Tell me all your sweet, sweet little lies
All about the dark places you hide
Tell me all your problems, make them mine
Tell me all your sweet, sweet little lies
The stridency of Scottish journalist/pundits, particularly coming from those on the BBC Sportsound platform from where they cry out for an investigation into what took place behind the scenes before and after the SPFL put forward a resolution to SPFL clubs, subsequently accepted by the majority, that allowed SPFL to pay out needed prize money to sides below the Premier level is, to quote an old saying, “the talk of the steamie”.
Whilst those cries are ostensibly in support of a demand led by The Rangers FC for a need to change the governance at the SPFL, it is not clear if they mean the way the SPFL conduct business or the way individuals inside the SPFL go about the conduct of that business.
During on-air interviews, questions are being put to clubs about the degree of confidence they have in individuals rather than the processes, systems and structures. This suggests it is individuals who are being placed under scrutiny, and not the dysfunctional processes and structures themselves. A pity, since there is little doubt the governance is dysfunctional.
SFM has long been asking questions about the system and processes of governance and in fact tried to elicit the help of a number of journalists (in 2014) after information which had not been made available to the then SPFL lawyers Harper MacLeod during or after the LNS inquiry had surfaced.
Information that had it been made available would have changed the charges of Old Rangers’ mis-registration of players contracts, and to the more recent and unresolved matter of their failing to act in good faith to fellow club members (which the SFA Compliance Officer made in June 2018 in respect of non-compliance with UEFA FFP regulations relating to tax overdue in 2011).
Following the last Celtic AGM a detailed independent investigation by an accountant was provided to Celtic who passed it to the SFA where the matter has been overtaken by world events but not forgotten. That report can be read here.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1NeNzADsUAXkcFQ6QtehK5QqNsFa6he8V
It only adds to the mountain of evidence on https://www.res12.uk that suggests the need for reform of both governance bodies, their structures, systems and process.
Instead the media have given us a narrow head hunt to remove individuals for reasons that can only be guessed. This from individuals in the media whose motivations are as questionable now as they were in 2014, when they and their organisations ignored stronger evidence of greater wrong doing than has so far been presented by those currently advocating change.
The current media clamour for heads on a plate carries with it more than a whiff of hypocrisy.
During week commencing 22 September 2014, some volunteer SFM readers posted a bundle of documents that had surfaced to a number of journalists. SFM had previously sent these documents to Harper MacLeod, the then SPL lawyers. These were important documents pertinent to Lord Nimmo Smith’s inquiry into Rangers use of EBTs, documents which had not been made available to Harper MacLeod by Rangers Administrators Duff and Phelps despite being requested in March 2012 as part of the commissioning of LNS.
Earlier SFM blogs provide the details of communications with Harper MacLeod and can be read from the same link(s) provided to 12 Scottish media journalists in the draft below.
Some of the addresses may have received more than one copy but apart from one for whom only an e mail address was known, they should have received at least one hard copy of what Harper MacLeod/SPFL had been provided with which the latter passed to the SFA Compliance Officer in September 2014 according to their last reply to SFM. It is unlikely none were received by the organisations they were addressed to.
The draft to the journalist which the volunteers were at liberty to amend said:
I am a reader of The Scottish Football Monitor web site and attach for your information a set of documents that Duff and Phelps, acting as Rangers Administrators in April 2012, failed to provide to the then Scottish Premier League solicitors Harper MacLeod, who were charged with gathering evidence to investigate the matter of incorrect player registrations from July 1998 involving concealed side letters and employee benefit trusts by Rangers FC as defined in the eventual Lord Nimmo Smith Commission.
The failure to supply the requested information in the form of the attached documents as clearly instructed resulted in incorrect terms of reference being drawn up by Harper Macleod and a consequent serious error of judgement by Lords Nimmo Smith in his Decision as regards sporting advantage.
The information in the attached was provided to Harper MacLeod and the SPL Board in Feb 2014 and it was pointed out in subsequent correspondence that SFA President Campbell Ogilvie had failed to make a distinction in his testimony to Lord Nimmo Smith between the already confirmed as irregular Discount Option Scheme EBTs paid to Craig Moore, Tor Andre Flo and Ronald De Boer from 1999 to 2002/03 under Rangers Employee Benefit Trust (REBT) and the later loan EBTsfrom 2002/03 onwards under the Murray Group Management Remuneration Trust (MGMRT), having initiated the first DOS EBT to Craig Moore (as shown in the attached) and being a beneficiary of a MGMRT EBT as widely reported in national press in March 2012 at the time investigations commenced.
The complete narrative was set out in a series of blogs on The Scottish Football Monitor Web Site that are accessible from
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9dnVHSl9OU3RoWm8/view?usp=sharing
(Edit: The links to the original SFM blogs were listed but some have been lost but original sources have been uploaded to Google Drive accessible from the above link)
However in spite of the correspondence sent to Harper MacLeod, there has been no response from them or the SPFL, save their answer to the original letter. (Edit: There was subsequent correspondence with Harper Macleod after the package and this letter was sent to the journalists which can be read from the above index to the original blogs.)
These points suggests that the SPFL, Harper MacLeod and Lord Nimmo Smith were misled by Duff and Phelps failure to supply the attached documents as instructed as well as Campbell Ogilvie’s failure to correct Lord Nimmo Smiths decision to treat all EBTs as “regular” when the DOS EBTs are not, as the attached evidence clearly demonstrates.
You are one of a number of journalists to whom this letter and attachments is addressed either electronically or hard copy. We are hoping that some journalists will prove themselves worthy of the challenge and investigate the story, even if only to refute it and stop suspicion of a cover up.
A copy of this letter and responses from addressees (or failures) will be published on The Scottish Football Monitor web site for the Scottish football supporting public to note. The e mail address for your reply is press@sfm.scot and we hope that you will investigate what appears to have been the corruption of the very process set up to establish the truth or you will explain why you cannot.
Yours in Sport
Note: The letter above was drafted and distributed with the documentation before a reply from Harper MacLeod was received, but as the reply did not address the issue of the nature of the irregular DOS EBTs, the request to journalists to investigate was even more valid.
The following were the journalists to whom documentation was posted/delivered.
Mr Richard Gordon
Mr Richard Wilson
Mr Tom English all at the BBC.
Mr Grant Russell
Mr Peter A Smith. At STV
Mr Andrew Rennie Daily Record Sports Editor
Mr Paul Hutcheon
Mr Graham Speirs
Mr Gerry Braiden at The Herald
Mr Mathew Lindsay Evening Times (belatedly)
Mr Gerry McCulloch Radio Clyde
Ms Jane Hamilton Freelance ex-Sun Sunday Mail (by e mail)
Only three individuals showed an interest but it is inconceivable to think that the media outlets they worked for were ignorant of the information provided or that the Scottish media sports departments are unaware of the narrative and its implications which were subsequently picked up by The Offshore Game but drew no refuting comments with the exception of Tom English.
