplating giving up visiting the sites that dedicate their time and effort to exposing the sham that has the audacity to describe themselves as the governing body of our game. Thankfully I read your latest blog and found myself thinking “hell no, why should I.”?
    This is not only the blatant implementation of fianancial doping but the systematic endeavour to dope public perception, doping of journalistic freedom by level 5, doping of LNS, UEFA and the courts by failing to fully disclose relevant documentation, doping of supporters and supporter groups, the doping of players, managers, coaches, directors and owners but worst of all the doping of the truth. No matter how long it takes we must persist because the thing about liars, sooner or later they will trip themselves up and the longer they continue to lie the deeper the hole they dig.
    I gave up my 4 SB’s I had for over 35 years, four years ago, I have written to Celtic explaining why on three seperate occasions and received one reply, I have no intention of returning even though I miss the whole experience I had enjoyed since my very first game against Leeds Utd at Hampden Park in that unforgettable match, but like CFC’s  board’s silence, I would be complicit by endorsing this stain that is blighting our sport.

    One day we will be proven right until then keep up the good work.


  9. Probably an appropriate time to put this article up BP and a great read it was.

    It is incredibly frustrating not being able to have an immediate impact on things close to your heart, no matter what that may be, however we all need to take the long game view of this. As my previous manager was so fond of saying “How do you eat an elephant?”

    The thing about TOG is that a huge amount of people seemed to get swept up in the debate with TLM about the license issue, although I know LNS was mentioned a few times, as has been said above and I think eluded to in a couple of posts on the previous article, that is black and white, there is no debate to be had! The dates were changed and changed for a specific reason, guilt had been admitted on the WTC so for those to be discounted (Pun intended03) is a disgrace. 

    Also see Clumps is back and boy is his latest a cracker! I was laughing my backside off all the way into work this morning, brilliant. As much as I love reading him, it is again frustrating that the majority of the populace still takes the MSM seriously, when it suits them, and that the journalists are so obviously biased. 

    Keep up the good work guys, one bite at a time 12


  10. From the ‘Scotsman’ online at 9.21 pm 26th July
    ‘Martyn McLaughlin: IOC refusal to ban Russia reduces Rio to farce”
    “Presented with incontrovertible evidence of institutionalised Russian cheating by the McLaren report, the IOC’s refusal to impose a blanket ban has reduced the proceedings in Rio to a pantomime.”
    _________
    I say to said Martyn: where is your report on how Scottish Football has been reduced to a pantomime by the failure of our Football Authorities to abide by UEFA rules when they disregarded the incontrovertible evidence of the cheating by RFC ,and supported that club’s false declaration to the UEFA Club Licensing Committee that they were up to date with their social taxes, thus enabling that cheating, ruined club to obtain a licence to which they were absolutely not entitled?

    By all means, have a go at the IOC- but do not be hypocritical -first acknowledge and  deal with home-grown corruption in Scottish Football.

    If you have the journalistic gumption when up close and personal.


  11. I’m a great one for conspiracy theories, although as the header article demonstrates our anger at the football authorities and clubs is evidence backed.  Going back to conspiracies, I remember years ago reading about one where it is believed Russia uses secrets they hold about influential western figures as a bargaining tool with the west. ‘Back off or we’ll grossly embarrass you’ was the alleged message. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that many people involved in this Rangers saga possibly have the same power to grossly embarrass senior figures within Scottish football and the media. In particular this embarrassment could leave many figures in a difficult position with their own clubs fans. That could be as much a reason for clubs and media appearing complicit as anything else, and also a reason for the authorities to bury their heads in the sand in the face of presented overwhelming evidence. 


  12. macfurglyJuly 26, 2016 at 23:29
    ‘.. the influence of RFC has been replaced by the entrenchment of the perceived necessity of having a strong “Old Firm”, ‘
    _________There’s never a new signing whether by TRFC or Celtic ( Kolo Toure being but the latest) who doesn’t open his mouth and let his belly rumble about how wonderful and magical the old hate-fests , and how much they adored them from afar. Is it part of the fecking contracts they sign that they have to mention a fixture that now longer has any history?
    I can see that TRFC desperately need to use every device and trick to maintain the fiction that they are the RFC of the former ‘OF’.
    For Celtic gratuitously to aid and abet them in that pretence is unacceptable. And they bloody well ought not let their players, new or established, come out with ‘old firm’ crap.


  13.     
    In light of JJ’s, (amongst others), allegations regarding the survey on the structural integrity of Crumbledome roofing, and the recent comments made by King himself, I imagine that Sevco would be duty bound to notify their Public Liability Insurers as to any new information, which may possibly affect premiums or indeed, in the worst case, invalidate the policy
        Does anybody know who their insurers may be? 
       I believe the policy must be publicly accessible, but can’t find it


  14. How many years have we been hearing about the Crumbledome?

    It is likely that maintenance is required but what exactly and how much is just speculation.

