THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight


According to Phil’s latest blog, a Blue Room delegate turned …

Comment on THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight by Billy Boyce.

According to Phil’s latest blog, a Blue Room delegate turned up at Ashley HQ on Friday, probably with a begging bowl, a white flag and a peace-pipe.  Big Mike’s legal eagle was unable to accommodate him as the RRM could not assure him of DCK’s intentions or if he was acting with TG&SL’s knowledge or authority.

Meanwhile, JJ is getting mixed up with his sit coms, namely Fawlty Towers and Hogan’s Heroes.  Who am I to talk? – I know nothing!

Billy Boyce Also Commented

THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight
Some tweets this morning from JD to whet your appetite:
Withey: “My personal view is that the Ticketus money was known about.”
Continues: “Only deal I’ve ever worked on where the vendor was pushing so hard, they were desperate to get the deal over the line”
AD asks if any mention of Ticketus Withey “The answer is no but there is a bigger story behind it, but you ask the questions”
Court takes a break, summary of morning session to follow. The Advocate Depute is questioning former lawyer Gary
Withey: “I thought of something odd last night can I explain

THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight
Homunculus May 3, 2017 at 23:03
‘..As it happens, King should have been a participant at another high-profile drama which is engrossing Rangers fans. He was cited as a witness in the trial at the High Court in Glasgow of Craig Whyte, who is alleged to have gained ownership of the club by fraudulent means in May 2011. He flew back to South Africa on Wednesday but it is understood that he met Stewart Regan, the SFA chief executive, for an informal discussion on general topics, before heading back.’ ‘What happened twixt him being cited as a witness and it being decided he was no longer required.’
The Telegraph article also states: “His participation was kept quiet in order to avoid what would likely have been intense media and public interest”.
So the likes of Craig Whyte (innocent until proved guilty) has to run the gauntlet of hostility each day while one particular witness is singled out and given the court’s protection re: his privacy.   Who made that decision and why?  Every time Dave King jets into Glasgow Airport the media surrounds him.  By now he should not feel threatened by this type of attention.
As a concerned taxpayer I would like to know if King’s trip to Glasgow was paid for out of the public purse.  The Crown Office has a duty to keep costs to a minimum.  Who, therefore, is responsible for waiting until King is in town before informing him his services are no longer required?  I am assuming that King would have been entitled to something more that a budget airlines flight and a cheap B&B.
Why would the Chief Executive of the SFA hold talks with King when he has no status in the registered member club (TRFC)?

THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight
ulyanova May 1, 2017 at 11:44
 Billy Boyce Risking a ban by playing the man but you know nothing
Thanks for that, but poor old Sgt Schults was trying to keep the Yanks in Stalag 17 in order long before the Catalonian waiter arrived in Torquay.

Recent Comments by Billy Boyce

The Stella Dallas of Europe
I see that our Rangers Tax Case friend has tweeted the Scottish football governing bodies with his concerns about a particular club’s solvency and its ability to complete the season. I very much doubt he is telling them something they are not already well acquainted with but are happily ignoring.

Rangers Tax-Case

Open questions to Messrs Doncaster and Maxwell.

Do you have full confidence that all SPFL Premiership clubs have binding commitments of funding in place to ensure they can complete all 2021/22 fixtures?

What have you done to assess and mitigate such a risks?

Rangers Tax-Case
Can you provide unambiguous guidance-
Is it acceptable for a club to complete the season by trading while insolvent, not remitting taxes, and increasing debt that cannot be repaid?

If this is ok, it is surely important that every club is aware of this fact?

Fergus McCann v David Murray
" TWO Rangers administrators have been awarded £600,000 damages after the Crown Office admitted their arrests were "malicious".

Duff and Phelps partners David Whitehouse and Paul Clark were arrested after the Ibrox club plunged into liquidation in 2012.

Mr Whitehouse was charged in connection with Craig Whyte's takeover of Rangers a year earlier.

The Crown Office has now admitted the case against them was unlawful and "motivated by malice".

The two men are seeking a total of £14m from Police Scotland and the Crown.

Judge Lord Tyre ordered them to hand over £350,000 to Whitehouse and £250,000 to his colleague Clark.

It comes after the Lord Advocate’s lawyer Gerry Moynihan QC admitted that every stage of the prosecution of the pair following their first court appearance was unlawful.

Lawyers said that the human rights of both administrators had been breached during the probe.

The court heard that the businessmen’s legal teams have been supplied with documents which show senior Crown Office lawyers speaking about the “need to nail the Duff & Phelps people”.

Whitehouse's lawyer Roddy Dunlop QC told the court his client had spent an “eye watering” £1.8 million on the case.