He opined that the TOG report was ‘flawed’ although he did not specify how he came to that conclusion.
Darren Cooney of the Daily Record did take an interest in November 2015 when he met an SFM representative, who explained the case then sent him a summary to give to his editor but The Daily Record did not publish the story nor give any reason why they didn’t.
Grant Russell was with STV at the time and a meeting with him was arranged with a fellow SFM contributor but he failed to show up.
He subsequently did show an interest when The Court of Session ruled the Big Tax Case unlawful in July 2017, when he was provided with the a note of the consequences for the LNS Commission. However Grant moved jobs to join Motherwell in late October 2017.
Why bring all this his up now?
Because currently, the existence of texts and e-mails and unsubstantiated claims of skullduggery appear to have energised a media (and BBC Sports Department in particular) that had ‘no appetite’ to investigate actual evidence presented to them in 2014. There seems to be little doubt that an agenda is being followed, but as the preceeding paragraphs demonstrate, it casts doubt that their motivation is reform of the governance of Scottish football, and raises a suspicion that replacement of individuals (whose steerage of the good ship Scottish Football into the RFC iceberg was deemed adequate a decade ago) is what is important. A meaningless powerplay. No more no less.
One may jump to the conclusion that the foregoing is a defence of the individuals at the centre of this controversy, and that it defends the SPFL position in respect of the requisitioners review of governance. That would be the wrong conclusion. The point is that a wide-ranging review of the SFA/SPFL governance is way overdue.
The time window covered by any review should the very least cover the tenure of those accused of malfeasance and mis-governance. The media, and the requisitioners are cherry-picking their poor governance. That is poor governance in itself.
Wakey Wakey! No news is good news?
Anything happening in the courts this week?
Homunculus
Haven’t read any of the messages. My disappointment is in the club’s reluctance to clear a hinderance-free path to refunds.
The insistence on downloading forms, then posting them, then being paid by cheque and now refusing to accept scanned pdfs. Not at all in keeping with procedures when the flow of cash is in the opposite direction.
I could add that refunds to concessions for the unplaced TRFC match is not commensurate with the premium paid to have access to the games.
My disappointment lies in the fact that in my view the club are ‘nickel and diming’ the fans.
Anecdotally, it may well be that the plan will backfire. I include my own family when I count those who had no intention of applying for a refund, but who now most assuredly will.
Big Pink 7th June 2020 at 10:34
Thanks, I understand where you are coming from.
Doing this could actually cost the club anything up to about £7.5m if a lot of people now decide to get the refund. I suppose it basically boils down to how many people feel as strongly about this as you. Some might just think “I don’t want a refund anyway, so I’m not really interested in what the process is”.
I think Partick Thistle have probably gone about this the right way. Telling people what they can get back, but also asking them not to apply for the refund if they can afford it.
Homunculus
I think most fans (of any club) will instinctively reach for the solidarity button in these circumstances, but there are also those who may feel that clubs take their supprot for granted.
There are a range of political arguments that folk could use about the morality of asking people to forego what to many of them might be a significant sum of money in order to finance those to whom far greater sums are not significant.
My own feeling is that these should be set aside in these circumstances, simply because that argument is a wider debate about how the game is financed and how the money is spent.
You are correct when you talk about the extent of refund requests being proportional to the strength of feeling over this. Often the loudest voices are not necessarily the majority, but I can't help thinking that this approach is using up much of the goodwill already in the pot. And particularly now, that goodwill is an incalculable commodity.
I am also going through something of the same dilemma with my mother's Life Assurance company, who put up bureaucratic barriers to slow down the settlement of claims. Postage only, original documents only, recorded delivery only, etc, ad nauseam – when they return forms and other documents requiring a response by second class mail.
I expect it from insurance companies. However the bottom line is the only game in town far beyond that.
Be interested to see what fans of other clubs have experienced in this regard.
Borussiabeefburg @ 9.23
Jings, how it is to be unpopular!
————————————————-
You've been a very very bad man! Suggesting that Rangers and Celtic could be in cahoots! Think you might have a record for TD's
. Wash your mouth out with soap immediately!
In amongst all the Old Firm (TM) annual attempt for their colts plan there are some interesting views in other blogs. First one that points out that supporters of Div 2 teams are actually choosing to watch competitive football at the level their team is capable of; not "developing" players. And secondly how anyone can suggest it is somehow good for the international team beggars belief if you count the number of OF(TM) players who have made it through to the Scotland team in the last 20 years after coming through the old firm ranks (as opposed to bought in). Especially current and past Rangers.
Losy idea.
We should all know the drill by now.
If the paying punters voice opposition to Colt teams, then that's just what Hampden is going to give them.
Joking aside…
I've not followed the Colt teams debate – currently or previously – so can't really comment.
But, I am naturally suspicious, (I'm blaming SFM for that!), that during a period of turmoil some may try to be opportunistic?
So, if possible, any significant changes to the game should be put firmly on the back burner – and revisited during a period of calm and stability, IMO, whenever that will be…
StevieBC 7th June 2020 at 15:18
But, I am naturally suspicious, (I’m blaming SFM for that!), that during a period of turmoil some may try to be opportunistic?
So, if possible, any significant changes to the game should be put firmly on the back burner – and revisited during a period of calm and stability, IMO, whenever that will be…
==============================
I disagree. A hiatus such as we have experienced is an ideal opportunity for change. Necessity is the mother of invention and all that.
It should have given the platform to introduce much needed and innovative reform of the league structures, finances and governance.
However, due to the parochial nature of the Scottish game and the in-built conservatism within many boardrooms, change is an alien concept. Better stick with the devil we know, even though we know it’s not ideal, rather than embracing change and being ambitious with a “can do better” mindset.
Looking at the state of the ibrox pitch last season and the fact they had to get it relaid, having a colts team playing on it when it is usually time to give the surface a rest, if the colts thing goes through how long will this new ibrox pitch last?
I'm not sure what the fuss is about.
Rangers have put forward a proposal, if the other clubs don't want it to happen then it won't happen.
That's how it works as has been seen in recent times. Resolutions are put forwarded and supported or not.
I have to say I think EJ makes a good point though. Would now not be a time to think of ways in which we can improve the league. Surely people don't think it's perfect right now.
I totally agree with eJ and Homunculus: this hiatus could/should be regarded as a unique opportunity for implementing change and improvement in the Scottish, senior game.
Just like any organisation or business: change is good.
Unfortunately, we all recently witnessed an embarrassing, prolonged, farcical attempt by the 42 senior clubs to complete a simple vote.