    DCK has clearly marked it down as a substantial expenditure that needs to be taken into account, but how much you can trust that is another matter. Fear of the beloved stadium crumbling around them is just the type of PR thing needed to get the punters digging deep into their pockets.

    We can hope for ‘this and that’ but the issue for the Ibrox Club, at the end of the day, is pure cash flow.

    This season they will most likely max out the season ticket and game day attendance income. Other than that there is very little else coming through the door being that the retail dispute is still ongoing and strip and shirt sponsors are most likely very unhappy. How that dispute will effect the attitudes for future sponsors will be seen down the line.

    In addition to potential maintenance costs there is the day to day running on both Ibrox and Murray Park. This board, like the Llambias one, will have been trying to cut all operating costs but I would have thought that there isn’t too much more that can be trimmed.

    My guess is that T’Rangers are now at a point where operating costs are as low as they can be and fan/game day income will be as high as they can get without scaring punters off. 

    That is the basic budget they have to live with.

    The only additional monies on the horizon are from the Club 1872 enterprise, the rich mythical RRM and of course –  Euro glory.

    In the future additional costs are going to come from potential maintenance and the long term player contracts being signed up over the last few weeks. 

    Frankly I can’t see anyone of a quality in the current squad that will ‘add value’ in terms of commanding transfer fee generation. Therefore these contracts will mostly likely need to be honoured in full. Without any additional funds then little or no monies will be available for squad strengthening or higher wage bills.

    The club is therefore being run on a shoe string but given the size of the fan base that is still at a level that other clubs would love to have and one that can see T’Rangers out out a decent team on the SPFL.

    Whether that team is good enough to keep the punters enthralled in the long term is another question. 


  15. wottpi

    I think your observation regarding operating costs at Ibrox are spot on. For any other club, this would be seen by most of us as a matter for concern, and our hope would be that the curve would begin an upwards course.

    In the case of TRFC I do not sense that spirit of fraternity. Is it because we are all Rangers-haters?

    I don’t believe it is, but I have an idea why the consensus of this blog came about.

    My great Auntie Polly had a stinging – and uniquely Calton – turn of phrase about people she imagined had “goat a new erse and forgoat aboot their auld wan!”

    She was referring to people whose circumstances had improved, and who had consequently lost touch with their more humble roots.

    The trouble with TRFC is that they have travelled in the reverse direction – and they are unable to forget the old ‘erse’ and are in denial about the shape of new one. Of course the new one comes as a consequence of the penury involved in a start-up business and the obligations they have loaded upon themselves because they have been so desperate to live up to their in-liquidation predecessor.

    It probably is the one thing (apart from £100m in debt) that they would prefer not to cherry-pick from their heritage – but they can’t escape it if they wish to retain the old adherents for the cause.

    Just think how much healthier and calmer Scottish football would be if they had added a dose of humility and empathy (for the damage the old club did to the rest) to the admirable enthusiasm they displayed on starting up.

    My guess is that if they had done so – with some perhaps understandable exceptions in the Celtic camp – we would be wishing them well right now. It is sad we never got the chance to test that. 


  16. WOTTPIJULY 27, 2016 at 15:03 How many years have we been hearing about the Crumbledome?
    It is likely that maintenance is required but what exactly and how much is just speculation.
    ===================================

    I agree, but I do think if such continued speculation surrounded another stadium the media would do a bit of digging to establish as many facts as they could.  Having said that, despite what I believe is clear establishment bias towards Rangers in most areas, I really don’t think any authority would allow games to be played in a stadium where thousands of people might be at risk, no matter how much they favoured the club.  If their roofs have indeed been recommended for replacement the real scandal will be if public money is used to help them pay for it. 


  17. I seem to remember when Leeds United were in serious financial difficulty that Leeds City Council agreed to purchase from and lease back to the club, Elland Road stadium. I suppose it is perfectly possible that Glasgow city council might do the same with TRFC. Then as landlords the council would have to make sure that Ibrox was in a fit state and would have to pony up for the repairs and maintenance to ensure that it was safe enough to rent it out.TRFC could then buy back the stadium at a pre agreed price and have any rental during that period of tenancy count towards the buyback. Whats not to like ? Roofs replaced , any pesky lurking asbestos issue taken care of and a complimentary warchest too. The fabric of Scottish culture is saved!


  18. gunnerbJuly 27, 2016 at 20:13  
    I seem to remember when Leeds United were in serious financial difficulty that Leeds City Council agreed to purchase from and lease back to the club, Elland Road stadium. I suppose it is perfectly possible that Glasgow city council might do the same with TRFC.
    =============
    I was working in Leeds at the time. I must admit that I was astonished that the Council got away with it, but you must remember that Leeds is a one club city, and there is a lot of loyalty to the club.
    I don’t believe that GCC, whatever its political makeup at the time, would ever try to pull a stunt like that in Glasgow.  Guaranteed electoral suicide for all involved.


