The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench


It’s now just about 1.00 pm on Saturday 14th january …

Comment on The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench by John Clark.

It’s now just about 1.00 pm on Saturday 14th january here in Birkdale/Brisbane.Current temperature is 29.6 degrees celsius.
I had the two younger granweans down at the park for an hour betwen 8.00 and 9.00 a.m (plenty of shade , as they played on the ‘flying fox’ etc…) Mrs C is just preparing a bit of lunch now, and I have had a few minutes to myself.
During these few minutes, I have been ruminating, not for the first time, on the nuisance factor that arises when one is dealing with two entities which are pretending to be one.
( I have previously written to Companies House about what seemed to me to be an attempt by RIFC/TRFC to claim unbroken continuity with SDM’s/ CW’s RFC(IL) in the way they try to use ‘Rangers’ when referring to either)
So, I had a mind to have a look at the web-site for Rangers Football Club. I find it to be here   
I find, to my pleasant surprise, that when I click on ‘history’, the ‘history’ stops at the point where ‘Walter’ is about to hand over to ‘Ally”
I turn then to have a wee look at  RIFC, the web-site of which entity appears to be
I find under their ‘history’, the very same identical same page. BUT this is not at all updated to mention SDM’s sale for the £1 to CW , and the facts of ‘Administration’, and the fact that the club was NOT bought out of ‘administration’, but ws Liquidated, lost its SPL share, and LOST its SFA share.
The RIFC board daren’t put in print the express claim to be the Rangers Football Club of old, by recording the history of the origins of SevcoScotland…..
They try to do it by implication, sneakily, their lawyers knowing better than to try an obvious market con.

John Clark Also Commented

The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
On the subject of Darryl Broadfoot ( loosely in connection with Big Pink’s post of January 14, 2017 at 16:50 )   I was intrigued a week or so ago when I looked him up  on the web and saw  that his job at the SFA is as ” Head of Communications and Corporate Affairs’

I’ve been a good few years out of the world of cv’s and job titles, and I am obviously way out of date.

In my day, there were ‘Press Officers’ who read the papers and listened to ‘phone-ins’, and tried to ‘correct’ factual errors, and/or put a favourable spin on matters- and enjoyed cheap drink in the Press Club.

None of them ever had such a grand title that suggests real executive, corporate power!

Head of Corporate Affairs! Is he really the boss man at the SFA? Does Regan answer to him? Does the SFA Board take instructions from him?What does it all mean, to be Head of Corporate Affairs?


Anyroads, he’s still there in post, whatever the rumours- although, of course, he may  just be working out his statutory period of notice for all I know.

The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
AllyjamboJanuary 14, 2017 at 14:18
‘..A couple of days ago there was a post from a bears site put up on twitter where one bear was vociferously defending King, but now it appears more and more are seeing that they’ve been ‘duped’ and are saying so, still, though, in somewhat muted terms.’
Aye, but who are the ‘duped’ now seeing as their wealthy ‘saviour’?

Someone on the present RIFC board, or the TRFC board, or some other ‘Bill Taylor’ or Mr Ng, or brothers Mcgill or… CW clone?

Dear God, was there ever such a tedious piece of nonsense as this whole wearisome saga about a four-year-old football club?

The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
Big PinkJanuary 14, 2017 at 13:35
‘…And Celtic’s apparent willingness to ignore the licence shenanigans at the SFA would encourage most folks to think that the club mindset – if not the fans – is firmly wedded to the culture of duopoly.’
In a (long ago?) previous post I used the words of a much more significant chap than I when I said that there was no duty on the part of Celtic to make a gift of its life to its enemies by leading the ‘football integrity’ charge while other clubs ( with the most honourable exception of Raith Rovers under Turnbull Hutton) sat back and uttered not a word, publicly( although, privately, one or two let me know their feelings).

That was before the Res 12 at the Celtic agm in 2013.

At that agm, the matter became a matter of shareholder, not ‘supporter’, business; a matter of share value, not club allegiance.

And that was a perfectly legitimate , non-footballing, non-sectarian, non-‘Celtic- as- a- football- club’ but as a feckin business that ‘might’ have been done out of millions, opportunity to at least ask some searching questions.

The fact that they have thus far failed to ask any question, and buggered people ( their shareholders) about for 3 years tells its own story.

I have still to write to Celtic to ask them to explain to me exactly why they have thus far neither taken action on the Res 12 matter, nor totally dismissed the Res 12 resolution as being spurious and  not being worth pursuing, from a shareholders’ perspective.

I will write.

And will expect an answer.
And a truthful answer, at that.

Recent Comments by John Clark

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
My brother and I, auld men now that we are, meet occasionally for a pint or three.
We tend to pay homage to our late dad by visiting one of the pubs he used as a young man afore the war ( he lived in digs near Partick Cross) , or one of the pubs he used when we were kids during his working life at what  used to be Glasgow Corporation Tramways Parkhead depot,  or the pub he used in Tollcross in his retirement days.
So I feel for the patrons of what had been Annie Miller’s pub in Ropework lane.
If and when the new owners of the premises tart it up gaily as a feeder bar for their adjoining sauna, I expect that it will no longer be a ‘Rangers’ pub,a place of shared enjoyment of football memories and celebration of former days of glory.