This – and the subsequent fallout – confirmed the levels of mistrust, self-interest and disrespect between clubs and the SPFL management.
I was being optimistic to suggest that better decisions could be made at a later date, during a period of stability.
Being pessimistic: there is no political will amongst the clubs, the SFA or the SPFL to agitate for change.
They want the status quo.
IMO, that is why nothing has significantly changed or improved, in terms of governance, since 2012.
That is why Doncaster has been elevated to CEO of the SPFL.
That is why Petrie has been promoted to [Executive] President of the SFA.
I genuinely don’t believe that meaningful change can be effected from within: some external influence is necessary to impose change and improvements across the Scottish, senior game.
(I include supporters’ actions as an ‘external influence’.)
StevieBC 7th June 2020 at 23:47
7
19
Rate This
I totally agree with eJ and Homunculus: this hiatus could/should be regarded as a unique opportunity for implementing change and improvement in the Scottish, senior game.
Just like any organisation or business: change is good.
…………………
Nothing will change, if there is no change at the top. It might look great if the deck chairs are moved about a bit and a new coat of paint applied to them a new bright coloured stripe may be added to the canvas and give it that all new modern look. But like the style of the deck chairs we know they can only be locked in one position, a position that those at the top are comfortable with, don’t rock their boat, but paint and move the chairs about all you want.
Re the Virtual Season Tickets. Hi Folks, just came to me that most clubs charge different prices for different areas of their ground, but, with this new Virtual Ticket everyone has the same view, so it doesn't seem right that any club can charge more to one fan than another for their Virtual Ticket, and that's what most of them are doing, albeit for probably half a season. Any thoughts, por cierto?
You are completely missing the point Ernie. The point being that once the OF hoover up the decent players with potential into their Colt teams there is a chance that they will develop into good players, thus progress to the senior team, thus gain exposure to "big" games including Euro matches ergo they should be better players thus we have a better national team. Please concentrate on that sole point. Please ignore that that is only as stated, its a chance, nothing more. Please ignore that to do so inhibits every other team as the policy potentially deprives them of players and fans. Please ignore that to do so inhibits every other team as they potentially face hand picked quality colt sides thus distorting 'their' leagues. Please ignore that it reinforces an institutional and currently damaging effective duopoly (Im being generous here) thus inhibits other teams further. Please ignore that this effect will happen regardless of whether our national team improves, whether their players improve or even if they develop benchitis in their arses or just give up the game altogether, or move abroad being thoroughly disillusioned with it here.
Concentrate on the point Ernie. Ignore everything else. Its for the good of the game apparently.
Smugas 9th June 2020 at 11:00
First one that points out that supporters of Div 2 teams are actually choosing to watch competitive football at the level their team is capable of;
…………..
Have any supporters of Div 2 teams even been asked if they would stick around to watch their team play a colts team, and would they want a reduction in their ticket price. Do any fans of Div 2 teams look at this colts thing and think what is the point?
The irony is the best part of the deal is the 200 tickets paid for the away end of each game. The worst part potentially (from the home club's perspective) is if they actually turn up!
And how does one distribute match day income? I assume the colt side underwrites 200 ticket sales? So does the diddy side still operate a cash turnstyle (remember them?) and deduct the number sold from the 200 underwritten and bill the colt side for the rest? Or does it become an all ticket affair (with incumbent expense) and presumably the diddy club missing out if away numbers exceed 200?
Lets say Im a fan of football firstly with a big team and a wee team (look me up in the SFA dictionary under "stereotypical," just "typical" or possibly "ideal"). Do I not then go to the home end of my diddy club. Watch, appreciate and politely applaud if not outright support 'my' colts thus 'my' diddy club gets double reward – my cash revenue plus the guaranteed notional away income especially if I was not particularly in the way of going to the local match in the first place?
My concern is that the Colts’ involvement in League football would make a mockery of said League.
What if one of (or both) well-resourced Colts teams was/were just too good for the other teams in the League?
(Consider TRFC & its resources in 2012/13 & 2013/14. Won Div.3 by 24 points & then won the re-named Div.1 by 39 points.)
Is the expectation that the Colts would be competitive with all teams in the League or just with each other?
Jingso.jimsie @ 11.57
Is the expectation that the Colts would be competitive with all teams in the League or just with each other?
Pretty sure there will be an expectation that they are in the same league (i.e. progress at the same pace) so that there can be 4 Old Firm* Colt derbies each season
.
‘bordersdon 9th June 2020 at 13:32
Pretty sure there will be an expectation that they are in the same league (i.e. progress at the same pace) so that there can be 4 Old Firm* Colt derbies each season
.’
########################################
Isn’t the informal name for that arrangement a ‘Doncaster’, often shortened to ‘Donco’?
My preference , if this goes ahead , would be to keep the colt teams apart , with CFC starting in the East of Scotland First Division and TRFC in the West of Scotland equivalent , or vice-versa , It would take two promotions for both before they could face off .As well as guaranteeing 200 tickets , the big two should also pocket the tab for policing and stewarding costs , given what their more excitable supporters bring to the game . This proposal is for the benefit of two clubs , not Scottish football as a whole , and is disguised as a helping hand to the minnows , who become little more than sparring partners .
The French national court this afternoon moved to confirm that the classification of the 2019/20 Ligue 1 table, called to an end after just 28 of the 38 matches due to occur were played, was lawful, but that the subsequent relegations of Toulouse and Amiens was not.
https://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2020/breaking-toulouse-amiens-relegation-to-ligue-2-suspended-by-the-national-court/
The French court ruling has certainly "laissez le chat parmi les pigeons" en Ecosse.
“Cluster One 9th June 2020 at 11:18
Have any supporters of Div 2 teams even been asked if they would stick around to watch their team play a colts team, and would they want a reduction in their ticket price. Do any fans of Div 2 teams look at this colts thing and think what is the point?”
When the colts appear in the Challenge Cup playing away to Div 2 clubs, the average attendance for that club is invariably a good deal lower. Further, a quick look around specific Div 2 club forums would indicate the hostility towards the idea of colt sides playing in the league system, Cluster One. Or have a look to P&B for the topic “Old Firm Colts in L2” where the overwhelming view is that supporters don’t favour this, with many vowing to leave supporting Scottish football if it happened. I’d link to the long running topic, 167 pages and counting, but don’t know if that is frowned upon here.
“Smugas 9th June 2020 at 11:56
The irony is the best part of the deal is the 200 tickets paid for the away end of each game. The worst part potentially (from the home club's perspective) is if they actually turn up!
And how does one distribute match day income? I assume the colt side underwrites 200 ticket sales?”