  19. UPTHEHOOPSJULY 27, 2016 at 19:05
    I really don’t think any authority would allow games to be played in a stadium where thousands of people might be at risk, no matter how much they favoured the club.

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

    I think you will find that many of the Green & White persuasion in Edinburgh would put that very same accusation to their Council  in relation to the old stand at Tynecastle.

    Acknowledgement that the old stand is not fit for purpose and a new one is required has been on the cards for many a year but it is still given the OK and is full week after week.


  20. NEEPHEID
    JULY 27, 2016 at 22:16
    3 0 Rate This

    gunnerbJuly 27, 2016 at 20:13
    I seem to remember when Leeds United were in serious financial difficulty that Leeds City Council agreed to purchase from and lease back to the club, Elland Road stadium. I suppose it is perfectly possible that Glasgow city council might do the same with TRFC.
    =============
    I was working in Leeds at the time. I must admit that I was astonished that the Council got away with it, but you must remember that Leeds is a one club city, and there is a lot of loyalty to the club.
    I don’t believe that GCC, whatever its political makeup at the time, would ever try to pull a stunt like that in Glasgow. Guaranteed electoral suicide for all involved.
    ——————————————————————————————————————————

    Logically it could never happen Neepheid and (as I’m sure you and other members realised ) my tongue was firmly in my cheek when I posted. I was just musing on whether such arrangement has been timorously considered in the corridors of power.


  21. GUNNERB
    I was just musing on whether such arrangement has been timorously considered in the corridors of power.
    Was that an accidental or intentional pun?  It’s a funny one which ever it was. 12


  22. NEEPHEIDJULY 27, 2016 at 22:16 
    gunnerbJuly 27, 2016 at 20:13  I seem to remember when Leeds United were in serious financial difficulty that Leeds City Council agreed to purchase from and lease back to the club, Elland Road stadium. I suppose it is perfectly possible that Glasgow city council might do the same with TRFC.=============I was working in Leeds at the time. I must admit that I was astonished that the Council got away with it, but you must remember that Leeds is a one club city, and there is a lot of loyalty to the club.I don’t believe that GCC, whatever its political makeup at the time, would ever try to pull a stunt like that in Glasgow.  Guaranteed electoral suicide for all involved.
    ========================================

    I could be completely wrong, but I’m sure Elland Road was in the Council’s hands way before Leeds hit their financial crash. It may have been purchased by Leeds before the crash then bought back by the Council but I’m sure I read a long time back (1990’s?) that the Council owned Elland Road. As I say I could be wrong. 

    In terms of GCC purchasing Ibrox, I don’t rule out any sort of help from the authorities. I think by now it is well established that ‘Rangers’ can’t ‘die’ and the authorities will ensure that is the case. 

    On an unrelated but nonetheless interesting note when you do the guided tour of Celtic Park the various trophies and awards on display are explained by the Guide. There is one plaque from GCC to commemorate Celtic winning the European Cup in 1967. The only problem is it was not given to Celtic until 1972. This was only after GCC had given Rangers a plaque for winning the Cup Winners Cup, having never recognised Celtic previously. I opined to the guide in the politest way I could that the club should have told GCC to shove their plaque where the sun doesn’t shine. She declined to comment but did say many others are of the same view.  It is also unthinkable in my view that had Rangers, not Celtic, won the European Cup in 1967 that their Manager would not have been awarded a Knighthood. It’s just the way Scotland is I’m afraid.


  23. There is much that has been speculated over for a number of years at Ibrox, and much of that speculation has ended looking like no more than speculation or guesswork because the anticipated outcome has not publicly materialised. I am sure, though, that more often than not, the goings on at Ibrox as described by, say, PMGB, have indeed occurred but have been ‘sorted’ behind the scenes in a way that made what PMGB (or whoever) has said look wrong/exaggerated.

    As a very public example, we all know of King’s criminal record, and common sense said that that would have been enough to prevent him being accepted as fit and proper to be involved with any Scottish football club. The powers that be found a way round that ‘problem’, and so it disappeared! Regardless, the problem still existed and what ended as mere speculation, was, at the time, 100% correct – it was just the end result that was wrong. Wrong not only because we’d predicted it wrongly, but wrong because the end result was morally wrong in the extreme. In the end, though, what we’d been allowed to believe, and what even Mike Ashley’s legal team appeared to believe, was, in fact, wrong, and King was only club chairman in action, not in fact!