He said: "It is nothing short of a disgrace that the government has chosen to act in this fashion towards two private citizens.

“It is only through the determination of Mr Clark and Mr Whitehouse to clear their names that we have got to this point.

“The bottom line here is that less wealthy people could never have got to this point. In my submission some award has to be made in this case.”

And Paul Clark’s lawyer said the matter was “nothing short” of a disgrace.

Lord Tyre ordered the interim payment to be made after the Duff and Phelps partners won their case.

Les Says It is Time to Ask The Audience?
Ex Ludo 7th May 2020 at 16:43


I'm awfully confused – is that an hour before or after BST?

SPFL Myopia Flares into Civil War
It looks like that pesky whistleblower is now going to have to step up to the plate:



You will all be aware of reports in the press, calling for an independent investigation and for the suspension of SPFL’s chief executive Neil Doncaster and SPFL’s legal counsel Rod McKenzie in relation to the resolution that enabled the payment of nearly £2 million to Championship, League One and League Two clubs. The focus of the questions raised in the press concerned the events of the evening of Friday 10 April, when Dundee FC attempted to return a voting slip to the SPFL in connection with the resolution.

In order to ensure complete probity and independence during this process, on Thursday 16 April, Deloitte LLP, a leading global provider of audit and assurance services, was appointed by the SPFL’s independent non-executive directors to carry out a comprehensive and independent investigation into the factual chronology relating to Dundee FC’s return. Deloitte has completed its forensic investigation and the findings confirm the following sequence of key events on 10 April 2020.

Sequence of key events on 10 April 2020.

  1. An SPFL Board Meeting commenced at 17:00 on Friday 10 April 2020. At the start of the meeting 38 returns had been identified as received, and 1 further return was received during the meeting at 17:10, bringing the total number of returns to 39.
    Ladbrokes Premier: 10 returns in favour, 1 against
    Ladbrokes Championship: 7 returns in favour, 2 against
    Ladbrokes Leagues One and Two: 16 returns in favour, 3 against

It was noted during the meeting that one vote remained outstanding from the Premiership,
one from the Championship, and one from Leagues One and Two.

  1. The Board meeting concluded at around 17:15.
  2. At 17:15, Neil Doncaster called Dundee FC Managing Director, John Nelms, and left a message asking whether Dundee FC intended to submit a return.
  3. At 17:39, Neil Doncaster had a conversation with John Nelms and confirmed that as far as he knew, no vote had been returned from Dundee FC. John Nelms thought Dundee FC’s vote may have been returned, but would make enquiries.
  4. At 17:50, Eric Drysdale (Dundee FC Club Secretary) spoke to Iain Blair (SPFL’s Company Secretary and Director of Operations) asking whether Dundee FC’s return had been received. Iain Blair confirmed that it had not.
  5. At 18:00, a text was received by Iain Blair, from Eric Drysdale, intimating that the Dundee FC vote should not be considered as cast.
  6. At around 20:30, Ian Blair accessed the SPFL’s email quarantine system (which is a feature of the email system operated by a separate third party) at the suggestion of Rod Mackenzie and identified an unread email from Eric Drysdale that had been sent at 16:48 on 10 April 2020. Iain Blair released the quarantined email and it appeared in his SPFL email inbox at 20:55. Prior to identifying the quarantined email at around 20:30, no one from the SPFL had seen the email from Eric Drysdale.

Deloitte’s examination of phone records, mobile communications (including texts) and email data has identified no evidence of improper behaviour by SPFL personnel concerning the submission of the Dundee FC vote.

I hope that Scottish football will now focus on the significant issues that face our game, otherwise many clubs may not survive this period.

We will have to be forward-thinking, and work collegiately to quickly present ideas and proposals to Scottish Government and others which will enable Scottish football to recover and progress.

Make no mistake, this is a critical time for all clubs, and we must concentrate on what is important to the future of our game.

Yours faithfully,
Karyn McCluskey
SPFL Independent Non-Executive Director


SPFL Myopia Flares into Civil War
Homunculus 16th April 2020 at 19:18

Corrupt official 16th April 2020 at 18:19

Statement O’Clock

Thursday, 16 April 2020, 19:00

by Rangers Football Club

So, the TRFC board are now falling in line with their manager’s earlier demands today for a full ‘forensic investigation’.  They have even ‘borrowed’ his phraseology.  The same board are being rather clever here in not revealing or even mentioning the damning evidence they hold, courtesy of that pesky whistle-blower.

Should the SPFL alleged villains resist such a move then who exactly will have the power to enforce this investigation – the Courts or a lynch mob heading for Hampden?

About the author