There’s no ‘best part of the deal’, Smugas. Some clubs in the lowest of the four leagues regularly take over 200 paying supporters to away games (Stirling Albion, Queens Park) in any case, but the non-appearance, and potential loss of home supporters for the entire season, or for all time would put a dent in that 200.
The offer is for money to be handed over by the Glasgow clubs covering the 200 spectators. Actual people may or may not physically appear to use the tickets, and going by past attendances at Challenge Cup games, it’s likely that those tickets used would be distributed to visiting players’ family and friends. The colt sides brought very few supporters of their own.
“Jingso.Jimsie 9th June 2020 at 11:57
My concern is that the Colts’ involvement in League football would make a mockery of said League.”
Of course it would Jingso.Jimsie: it wouldn’t matter if these sides were better or worse than the teams they were against. It would make a mockery of said league.
“paddy malarkey 9th June 2020 at 14:20
My preference , if this goes ahead , would be to keep the colt teams apart , with CFC starting in the East of Scotland First Division and TRFC in the West of Scotland equivalent , or vice-versa , It would take two promotions for both before they could face off .As well as guaranteeing 200 tickets , the big two should also pocket the tab for policing and stewarding costs , given what their more excitable supporters bring to the game . This proposal is for the benefit of two clubs , not Scottish football as a whole , and is disguised as a helping hand to the minnows , who become little more than sparring partners.”
Could be a good point about paying policing and stewarding cost: when the Ibrox club was on their journey, the MSM narrative was of the riches they brought to the small clubs throughout the land. This was not really the case: as an example, the clubs had to introduce police instead of stewards, and segregation, with attendant costs. Nonetheless, it probably wouldn’t be an issue with poorly attended matches played by colt sides.
I agree with much of your later post, paddy malarkey, apart from them being placed in any part of the pyramid system.
____________________________________________
Now, I await my fate: perhaps more thumbs down than the poor Christians suffered in the Colosseum.
borussiabeefburg 9th June 2020 at 17:36
…………..
Good post.
I will have a look.
https://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php?/topic/235953-old-firm-colts-in-l2/
After the French League ruling today, I may as well 'put my tuppencewoth' in!
Ann Budge will assuredly 'go to court' and the outcome will eventually be:-
14 10 10 10
"Quelle surpris – I thought the road would be a lot harder than this" – quoth Ann
Does anyone know if the Colt team proposal would see them receive prize money?
If they do receive cash then, in season 1, if they finished 1st and 2nd in tier 3 (positions 29 and 20 overall), then they would receive £75k and £72.5k for their efforts.
If both were promoted and finished mid table in the championship (tier 2 – positions 21 & 22 overall), then they would receive £187.5k and £175k for their efforts.
That would go a long way towards paying their entry fees.
easyJambo 9th June 2020 at 19:34
Does anyone know if the Colt team proposal would see them receive prize money?
That would go a long way towards paying their entry fees.
…………….
And go a long way in denying other clubs in the divisions much needed prize money.
easyJambo 9th June 2020 at 19:34
'…If both were promoted..'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
My attention has been elsewhere this last little time, I'm afraid, so I'm way behind with the basics and apologise appropriately.
But I'm sure that I read at some stage that the idea was that a Colts team would not be eligible for promotion if it won whichever League in which it played?
That one of the underlying ideas was that the Colts team would benefit only from match experience, the other clubs would benefit from the guaranteed 200 home 'attendances', and the the non-Colts club that won the league would be promoted..?
Can anyone reassure me that I couldn't have made that idea up?
If it is really part of the 'proposals' then I might not rule it out of hand.
paddy malarkey in his post at 14:20 used the words 'sparring partners', as referring to the other teams in the league.
If we turn it round, though, to refer to the Colts clubs then provided that the 'sparring partners' are not actually in competition for league placings but only in immediately game by game match competition for the sake of their their own development, and also perhaps as stimuli for the other teams in whichever league they are in, it might possibly be beneficial to those other clubs with the guaranteed monies from 200 'gate receipts'.
If there is any suggestion that the Colts teams should 'win ' their league and be promoted, then bugger that for an idea.
Sparring partners, perhaps yes. But nothing else.
If they happen to be particularly good sparring partners, that would be good for their opposing teams.
If not, then the games would nevertheless be useful practice games for the opposition in the rest of the league, fighting each other for promotion.
Or has covid-19 finally reached me and addled my brains?
Oh, that 'The Scotsman' were not so selective in their choice of which wickedness should be reported!
I give you this:
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/henry-dundass-statue-edinburgh-should-be-torn-down-over-slave-trade-links-martyn-mclaughlin-2879038
I have for many years metaphorically spat as I passed Dundas' column in St Andrew Square in Edinburgh.
And I commend Martyn McLaughlin for his observations on the bad ba.tard, whose badness transcends the petty corrupt small-scale badness of the SFA,SPL and SFL , and those associated with the deep corruption of Scottish Football we have seen demonstrated by the Res 12 issue and the Big Lie.
Dundas was undoubtedly a bad basta.d.
And his badness was of an order akin to that of King Leopold of the Belgians and of that of the Third Reich.
But badness is badness.
And our petty little world of Scottish Football governance is as bad in its own way as ever Dundas, or Leopold or Adolph ever was.
But of course the SMSM is very selective about what they view as 'badness' and how they report 'badness' and untruth.
Cluster One linked to the decision of the French courts re relegation, above
https://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2020/breaking-toulouse-amiens-relegation-to-ligue-2-suspended-by-the-national-court/
The key decision is covered in the last paragraph
"On the issue of relegation, the judge “suspends the relegation into Ligue 2 of Amiens and Toulouse… the LFP Board of Directors was not able to argue on sound legal footing their decision to relegate the final two clubs in the Ligue 1 table, attempting to use the grounds that their agreement with the FFF currently provides for a league size limit of 20 clubs, however this agreement ends on June 30th and a new one has yet to be signed.”
Could any of our legal eagles comment on whether Scotland operates a similar end-of-season tabula rasa?
"John Clark 9th June 2020 at 22:50
My attention has been elsewhere this last little time, I'm afraid, so I'm way behind with the basics and apologise appropriately.
But I'm sure that I read at some stage that the idea was that a Colts team would not be eligible for promotion if it won whichever League in which it played? "
The Ibrox club's Plan B would presently allow Colts teams to be promoted as far as the Championship, John.
@ spikeyheid 0736hrs today:
From memory (always a risky action for someone of my age!), the SPFL rules state that the team that is in last place in its respective league at the end of the season is relegated. No ifs, no buts.
If that's incorrect, then, as usual, I'm happy to be put right
borussiabeefburg 10th June 2020 at 09:38
'..The Ibrox club's Plan B would presently allow Colts teams to be promoted as far as the Championship, John.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Thanks for that, bbb. I must have wholly misread and/or misunderstood whatever it was I had been reading or what I heard on radio or whatever.