    Now, it’s not just speculation that says there is something wrong with three stand roofs at Ibrox, for we know, beyond doubt, that there is something wrong. Bits have fallen off a roof during a game, and, rather than reading that it was nothing to get concerned about, thel SMSM coverage was the usual minimal mention and forget, with no follow up giving details of the problem or what it meant financially and legally for the club. Mere speculation might suggest that it would be strange indeed if no more debris has fallen while the stadium was empty and has gone unreported.

    Then, as we know, King has spoken of serious problems with the roofs of the three stands, but gave no details. We know not to believe King’s words, but it is hard to imagine how he, or TRFC, could benefit from such a statement as any increase in readiness of supporters to hand over their cash would surely be negated, wiped out entirely perhaps, by chasing away any potential serious investors.

    Now, as WOTTPI correctly said, Hearts have had a problem with the old stand roof at Tynecastle, on the face of it, quite similar to those at Ibrox. Hearts have been allowed to continue using Tynecastle on the understanding that they will either replace the roof, or rebuild the complete stand, or relocate to a new ground. Importantly, from day one, Ann Budge has been very open about the problem and made no secret of the extent of the cost – huge – and, of course, progress is being made in meeting the obligations agreed when the certificate was issued, with all temporary safety work having been carried out. This has not been the case at Ibrox, although temporary remedial work may have been carried out!

    It appears to me that, rather than meeting the problem head on, with openness and honesty, the King led board have been as silent as they could possibly be, with King either letting slip what they’d rather keep secret(ish), or preparing the supporters for some bad news further on down the line.

    The ‘breaking news’ in the National was rather short on detail, and said/hinted nothing more than ‘everything’s alright, a Safety Certificate has been issued’. But was it issued under the promise of remedial work/roof replacement, and, if so, what timescale was given? It would be very Dave King-like for such a problem to be kicked on down the road with promises and outright lies in the hope that money will come along in time to fulfil any safety obligation…or just to keep the lights on until his personal objectives are (closer to being) met!

    More speculation on my part, I know, but if I was a supporters group leader, or someone with a current or potential financial interest in TRFC/RIFC and their assets, I’d be demanding clarification and sight of any, and all, structural reports and details of what, if any, conditions were applied to the granting of the Safety Certificate! In other countries, I’d expect the same of the media…


  24. upthehoopsJuly 28, 2016 at 07:15

    …It is also unthinkable in my view that had Rangers, not Celtic, won the European Cup in 1967 that their Manager would not have been awarded a Knighthood. It’s just the way Scotland is I’m afraid.
    _____________________________________

    I think that would undoubtedly have been the case, but something that has to be remembered when comparing with Jock Stein; he was a man of principles, and turned down an MBE (or was it an OBE?), so it was extremely unlikely that his achievements could ever be recognised with a knighthood. Anyway, his achievements needed no enhancement, and to be described as ‘the great’ Jock Stein, says so much more than ‘Sir’…



  25. Allyjambo
    July 28, 2016 at 07:49 

    More speculation on my part, I know, but if I was a supporters group leader, or someone with a current or potential financial interest in TRFC/RIFC and their assets, I’d be demanding clarification and sight of any, and all, structural reports and details of what, if any, conditions were applied to the granting of the Safety Certificate! In other countries, I’d expect the same of the media…
    ——————————————-
    And there lies the problem. Fan groups of any other Club take their respective boards to task over such issues. Confront them and ask for reassurances and answers. But fans groups of the current Ibrox entity are there for one reason only. To line the pockets of DCK. No other reason. Don’t ask questions, just hand over any money you have collected from the gullible.


  26. upthehoopsJuly 28, 2016 at 07:15
    I could be completely wrong, but I’m sure Elland Road was in the Council’s hands way before Leeds hit their financial crash. It may have been purchased by Leeds before the crash then bought back by the Council but I’m sure I read a long time back (1990’s?) that the Council owned Elland Road. As I say I could be wrong.
    =================
    Leeds Council helped out Leeds Utd by buying Elland Road in 1982.
    In 1998 the ground was bought back from the Council by the club’s then owners. That didn’t last long, financial meltdown in 2004 saw the stadium being sold off with a leaseback clause, and a buyback option. Current rent is around £1.5m, and buyback price £15m.
    I believe the ground is currently owned by a BVI company. Current club owner Cellino has made a lot of noise about buying the ground back, but as always with Cellino’s statements, who knows?


  27. Good read BP.  Just one query.  You mention evidence falsification (as opposed to ‘mere’ guideline terms of reference date shifting).  What are you referring to here?

    just on the GCC plaque farrago btw.  From an outsiders perspective is it not the case that GCC felt they couldn’t award/recognise one without the other being similarly recognised?


  28. I note the DR have a little OF puff piece with their pundits being asked to pick a starting XI from the two clubs.

    Nice to see Joe Miller is unwilling to get getting involved in the nonsense.