Like the historic Rangers Football Club, Annie Miller’s is dead. Ceased trading in 2016. No longer exists as a ‘Rangers’ pub, any more than the Rangers Football Club of 1872 exists as a professional football club entitled to a place in Scottish Football.
That’s the reality.
There isn’t even a ‘Scottish Football Pubs Association’ prepared to create and propagate a lie  that ‘Annie Miller’s’ lives on, there have been no white or green knights/knaves rushing in to found ‘continuity Annie Miller’s’, no running-dog SMSM types betraying their avocation by propagating untruths…… convicted criminals begging, borrowing and making false promises about good times to come if only other folk will produce the readies…
Annie Miller’s is dead and gone.
Only a lie sustains TRFC Ltd.
And those who drank in Annie Miller’s know that.
And the evil men of the SMSM and the SFA know it, too.
May 2018 see them confounded, and their untruths exposed.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
FinlochDecember 30, 2017 at 20:42
‘…Craig took a Corinthian and undisciplined club going nowhere fast, rooted it into a previously ignored community and has achieved some incredible health and social goals deep into that community using football as glue.’
Beautifully expressed, Finloch.

Football as a glue of ‘community’

Of community trust,

of basic honesty,

of the  Corinthian spirit,

of sporting integrity….

and of all the virtues that the SFA has so spectacularly abandoned, in its determination to insist that Charles Green’s Sevcoscotland is entitled to call itself the Rangers of 1872

That such an incredibly monstrous perversion of truth of any kind, never mind sporting truth, is being, and has been for 5 years, propagated by our Football Governance body and supported by the SMSM is stark evidence of a deep, deep corruption at the heart of our sport, and, worse, at the very essence of our ‘free’ Press.

in this little country of ours.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
And since I’m talking to myself while all you guys and gals are snoring your heads off, can I just mention that in the local newspaper this morning there was a piece about school sports.

It seemed to be about the ‘pick’ of the best players.

I didn’t have time today to read the whole thing ( and it’s too late to disturb the household to go looking for the paper!) but it seemed to be related to the use by ‘soccer’ teams of the American  Football  concept of who gets to pick the best player in the ‘draft’.

I have only the haziest understanding of that concept.

But in so far as it might relate to attempts to create genuine ‘sporting’ , on-field, equality of talent, it must have something to recommend it.

Even the Americans realise that in order to make money out of sport,there has to be some concept of genuine ‘sporting competition’

Auldheid reminded us, quite movingly, of the joyous nature of our game as we all experienced it.
We all knew instinctively what was fair, and what wasn’t.
Remember how our street game teams were picked?

The two ‘captains’ tossed for first choice.Whichever won the toss would pick the ‘best’ player. The other guy would pick ‘the second best’ and so on.

And, if it appeared that there was an imbalance ,or if there was an odd number of players, then it would be agreed that a ‘John Clark’ would play the first half for one side to give them the extra man, and the second half for the other side, to try to be fair in the use of that useless lump!

( who, I may say, was actually quite good at lifting the wee ba’ from the street up onto the pavement, one hand on the lamp-post outside the Thomson’s house on Cuthelton Street, and bringing it to the goal at the lorry entrance to the Domestos depot ( formerly Donald Clarke’s steel kind of place, which in 1947 sirened One o’Clock,with the siren they used ‘during the war!’)

And it is these kinds of memories that fuel my contempt
contempt for the cheating bast.rd of a knight of the realm who killed the RFC of my day

contempt for the SFA who, like some referees,not only did not ‘see’ that cheating but went further and assisted in that cheating

And who continue to propagate the lie that the football club that cheated its way to death by Liquidation is somehow the same club as a five year old creation that they themselves have lied into existence.

And as for the the whole lot of the successive boards of either Sevco 5088, Sevcoscotland, The rangers football Club Ltd, RIFC plc  how can they be described otherwise than as  scavengers of carrion? Feeding as they do on the dead flesh of a once proud football club?

It gars me greet…
Quietly and solemnly, into my glass of “Goose IPA, 5.9%, made from hops from Idaho” ( And actually quite surprisingly pleasant, reminiscent of McEwan’s pale ale.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
It’s 11.43 pm in Scranton,PA,  and we have just come back from being wined and dined  in tremendously good company in a friends-of-the-son’s home.

I am therefore in a cheerful frame of mind. (Mind you, sitting in the back seat of the car I had one of those A9 moments of absolute fear, when the driver overtook another car on a blind bend, before I realised we were still on a dual carriageway!)….

For one reason or another, it suddenly strikes  me that I don’t actually know ( or remember) when it was that the concept of ‘transfer windows’ was introduced, or why it was introduced.

On the face of it, it’s as much of a restriction of ‘trade’ on ’employers’, as the pre-Bosman situation was on freedom of employment was on ‘workers'(players).

Is there a decently worked out rationale for the concept?

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
easyJamboDecember 27, 2017 at 17:49
‘..I think that the document will only be a restatement of the resolutions that were approved at the AGM (Resolutions 10 & 11).’
You’re perfectly right, of course, eJ: it was only the official recording  of the AGM resolutions.

I think I for one (in my general ignorance) tend to think that any plc of which a director has been taken to the Courts( in an unprecedented action by the Takeover Panel) would have every form or document that it submitted to Companies House rigorously examined, cross-checked, double-checked, treble checked ,even, in a way that ,for example, the SFA does not do with documents submitted to it by its trustworthy gentlemen members.

The Takeover Panel has a lot riding on how the Law stands in its approach to the Panel’s need for support in their regulation of rogues in the market-place.

So I tend to look at anything touching on RIFC plc that seems even a wee bit different as something worth exploring.

Largely tongue-in-cheek, of course: -we’re not likely ever to be told anything confidential by CH! But if they say something will appear, and then it doesn’t appear when promised, then it allows one to ask why. Keeps them on their toes!

And we know that when even the gentlemen of our free Press are not above behaving with less than complete honesty when it comes to TRFC Ltd/RIFC plc  there may (God forbid!) exist a ‘protective of companies’ mindset in CH, rather than a ‘get the baddies’ approach.

Who knows?

About the author