I'm going to apologise in advance as this post may annoy some people and be at odds with their own thoughts on this matter – this is not my intention and purely to give an alternative viewpoint!
Another week and another two proposals for restructing the leagues. I think this is the completely wrong time to be going down this route and trying to implement wholesale changes at a time of uncertainty, both in terms of the economy and just day to day life, is something that may ultimately end up causing more damage to our game.
Don't get me wrong, I think every part of Scottish football needs reviewed, with the SFA and SPFL being disbanded and started again. For my part, the biggest source of anger against the authorities is the complete shambles that is Junior and Youth football in this country – I live in the Borders where is there only friendly, round-robin 4v4 or 7v7 games between March and May and September to November for u12s and no youth set up at all with all kids having to play in the Edinburgh leagues – this is actually organised and accepted by the SFA Rep in the area!!
However, to try and agree, plus implement, a restructure for the senior leagues at the moment will only ever be a short term fix and being honest, it's only really being proposed by a few teams purely to protect their own interests. Once again we have the same problem which has plagued Scottish football for decades now – self-interest disguised as altruism – and by following this approach yet again, we will end up with the same result, a complete lack of trust and agreement between the member clubs leading to resentment.
By also rushing through a restructure at this time, we basically eliminate the possibility of there being any reform of the SFA and SFPL as they will take this as implied consent of clubs agreeing with their approach and justifying their own existence. They will also congratulate themselves on a job well done and use this as basis for denying there are any issues with our game. To quote a lyric "The needle returns to the start of the song, And we all sing along like before".
To my mind, it would be much better to wait until there is some degree of stability and football returning in some shape or form with clubs getting fans back into their grounds, and then starting a dialogue to come up with the best way forward – not simplying being corralled by a few teams who sense an opportunity to either take advantage of a horrible situation or using said situation for avoiding the outcome of their poor performances on the pitch.
Again, this want to repeat, this not meant to antagonise but just giving a different perspective from the process that is being played out which seems to suggest that restructuring must take place at this very minute!
Confirmation of James Anderson's donation today. £3.1m (42 x £50k) available now with further funds to be made available via the SPFL Trust from JA and others.
Generous in the extreme.
An extremely generous donation as you say ej. A lifeline for some of the smaller clubs I would think!
Yes EJ I agree, a very generous donation. Unfortunately I look on with some unease.
Football is important only to those who follow football and, if you total up the weekly attendance and compare it to the population size of the country, it is clearly a minority group. If the pandemic had not arrived then I would have applauded the donation with more vigour but money is needed to fight the pandemic by finding a vaccine or cure the after effects of the poverty that will definitely increase. I would have been more comfortable had the donation be directed toward such causes.
In his interview with the BBC today he states.
"Football is at the heart of communities across Scotland, and there are not many societal organisations that bring people together nowadays, to catch them in a net when they fall."
I disagree with him on that as I believe that people are more important in the community than an enertainment industry. Education in the community would be more important. Free health care in the community also. And if we could find a way to purge the need for food banks… well? These things properly funded would reduce the need for a net "to catch them when they fall." Add to that the current self interest shown by many clubs and you have to ask are they worthy recipients.
Even before the pandemic we read that he "previously made similar donations to the arts world". A great cause if we have a fully funded society but not in the financial climate that a huge swathe of the country found itself after 2008. I doubt that a visit to the ballet would lift someone's soul if their next stop was going to be the queue for the food bank.
We as football fans really need to face up to the fact that football is only a hobby. Do that and we can perhaps confront the problems that are approaching. To take it more seriously than that then we play right into the hands of those that govern us by just accepting our lot.
From the BBC Scotland sports news site on this link
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52992075
"Edinburgh-based philanthropist James Anderson has donated more than £3m to help support Scottish football clubs and their surrounding communities.
Anderson has also confirmed his intentions, along with others, to provide further funding to clubs in the coming years.
The money will be distributed through the SPFL Trust, with each club able to apply for a fixed grant of £50,000."
I'm happy to see that the money is to be handled by the registered Charity known as the Scottish Professional Football League Trust Charity number Company Number SC369633 , Scottish Charity Number SC041121.
But reading the 'Objects' of the Charity I'm not sure how they can be said to include the making of direct grants to a football club to meet the club's own needs, rather than to help the club fund its own charity and community initiatives?)
https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=41121
"The Company shall operate for the advancement for the public benefit of the following charitable purposes or objects : 3.1 the advancement of public participation in sport and, in particular, the promotion of participation by members of the public in healthy sporting activities , including, but not limited to, football; 3.2 the advancement of citizenship or community development and, in particular the provision of support for community-based facilities and activities undertaken by football clubs; 3.3 the provision of recreational facilities, or the organisation of recreational activities, with the object of improving the conditions of life for the persons for whom the facilities or activities are primarily intended; and 3.4 the advancement of any of the above purposes or objects by the giving of grants or the provision of funding to persons undertaking projects, initiatives and/or activities which further any of the above objects and are wholly charitable within the meaning of the Taxes Acts and also section 7 of the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Act 2005 or any statutory amendment or re-enactment thereof.."
The names of the existing Trustees as shown in the Trust's Companies House page
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC369633/filing-history
are interesting. Roddy Forsyth, Alison Walker (sports journalists), Tony Higgins(PFA), Murdoch Maclennan, Robert Winter (retired social worker), Graham Watt (retired uni professor) Kathleen McLoughlin (no occupation given) Bernadette Malone (retired) Ian Joseph Blair (company secretary) and Charles Barnett (no occupation)
Grateful as we should be for fresh finance in Scottish football , would it not have been easier for James Anderson just to give money to HoM to see them through next season ? It's his money , though , and he can do as he pleases with it , but it might have stopped them and such as them trying to feng shui our leagues .
Mickey Edwards 10th June 2020 at 13:06
Yes EJ I agree, a very generous donation. Unfortunately I look on with some unease.
=================================
While I can understand any unease that you may have about the relative priority of putting money into a "hobby" such as football in these times, I personally don't have a problem with wealthy people investing their "after tax" wealth or income into what ever they wish.
It is governments who have the responsibility to ensure that all citizens have access to their basic food, health, education and housing needs, not private individuals.
Investing cash in supporting food banks is only a sticking plaster on a gaping wound. The Utopian solution is the availability of jobs for everyone and adequate financial support to individuals who are unable to work and their families so that they don't have to rely on food banks. Again that is the responsibility of governments and reflects their approach to taxation on society as a whole.
You can reasonably ask governments to prioritise spending in those areas that support basic human needs. Government spending on "hobby" pursuits could therefore be viewed as discretionary. Similarly excessive spending on defence, cultural activities, media and sport.