    JOE MILLER (4-4-2)Craig Gordon; Kieran Tierney, Jozo Simunovic, Kolo Toure, Eric Sviatchenko; Callum McGregor, Stuart Armstrong, Scott Brown, Patrick Roberts; Leigh Griffiths, Moussa Dembele.
    07


  29. Wottpi, credit perhaps, but that’s not how it’s being seen by fans on the Bear’s Den! They’re scathing toward the club for failing to support those fans who, after all,  only went on the pitch to protect their players and themselves!! The Keef stuff about ALL the players being ‘attacked’ is taken verbatim over there and used as an excuse for those fans who were so sharp sighted as to realise that the Hibs fans were only on the pitch to attack TRFC* players.
    In their view, those defenders of TRFC* should be praised by the club, rather than banned. I guess Robertson’s initial outburst won’t have helped either.


  30. Allyjambo @ 08:06

    Just a wee point of information: Jock Stein received a CBE in 1970, a year after Celtic’s then Chairman, Robert Kelly, had been knighted.


  31. Smugas

    From The Offshore Game Report;

    The Commission considered whether Rangers should be stripped of a series of league and cup titles. It is clear from the documents that the then President of the SFA, Campbell Ogilvie, misled the public and the judge presiding over the inquiry, which led them to make a material error of fact in their judgement.

    Specifically, Mr Ogilvie told the public and the inquiry that nothing to do with the payments to players through Employee Benefits Trusts fell within his role at Rangers.

    However, documentary evidence is clear that in fact Mr Ogilvie was a central figure in the establishment of the Discounted Options Scheme, which was a tax avoidance scheme that was part of the Rangers Employee Benefit Trust.

    The fact that Mr Ogilvie had previously been one of the longest serving officials in the history of Rangers Football Club clearly raises questions as to the motive behind his statements – since the inquiry’s own findings imply that, in full possession of the facts, they would have to have reached a different decision.

    Mr Ogilvie and the SFA did not respond to our requests for comment.


  32. wottpiJuly 28, 2016 at 12:44
    ‘Attachment..
    … Credit where due.’
    _______
    I am struck by the fact that the letter assumes that merely being arrested equals being ‘guilty’! Lots of punters know that not everyone arrested before, during or after a west of Scotland football match is guilty of anything!

    And, come to think of it, it’s interesting that a club should take such a hard line against a supporter yet to be tried and convicted of any criminal offence, when it’s perfectly happy to have an actual convicted criminal on the Board of its parent company!


  33. wottpiJuly 28, 2016 at 11:21
    ‘…I note the DR have a little OF puff piece with their pundits being asked to pick a starting XI from the two clubs..’
    _________.
    And I note  that :
    ‘Stranraer boss Brian Reid believes it’s far too close to call.’
    If Reid really said that without a very big tongue in his cheek, one would have to question his judgment as any kind of coach.
    I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt, though, and assume he was cautiously protecting himself, even at the risk of being seen to be a dreadful judge of footballing abilities!


  34. Dunderheid

    July 28, 2016 at 13:21

    Allyjambo @ 08:06

    Just a wee point of information: Jock Stein received a CBE in 1970, a year after Celtic’s then Chairman, Robert Kelly, had been knighted.
    __________________

    Oh well, maybe it’s me who should be called Dunderheid 🙁

    I was always of the impression he turned the honour down. The rest of what I said about him is true, I’m sure.


  35. I’m unable to post a link, but I’ve just watched a video clip from twitter of Mark Warburton laughing off the suggestion that TRFC were about to sign Robin Van Persie. Believe it or not, some dipstick of a reporter tried to get him to agree that it (the unfounded rumour) was an indication that ‘Rangers’ being ‘back’ in the Premiership are an attraction to (he clearly wanted to say ‘top’) players! MW had the decency to smile, and the kindness not to call the ‘reporter’ out as a stupid a***hole! I could almost feel the hurt in the numpty’s voice that RVP wasn’t on his way to Ibrox, and also see the drool on his chin as he spoke to his very own messiah!

     


  36. Allyjambo,
    Apparently, the RVP story was a prank, set up by a Celtic fans site. Some of the “press” fell for it, and, without any due diligence, printed.
     


  37. Ha ha ha is that the original Dear john letter.What is that sound ah it’s a band playing believe it if you like.


  38. I didn,t know RVP was a roofer maybe he has had an estimate accepted .
    IMO that,s the only way RVP would turn up at Ibrokes.
    Then again it looks like Ibrokes may be getting that retractable roof Minty promised all those years ago ,if the bolts go it could come down , it,s the getting it back up that may be the tricky bit though .


  39. SMUGASJULY 28, 2016 at 10:05 
    just on the GCC plaque farrago btw.  From an outsiders perspective is it not the case that GCC felt they couldn’t award/recognise one without the other being similarly recognised?
    ============================

    Not so I’m afraid. it was explained to us GCC had already made the award to Rangers in 1972 and the Celtic one followed only once it was realised Celtic had never been honoured. It was just 5 years late.

    Such stories tell us much, and I believe in certain quarters nothing has changed in terms of pro-Rangers bias. As I said, Celtic in my view should have refused it. 


  40. UPTHEHOOPS

    Glasgow council did ok by Celtic in 1967. Apart from a Civic reception in honour of the club there was a pretty ostentatious floral display celebrating the European cup win at the back of the old information bureau in George Square. This was vandalised once I believe, but was soon put back in order. Can’t see something like that lasting for half an hour these days.

    I don’t ever remember a feeling that the council were grudging in the pride they took in CFC’s achievements either. Glasgow and Glasgow Corporation in the 60s was a different place and proposition from ten years earlier when the Progressives and Tories were in charge.


  41. Big PinkJuly 28, 2016 at 18:53
    ‘..the 60s was a different place and proposition from ten years earlier when the Progressives and Tories were in charge. ‘
    __________
    ye gods, and without getting too political, BP, as I , in my twenties at the time,recall  ‘Progressives’ was just another name for Tories of a harder stamp than the norm for the day, too miserable to pay a party membership subscription!


  42. BIG PINKJULY 28, 2016 at 18:53
    =====================

    Happy to defer to your better knowledge of these matters BP, although I’m sure from your time at Celtic Park you know exactly what I’m referring to about this plaque. 


  43. ALLYJAMBOJULY 28, 2016 at 08:06 
    I think that would undoubtedly have been the case, but something that has to be remembered when comparing with Jock Stein; he was a man of principles, and turned down an MBE (or was it an OBE?), so it was extremely unlikely that his achievements could ever be recognised with a knighthood. Anyway, his achievements needed no enhancement, and to be described as ‘the great’ Jock Stein, says so much more than ‘Sir’…
    =======================

    Couldn’t agree more. I detest the honours system and big Jock certainly didn’t need a ‘Sir’ in front of his name to prove anything. Neither for that matter did Brian Clough or Bob Paisley.  As someone else pointed out though, Jock did accept a CBE.


  44. John C

    Indeed they (the Progressives) were befuddled Tories. More UKIP actually. My father-in-law was a supporter and activist (in the days before I knew him) in the Airdrie & Coatbridge area in the 60s. Lots of sectarian politics in that part of the world which pertain to this day unfortunately. I think the Progs were seen by many as a way to loosen the Labour grip on that part of the world

    The Progs are as thin on the ground as their 70s musical namesakes, but the battle-lines are still drawn on the same terms all over Lanarkshire and West Lothian.


  45. UtH,

    Honestly, I really don’t remember any chat about plaques. In fact, I wasn’t even aware of any dispute until earlier today when I read your post. Not did I ever hear anyone speak in those terms about Glasgow Corporation or GCC.

    Of course I’m not famous for being aware of all that’s going on around me 🙂 , but I can say that, from my time at CP, I never once (with the exception of the CV editor) heard a complaint about any institutional bias against Celtic. In fact I was often sternly reminded that I was way to paranoid myself. I believe Jim Craig once accused me of being a cliche 🙁

    In general, the idea of anti-Celtic press bias – until the days of Murray – or institutional refereeing bias was scorned by players (current or former) and colleagues alike. Post Murray was a different thing altogether wrt the media, but I always imagined – and still do – that most Celtic fans would find their views very much out of step with attitudes in-house.

    There are many faults to be found at Celtic (as there will be at most football clubs I imagine), but making accusations of bias against the club is not one of them.


  46. I am so glad Aberdeen got their goal.(I think I may have mentioned -possibly years ago, now)that I was partly-schooled up that way, and have a wee soft spot for the Dons.
    I also have a wee soft spot for Richard Gordon -as a presenter. And I have the greatest respect for Willie Miller- as a man who knows his football from a manager’s perspective.
    Coming down the road from Asda’s ( Straiton) just after the game, I listened to Miller patiently explaining to Gordon just why it was that Aberdeen will not go gung-ho in Slovenia and play exactly as they played this evening ( Gordon rather naively was suggesting that that was all they had to do, because they had the beatings of Maribor by playing that formation and that way.)
    I tell you, it was a brilliant few minutes of insight into how a responsible, thoughtful manager appraises all the relevant  multifarious factors. I had been inclined to be as naive as Gordon: get charged right in there from the off, on the basis of a good home performance.


  47. WOTTPIJULY 28, 2016

    What I like about the letter is the last bit forfeit of sb without compo so they can sell it again lol Few thousand more in the coffers coming up.