EJ@14:41
As I understand it he made his money in the financial sector an industry that preyed on the low earners. They gave them belief that they could have their own houses and then took their properties away when the previously obvious fact that they could not afford it pushed them to bankruptcy. These institutions then were baled out by the bankrupts when it all went belly up, so paying twice over. The same people that orchestrated the scam continued on their merry way and within a year were awarding themselves multi-million pound bonuses while staying in employment courtesy of the tax payer.
Mr Anderson's CV may suggest a more benign involvement in the industry but it all survives through the same gambling on the basics that we all require to live. The law may say he has the right to spend his wealth on what he wants but my political/social viewpoint disagrees with yours on that point.
I would also suggest that perhaps his donation is pre-tax, written off against tax as is the wont of the very rich. The fact that the money has been paid into a charity is perhaps indicative of this.
I am perhaps getting too political on a football site but with our concerns over funding sources over the past decade perhaps we need to visit the non sport related subjects from time to time. How else are we to keep the sport clean?
Mickey Edwards 10th June 2020 at 16:32
==============================
I don't think that your political/social viewpoints will be that far removed from mine.
However if you have a problem with wealthy people funding football clubs, because of how their wealth was accumulated or how tax laws were used to their advantage, then I'd suggest that you need to apply the same standard to all club owners and investors.
I don't think that many clubs in the Scottish Premiership, could state that their major shareholders have never exploited low paid staff or sought to minimise the tax paid by themselves or their companies.
"The hearing in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) arbitration between Manchester City FC and the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) concluded at 4:15pm (CET) today. The hearing, initiated on 8 June 2020 in the morning, was conducted by videoconference, with participants in Lausanne and London, and expert witnesses in various countries, in accordance with the schedule planned. ….
…. The decision is expected to be issued during the first half of July 2020. The exact date will be communicated in advance. The CAS arbitration concerns an appeal filed by Manchester City FC against the decision of the Adjudicatory Chamber of the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) dated 14 February 2020 in which it was deemed to have contravened UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations and sanctioned with exclusion from participation in UEFA club competitions in the next two seasons and ordered to pay a fine of EUR 3"
spikeyheid 10th June 2020 at 07:36
…………………
https://spfl.co.uk/admin/filemanager/files/shares/SPFL%20Articles%20of%20Association%20of%2020-Jan-20%20(MASTER%20COPY)%20CLEAN.pdf
………..
May be in here.
My post of 18.11: the figure for the fine should have been 30 million Euro, of course!
I'd asked the ASA a while ago about TRFC claiming to be the world record holder for trophies won , and suggested that the true champion was El Ahly . It seems that their position has shifted , or that I was mistaken about their claim in the first place . Has anybody an official link to the claim ? ( I thought there was something in RIFC IPO ). Wikipedia now says the following
Rangers is the second most successful club in world football in terms of trophies won, behind only Egyptian club Al Ahly.[4] The club has won more league titles and domestic trebles than any other team in the world, winning the Scottish League title 54 times, the Scottish Cup 33 times and the Scottish League Cup 27 times, and achieving the treble of all three in the same season seven times.
I used this as reference
https://sportytell.com/football/top-10-most-successful-football-clubs-in-the-world/
paddy malarkey 10th June 2020 at 20:03
Celtic now on 109 i believe, and that got me thinking…i know,i know.
If the ibrox club had 115, could celtic over take that trophy haul as the eight year old club reach their 150 year anniversary in two years time?
What a riddy it could be a ten year old club having a 150 year anniversary and claiming to be the most successful club in scotland as your old Glasgow rivals overtake you for that honour.
Could be a marketing dream for celtic if everything falls into place, and a damp squib of a celebration down ibrox way.
paddy malarkey 10th June 2020 at 20:03
…
Back in the day.
https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/the-rangers-football-club-ltd-a13-224406.html
…………..
If i remember correctly not long after they did remove the banners and hoarding that stated that they were, used it as a marketing slogan for a time to get the fans on board.
….
( I thought there was something in RIFC IPO ).
I have that somewhere but i’m too tired to look for it, may try tomorrow.
Edit. I think this is it.
http://www.rangersinternationalfootballclub.com/shareholder-centre/circulars-admission-document
Cluster One 10th June 2020 at 22:21
'..could celtic over take that trophy haul as the eight year old club reach their 150 year anniversary in two years time…'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The absurdity of an eight-year-old club pretending to anticipate celebrating a 150th birthday is laughable as being so absurdly and obviously factually incorrect. TRFC themselves and the rest of us know that they did not exist in Scottish professional football until 2012-the year of their creation and admission to a League!
However, the readiness of our Football Authorities to create and sustain and promote the Big Lie is not at all a laughing matter, signalling as it did a depth of corruption in Scottish Football and its Governance bodies and the ending of any belief that the concept of 'Sporting Integrity' means anything to venal, grasping, cowardly and self-seeking persons serving on the Boards of those 'authorities'.
A plague on them.
The earlier mentions of the 'most successful club in the world' sent me to have another look at the IPO prospectus, and I got diverted from 'the most successful' question by a reference to a very current question:
"The Company understands that the SPL are reviewing whether the SPL should be split into two divisions and that the SFL are considering a proposal for one league body and three leagues of 16, 10 and 16 teams respectively which would result in the end of the SPL and the opportunity for colt teams [ my bold] to participate in the league. The uncertainty in relation to the financial stability of certain Scottish football clubs and the proposals for restructuring Scottish football present a risk for the Company in relation to the manner in which the league and cup competitions will be structured in the future which may have a material adverse effect on the manner in which broadcasting and other revenue streams can be monetised by the Company. However, this risk is mitigated by the fact that any restructuring of Scottish football may enable the Club to return to the top division of Scottish football sooner than currently anticipated and to therefore benefit from access to different sources and levels of income"
I can't be sure, but I think that that was the first reference to 'colt teams' that I ever saw. I don't remember whether I even understood what was meant by 'colt teams' at the time or why they were mentioned as an 'opportunity'.
Further to my post of 22.59 , isn't there a lovely( albeit retrospective) irony in this observation:
"The uncertainty in relation to the financial stability of certain Scottish football clubs .."
coming as it does from RIFC plc, dependent as it now is on directors' loans and/or loans from unknown folk furth of the jurisdiction?
Who these days remembers the old washing board, used by generations of womenfolk ,and by Lonnie Donegan of fond memory and his skiffle group?
The washing board carried to Parkheid steamie ( more or less opposite to the 'three p's' cinema on Tollcross Road in them days) was used to wash nothing but claes, of course.