  48. shugJuly 28, 2016 at 22:40
    ‘…What I like about the letter is the last bit forfeit of sb without compo so they can sell it again lol ‘
    _______
    Oh, so cynical!02
    Seriously, though,not presently being a SB holder ( impoverished,penurious, skint, hungry granweans in Oz, Mrs C to keep extravagantly shod  and clothed …..), I don’t know the terms on which clubs issue season books.
    Sounds decidedly dodgy if they can whip them off you without refunding any amount paid for games that you paid for but will be denied access to.
    Especially if the grounds on which they can be whipped off you are entirely at the discretion of the clubs!
    Sounds to me like those contract terms that are ‘unconscionable and oppressive’ which a Court might judge to be unenforceable in law.02


  49. JOHN CLARKJULY 28, 2016 at 23:31
        Its just another Cluster capital Eff John. It seems reasonable to assume this is “political” manoeuvering, but at the time, the arrested were defended by the club, even to the extent of stating that fans of every other club would have did the same thing. 
        Now it would appear that the club is prepared to sell these defenders of the faith down the Swannee for political gain, and without a fair hearing. 
       I am not supporting the accused, but until a court says so, these are all innocent men. 
       Like the initial Level 5 releases after the match, they have not thought it through. I think the hand-shake muscle is connected to the knee-jerk tendon in the land of Sevconia.  I think they’ve been tellt.
       It all points to the “Independent” report being negotiated behind closed doors.  


  50. Corrupt officialJuly 28, 2016 at 23:55
    ‘.. I am not supporting the accused, but until a court says so, these are all innocent men. ‘
    ________
    That’s the ordinary understanding of our legal system, certainly.
    And it seems a bit high-handed for a club ( any club) not only to deprive someone (who has not been found guilty of the charge for which he was arrested ) of his season ticket, but also in effect to fine him, by not giving him a refund in respect of the monies he has paid for games he can’t attend!
    It might be worthwhile for any season book holder to have a look at what he has signed up for!
    We know from experience that our clubs tend to play us for patsies and till fodder, and, like crooked politicians, play on our emotions quite, quite cynically and  unscrupulously.


  51. JOHN CLARKJULY 29, 2016 at 00:25
        I doubt they are on solid legal ground John. Maybe “Suspended pending outcome” would have been more reliable.  Upon a guilty verdict, I don’t think anyone can argue that a banning is the correct course of action, but if, and until then, I would say it was shaky.  
        That’s what leads me to believe there was a more pressing need to be seen to be taking some sort of action.  A more appropriate action would have been to say, “We should have kept it shut until we had the full facts”…..But that would be admitting they did wrong. …That just won’t do old chap. 
       My guess is Hibs will get rattled for encroaching the field of play, and Sevco will get a mere wrist slap because they have banned the accused.  …………Then they will be free to attend again. Maybe a hero will help with a new purchase. 
       What’s a ban worth over there, when a life-time ban, can be followed by another meaningless lifetime ban? 
       


  52. shugJuly 28, 2016 at 22:40 
    WOTTPIJULY 28, 2016
    What I like about the letter is the last bit forfeit of sb without compo so they can sell it again lol Few thousand more in the coffers coming up.
    ____________________
    Or re-sell their seats when demand is up (the local Derbies or play-offs21) as selling their STs over again might just be pushing their (TRFC’s) luck a bit too far!

    Clearly this action is all about money, and nothing to do with ‘doing the right thing’. It’s so obvious, by pre-judging the accused, that they want this public flogging ahead of any announcement of penalties, and, what’s more, it’s probably at the suggestion of their mates at the SFA – ‘hit them hard, and publicly (get the letter out onto the internet), then we can point to swift (ha) and decisive action as a means of reducing the (unfortunately unavoidable) fine. Oh, and do you want us to just add it to the list of fines to be paid from, ahem, prize money?’


  53. ALLYJAMBOJULY 29, 2016 at 08:24 shugJuly 28, 2016 at 22:40

    I noted the bit re season ticket holders not getting their cash back as well.

    However I think folks are being a bit too cynical on this one.

    The letter says the ban is indefinite so they may well allow the folks access to games in the future so it seems right to keep the option open for them to return, especially if as has been pointed out they have yet to be found guilty of a criminal offence.

    And anyway does being found guilty of a criminal offense really matter?
    Ann Budge got rid of the ‘young team’ that was trying to stir up trouble at Tynecastle early on last season. As far as I am aware none of them where ever charged by the Police by the time the decision was taken, if indeed ever.

    It was the club’s decision. I saw no major complaints with regard to that being justified when no one was formally found guilty of an offense. 

    They were banned in the same way anyone is barred from a boozer by a publican. i.e Your type are not welcome here.

    Hibs have already issued bans as early as 31 May, ten days after the final. Whether or not that was only for those who pled guilt within the week I am not sure.

    Regardless, both clubs seem to have taken relatively swift and, IMHO, appropriate action to sort out some idiots the game can do without.

    On this one I will take T’Rangers at their word and applaud their stance.

    In the meantime, we still await the SFA getting their fingers out of their backside with regard to their side of things.


  54. I find it amazing that The rangers fans are saying these bans are ridiculous as we were only stopping our players getting attacked I cannot believe that they are really so thick as to expect anyone to believe that absolute twaddle. Then again maybe they really believe that was the case maybe they were so raged out at getting pumped that everything else is just a haze it may be that they remember nothing much after the third goal.


  55. WOTTPIJULY 29, 2016 at 09:44
    What do you think would have happened if they had come out with this before season books went on sale, However over in a site for sevco fans they believe all those who get banned will still be allowed to attend games so maybe it is best to be cynical when it comes to sevco.


  56. Incoming from EJ & JC:

    Donald Findlay is Craig Whyte’s new brief. Certainly makes it a tad more newsworthy, but politically intriguing too …


  57. SHUGJULY 29, 2016 at 10:02

    Take you point re the faux and hypocritical outrage on some forums but all Back of a Taxi type talk. Some guys might wangle their way in,  others might get stopped.

    Guess the same happens at other clubs where folk have been banned.

    The larger the crowd the more difficulty stopping people from attending. Similarly if the folk around the banned person view them as a hero or martyr to some ridiculous belief / political viewpoint that has little to do with football then no-one is going to call the person out.
    Facial recognition anyone 02


  58. CORRUPT OFFICIAL

    JULY 28, 2016 at 23:55 I am not supporting the accused, but until a court says so, these are all innocent men
    —————————————————————————————————-

    They are not receiving bans for being found guilty of a public order offence: they are being banned for entering onto (perhaps for being arrested on, I’m not sure?) the field of play, contrary to SFA ticket regulations.

    All part of the Stewart Robertson SFA Professional Game Board seat horse-trading, I’m sure…


  59. From Twitter-         
    Aileen Clarke ‏@BBCAileenClarke 26m26 minutes ago High Court Glw,judge tells Crown to explain why final charges against Craig Whyte are not ready. D FindlayQC now representing Mr Whyte.1/2

    Donald FindlayQC then told the judge he did not know what Mr Whyte was charged with. 2/2

       


  60. Extracted from BP post above;
    “…
    The facts are there. So too is a very strong suspicion that evidence was falsified, and that erroneous conclusions were arrived at. The SFA/SPFL/MSM response? Silence. The same people who hold up their hands in horror at the IOC’s decision not to impose a blanket ban on Russia for alleged state-sponsored doping COMPLETELY ignore the cover up by our own authorities in the matter of systematic cheating and financial doping on our own doorstep.
    …”
    =====================
    And as mentioned by other Bampots above, we may have taken this Ibrox saga misreporting all wrong.

    Mibbees it’s not really about getting ‘Rangers’ back to where they belong
    and it’s not really about needing an Ibrox club for the good of Scottish football

    The SMSM is desperate to get back to the ways things were…
    and the sports hacks’ obedience – and silence – wrt TRFC is for the good of Scottish media.
    In their misguided opinion.

    191919

    To state the bleedin’ obvious: nothing will change – IMO – until/unless there is a significant ‘correction’ in the way the SMSM operates.  

    The Internet Bampots have led the way in confirming that there is indeed a demand out there for Scottish football fans who are interested in fair, balanced, honest and investigative reporting.
    We can now all sniff PR p!sh from a hundred yards !

    IMO, most other fans should also become increasingly aware that their needs are not being met by commercial media, or the BBC.  
    And the likes of Keef are becoming increasingly irrelevant, and working on borrowed time…
    and the $64K question is: but for how long ?


  61. TRFC fans might have dug a wee hole for themselves by collecting monies to pay the miscreants’ legal fees and costs . Makes it harder for the courts to punish them .


  62. Despite claims that the BBC are refusing to identify club loyalties and name fans convicted of offences after the Cup Final, they have indeed named a Rangers fan convicted of such offences.

    Of course the BBC are one the main villains in the piece surrounding SFA corruption, but we need to stick to the truth and resist the temptation to spin things to fit our own narrative.


  63. The continuation of the preliminary hearings in the HMA v Craig Whyte case ,we were reminded late this afternoon, are still subject to the reporting restrictions imposed yonks ago!
    So, sadly, neither nor I can add to what others have ( somewhat riskily and surprisingly!) reported.
    I can say that it will be some time before I ‘need’ to attend court on anything to do with the ‘saga’


  64. BIG PINKJULY 29, 2016 at 17:58  
    Despite claims that the BBC are refusing to identify club loyalties and name fans convicted of offences after the Cup Final, they have indeed named a Rangers fan convicted of such offences.
    ———————————————————————-

    The STV News this evening didn’t mention the jailing of a TRFC fan (or Mr. Whyte being in court today).

    I suppose if it’s a choice between allocating time to Jordan Rossiter mouthing platitudes & actual news, platitudes win.

Comments are closed.