EJ@17:32
The fact is that I do pay attention to the investors and owners at all clubs and am aware of the dodgy practices that led to the wealth of many. My own club has had people that subsequently fell foul of the law. More recently we were funded by someone whose business used the imitation of faults(with a squirt of oil) to make money from non technically minded car owners. Tom English's recent "rehabilitation" of the Easdales doesn't pay heed to carrier bags of money behind the couch or being found guilty by our courts for dealing in stolen computer parts. We know that a knight of the realm's abuse of the tax system was found out but our society saw no need to prosecute. Neither does it question how, in two years, he went from bankrupt to 16th on Scotland's rich list after "his family" were sold the profitable parts of his failed empire for 20% of its true value. I would also like a closer look to be taken at the man who provided him with interest free loans and his involvement with Dunfermline FC.
While we are at it I would like to understand the recent increase in the transatlantic involvement in our clubs. Clubs that have very little potential for making money and play in leagues that are pretty barren when it comes to income from broadcasting companies.
When we look for someone to blame for what we are seeing then our attention should be on those responsible for policing our system, from the lowly SFA to the the FSA. We should not be surprise at what we see though. When an estimated £15-20 BILLION pounds is laundered every year through London's property market and barely scratch is made on that through prosecution what priority would EBT recipients receive.
Curing these ills is a massive task but should not be regarded as insurmountable. The involvement in football, though much smaller, has different problems – apathy and priorities. It could be tackled with ease by the fans should they choose. Starve the leagues and the club owners by staying away from the grounds. The problem is we have a fan base who, in the majority, see their tribal allegiances as far more important than their social responsibilities.
To my mind the worst of the crimes is the legalised scams operated by the financial industry. A system on which all society currently depends is given free reign to force prices up on the staples of life through the futures market or to create money making scams, sorry, schemes that risk the savings of Joe Public. And yet, the market trader selling pirate DVDs is more likely to face the courts than people who could cause the world economy to crash.
So, rant over. While I feel strongly that these problems need tackled my original posts were more a plea to face up to what will be a serious outcome from the pandemic than an attack on the inaction over organised crime. When the fallout arrives football will have no priority in our lives.
easyJambo 10th June 2020 at 17:32
I don't think that many clubs in the Scottish Premiership, could state that their major shareholders have never exploited low paid staff or sought to minimise the tax paid by themselves or their companies.
=====================================
I don't know who the major shareholders in most of the clubs in the premiership are, or how they made their money, so I don't know if that is the case.
However intuitively I think you are probably correct. So long as they are staying within the law and are not carrying out tax avoidance or tax evasion and are simply managing their tax affairs prudently I have no problem with that. I would sometimes question what the Government allow or even encourage, however that is not the fault of the business taking advantage of what is legitimate tax management.
To use the analogy of an ISA. They are there, they are legitimate, the Government encourage their use to make it worthwhile for people to save. Is there anything wrong with people using an ISA to reduce their tax. Absolutely not.
So I would agree, most businesses will seek to minimise the tax they pay, as will most individuals. No problem with that so long as it is not avoidance or evasion.
John Clark 10th June 2020 at 23:19
I can’t be sure, but I think that that was the first reference to ‘colt teams’ that I ever saw. I don’t remember whether I even understood what was meant by ‘colt teams’ at the time or why they were mentioned as an ‘opportunity’.
……………………
If a club goes bust and has a colt team playing in a lower league, would the colt team also go bust or would the colt team survive as something seperate playing in a lower league?
Cluster One 11th June 2020 at 12:35
=================================
Surely if a club goes bust it goes bust.
It may have teams playing at different levels, may have a ladies team, however they are all part of the same club.
It would be untenable to suggest that the senior (first) team died with the club but the other teams it put out didn't
Cluster One 10th June 2020 at 22:34
Thanks , CO , but can't open second link .
Sky Sports Scotland
@ScotlandSky
·
22m
SPFL LATEST
BREAKING
@spfl
confirm they’ve asked clubs to consider moving to a 14-10-10-10 structure permanently from next season
Clubs have until Monday to indicate their preference – an EGM and formal vote will be held if there is sufficient support.
………………
Wonder if this is another deadline kind of thing?
paddy malarkey 11th June 2020 at 13:14
1
0
Rate This
Cluster One 10th June 2020 at 22:34
Thanks , CO , but can’t open second link .
……………
Having problems also. JC may have the link and post it.
Barry Anderson (presumably not related to James Anderson) writes in today's 'Scotsman' that "the cash (the charitable donation to the SPFL Trust) will help teams pay wages and bills and go to the cost of testing players for the virus… Some of it will also be used to set up the Anderson Fund to support other positive projects within the SPFL community.."
I'm no lawyer, but it seems a rum sort of arrangement , setting up a new separate fund to meet the declared Objects of the SPFL trust, while using the Trustees of the SPFL Trust to decide on applications from clubs for £50 000 in cash grants to help with their normal everyday running costs!
Homunculus 11th June 2020 at 12:57
It may have teams playing at different levels, may have a ladies team, however they are all part of the same club.
It would be untenable to suggest that the senior (first) team died with the club but the other teams it put out didn’t
…………………
Before only one division got effected if a club went bust, but having a colt team playing at another level will affect two parts of the league if the senior (first) team died, double the danger so to speak.
What i am trying to get at (very badly)is there anything in place that would saveguard the colts team in a lower league if the senior (first) team died. Could a Charles Green type guy come in and gather up the colts part of the business and keep it running in the lower leagues?
John Clark 11th June 2020 at 15:04
==========================
From Q&A section of the full media release – it might assuage your concerns to some extent.
There must be some guarantees or stipulations that come with this donation, surely? What are they?
The donation James Anderson is making to the SPFL Trust comes without qualification or preconditions relating to the future structure or governance at the SPFL.
As with any grant charitable grant, the SPFL Trust will have certain standard conditions in place, but for the avoidance of doubt these specifically relate to community benefit, and have no bearing on the future structure or governance at the SPFL.
The only major condition, is that clubs may not use their grant for the provision of staff or player salaries.
Given the likely requirements to enable a return to football, this funding is expected to be able to support work in this area
of focus.
For example:
• Costs associated with ensuring stadia can attain bio-secure status, enabling the resumption of football, and with it, community activity, much of which take place daily at football grounds across Scotland
• Should clubs wish to purchase a Covid-19 testing system, we would expect to see equipment being made available for use to the benefit of the club’s wider community (clubs would not be expected to cover the per head cost of tests conducted by community groups using their equipment)
The one thing I particularly liked about this donation, I hope I have picked this up correctly, is that clubs can ask for the money and for it to go towards their own charity foundation, rather than the club itself. If that's wrong my apologies.
I for one think it is an excellent gesture by James Anderson. I see it as being altruistic, which he apparently has form for, and it is to be welcomed.
Though I can see how people may be sceptical about his motivations. Though that might reflect more on them than it does on him.
Cluster One 11th June 2020 at 15:39
Sorry CO but I'm just not understanding where you are coming from with this.
Take Rangers, when they went bust they would probably have had a reserve team, and under 19 team etc. When the club went bust every part of it went bust.
I take you point that there would be two teams playing in the same league, albeit a different division, however I still don't see how that would change anything.
As to the scenario re someone else taking the colts over. The players registrations would be an asst of the club, so no different from first team players. The same for any other asset the colts may have.
That's just my opinion of course, I have no issue if you or anyone else sees it differently.
Some court business next week. Unless there is a free-phone dial in facility I don’t think anyone will be able to report on it.
LORD TYRE – T Sadler, Clerk
Friday 19th June
Preliminary Hearing
CA86/19 David Grier v Philip Gormley – Kennedys Scotland – Ledingham Chalmers LLP
Homunculus 11th June 2020 at 16:51
………..
Thanks for reply.
….
Take Rangers, when they went bust they would probably have had a reserve team
…
I can’t remember when the reserves team structure was scrapped, but i think that is why the colts team thing came into being.
It is just the now double danger if there is a colts team in the division, if the senior club goes bust. two divisions in the league would be effected. I don’t trust the SPFL or the SFA to allow such damage to happen. Feck they sht themselves when the ibrox club went bust and never had a clue what to do(tried to shoehorn a new club in the top flight as you know to save disruption. What disruption would be caused if two teams were out the divisions at the same time? they would really shi themselves.I just don’t trust them to let such a thing happen.
easyJambo 11th June 2020 at 15:43
'…From Q&A section of the full media release – it might assuage your concerns to some extent..'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Thanks for that, eJ: I suppose Barry Anderson was ,like me, writing before he saw that clear-cut statement about grant monies not to be used for wages etc!
It's not so much that I had reservations about the integrity and generosity of the donor, who can deservedly be thanked for his generosity.
But we know that there are people in Scottish Football governance who have previously shown themselves not to be above a shabby thing and were prepared to throw integrity to the wind.
I am ready to believe they would do the same again , and would be ready to refuse to have 'outsiders' review their actions.
All the baddies are not in South Africa or the Far East.
Cluster One 11th June 2020 at 17:34
I can’t remember when the reserves team structure was scrapped, but i think that is why the colts team thing came into being.
=========================================
The Reserve League system exists, it was brought back in the 2018 – 2019 season. It replaced the Development League which operated between 1998 and 2018.
That's not from memory I looked it up.
In any case, I understand the ramifications for a club having two teams in different divisions if that club fails. That might be a good argument for not allowing it in the first place, the amiistrators wouldn't be able to deal with it.
However bear in mind it's not that unusual in places like Spain where top division clubs have their reserves in lower divisions. The reserves cannot be promoted to the top division and cannot now play in the cup, both of which make absolute sense.
Homunculus 11th June 2020 at 21:39
However bear in mind it’s not that unusual in places like Spain where top division clubs have their reserves in lower divisions. The reserves cannot be promoted to the top division and cannot now play in the cup, both of which make absolute sense.
==============================
There are currently three reserve sides already playing in the pyramid.
Those “reserve” teams are obviously prevented from being promoted to the same league as their parent clubs.
Annan Athletic fielded sides in L2 and the SoSFL up to the end of season 2018/19
Spartans fielded sides in both the Lowland League and EoSFL until 2015/16
Hibs also fielded a “colts” side in the EoSFL in season 2013/14
In discussion with friends I have raged against the ‘hoovering’ up of young potential by the larger clubs .The conversation was weighted toward the EPL and specifically Chelsea and Manchester City but I see parallels in the attempt to include colt teams in Scottish professional football. The game is already skewed enough without allowing young players to be picked up en masse and winnowed so early.Yes I am aware that this happens already but not on the scale that this Colts ruse could accommodate.The loan system is the proper way to develop talent outside of the top league and it has served quite well, Ryan Christie a contemporary example.Perhaps an expansion of the number of players allowed to be loaned out/in could be a way forward.
Latest BDO report now out. Almost 8 years, and they are still at it.
Cluster One 12th June 2020 at 11:21
It contains absolutely nothing new, just a breakdown of their charges.
I imaging they will continue until there is no money left. They are doing a good job of spending the £25m which was brought in.
Out of curiosity: has anyone watched a live game behind closed doors on TV recently?
What did you think about it?
I’ve only watched the highlights of a Bundesliga game, where the stadium was shown as empty, but with a soundtrack of fans noises/chanting. Don’t know if this is just heard on TV or if it’s over the stadium loudspeakers.
It did come across a bit like watching a preseason friendly.
I’ve just read about La Liga using CGI to ‘add’ supporters visually – but it hasn’t been well received?
Maybe, in an unintended consequences way, the clubs and Hampden might truly appreciate that they need to value their paying customers – and in future, proactively seek their feedback, and change/improve accordingly. (I know!)
It’s one thing this virus confirming that the (SPL) clubs and governing bodies desperately need our money.
It’s quite another thing to have it painfully reaffirmed that the (SPL) clubs and governing bodies ALSO desperately need physical bums on seats in the stadiums – to create a sporting event.
Maybe, just maybe, supporters might ‘soon’ receive the recognition – and appreciation – which has been woefully absent in the game, generally.
This terrible crisis also presents a significant learning opportunity for the SFA, SPFL and clubs…
Cluster One 12th June 2020 at 11:21
"….and they are still at it."
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
And then some!!
I wouldn't mind being able to charge £1,415.38 for 2 hours of 'planning and strategy' time.
The average salary of a Chief Medical Officer (in the UK) is about £258,036 per annum., or about £4960 a week, or for a 38 -hour week, about £130.00 per hour.
I needn't pass any comment.
'StevieBC 12th June 2020 at 12:53
Out of curiosity: has anyone watched a live game behind closed doors on TV recently?
What did you think about it?
I’ve only watched the highlights of a Bundesliga game, where the stadium was shown as empty, but with a soundtrack of fans noises/chanting. Don’t know if this is just heard on TV or if it’s over the stadium loudspeakers.
It did come across a bit like watching a preseason friendly…'
################################
I've watched a few closed-door Bundesliga matches.
The secret for me is to put on some music & turn the commentary off. That makes it almost enjoyable.
Tonight's choice on BT: Italian Cup or Turkish Premier League. Decisions, decisions…
Steve, the South Korean baseball league decided to fill their stadia with soft toys and a German company have developed an app to let fans cheer from their sofas
https://gamerant.com/south-korean-baseball-plushies/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-8290407/App-fans-send-cheers-jeers-sofas-stadiums.html
https://hack-care.de/myapplause-app/
<