by Stuart Cosgrove for the Scottish Football Monitor
In the early years of the new millennium, ‘The Battle of the Saints’ was a First Division encounter. Both St Mirren and St Johnstone had been relegated and were among the favourites to return to the spiritually suffocating SPL. Winning the First Division title was a mixed blessing. It provided a football moment that old firm fans could only dream of – an open-top bus round. But victory meant you were back in the SPL, a league that had been shaped for the benefit of the two big clubs.
Television revenues were skewed, there were no play-offs, only one team could be relegated and the voting structures would bring shame to a tin-pot dictatorship. It was a league you could never realistically win and so never fully enjoy. I remember being in the ‘Wee Barrel’ a traditional football boozer near St Mirren’s old Love Street stadium. It was soon after the St Johnstone drug scandal. On 5th January 2001, George O’Boyle and his teammate Kevin Thomas had been sacked following allegations that they had used illegal recreational drugs. They had allegedly been caught taking an “unidentified white powder” at the club’s injured players Christmas Party at That Bar in Perth. The drugs scandal undermined St Johnstone’s much peddled identity as a local family club. A bitter industrial dispute unfolded and widespread dressing-room unrest. The team’s form catastrophically dipped. Inevitably, St Mirren fans were delighted to play host to such a “scandalised” and “drug-addled” club. Football fans relish the misfortune of others with almost satanic glee. So the Buddies cheered sarcastically when any Perth fans went into the Wee Barrel’s less than salubrious pub toilet. They made pantomime sniffing noises interjected with animal impersonations and at times it sounded like a famer’s convention had turned into a massive cocaine bender. I vividly remember that one St Johnstone fan became so enraged that he blurted out the unforgettable phrase ‘Aye but what about Barry Lavety?’ Further back in 1995 the St Mirren striker Lavety had been arrested for using the then ‘designer drug’ ecstasy making him the first footballer of the acid-house generation. In this short, pithy response outside a toilet door in the Wee Barrel, all the gut instincts of football spectatorship came to the surface and all the components of what was later to become known as ‘whataboutery’ were laid bare.
Whataboutery pre-dates the internet but it has been kindled by it. The web has transformed the way we talk and think about football. Suddenly and profoundly new forums for discussing the game quickly followed. Facebook was launched two years later in 2004, Twitter joined the social media firmament in 2006 and by 2012 and Scottish football’s summer of discontent the micro-blogging platform had 500 million active users. The rise of social media invoked an ‘epistemological break’ with previous eras of spectatorship and with other forms of media and communication. For the first time ever, fans had a way of instantly communicating, of answering back and disagreeing with each other in real-time. Whataboutery is a dismal art that can be defined by three often sub-conscious characteristics – a refusal to engage with the question at hand; an attempt to deflect the discussion on to others and a failure to engage with the morality of the subject.
Go on any web forum today and you will find many debates are pock-marked with whataboutery. The financial meltdown of Rangers is the most recent and most virulent example. What about Hearts they owe the taxman? What about Dundee they’ve gone bust twice? What about Leeds, Middlesbrough and Portsmouth? Sadly, the misdemeanours of others is an unstable platform on which to mount a moral defence and celebrating victory in a tax tribunal about complex offshore loan-trusts does not magically airbrush away tax-debt involving VAT and PAYE. Nor does whatboutery explain why already rich footballers should enjoy the moral right to hide behind complex off shore tax schemes, irrespective of their legality. Every football fan at some time in their life has felt a deep primal urge to defend their club. We are emotionally instinctive creatures and quick to play the martyr. But however passionate you are about football – and I would count myself as ‘combustible’ – being loyal to your club does not permit disloyalty or contempt for the institutions of a fair society.
Not surprisingly, the origins of the term whatboutery can be traced back to the sectarian divisions in Northern Ireland. Last year I met the journalist and blogger, Mick Fealty who is one of the driving forces behind the blog forum Slugger O’Toole, a site that has bravely tried to provide a platform for localism and for non-sectarian political discourse in Northern Ireland. It is often cited as the place where the term whataboutery was invented. Taking its lead from Slugger, the online dictionary wikitionary defines whataboutery as “responding to criticism by accusing one’s opponent of similar or worse faults.” Recently, at the height of rioting in Belfast in the aftermath of Belfast city council’s policy shift on flying the union flag, a major local newspaper the Belfast Telegraph said in a trenchant editorial – “For everyone who cares about democracy; who wants an end to sectarian posing and mind games; an end to mindless thuggery; an end to immature reactions to complicated issues; an end to whataboutery ….” An end to sectarian posing and mind games – how refreshing would that be? The recent case of Anthony Stokes is a case in point. Most fans would concede that Stokes is a fool to have associated himself with the Real IRA and criminal elements within the Dublin republican scene. But some fans – believing they were supporting their club and its Irish origins – are hard-wired to romanticism and a re-hashed history. Nothing that Stokes has done is either romantic or historic – it is grubby and pathetic. Nor is deflection acceptable either. Yes of course Andy Goram has associated with some fairly disagreeable characters but that does not absolve Stokes of responsibility. Celtic manager Neil Lennon has been unambiguous about that. Stokes is on a final warning and rightly so. Whataboutery is the glue of entrenched opinion. It cultivates extremes rather than subtleties, and favours glib comment over deeper dialogue. That is why TSFM should always be vigilant about the forum slipping into whatabouterty.
It seems almost banal to say it, but you can be a supporter without being a supplicant. You can be Rangers daft without endorsing morally bereft tax loopholes, you can want Neil Lennon to enjoy a life free from intimidation without defending complicated film investment schemes; you can relish a goal by Garry O’ Connor without admiring his self-defeating lifestyle, you can be a big Jambo but still expect staff to be paid on time, you can be a Red Ultra without having to urinate on videos of Gazza and you can soak up the atmosphere in the Dundee Derry, without cushioning its sectarian associations. And, yes I do know that there was once a dairy behind the goal at the Derry End – but when fights erupted in the 1970s, it wasn’t lactic pasteurisation they were fighting about.
Football fans can be emotionally passionate yet hold on to moral values. We can be vocal without being vacuous. We can be diehard fans without being robotic ideologues for our club. Many of us have found ourselves tied in knots trying to defend our clubs and in some cases defend the indefensible. The roll-call of whatboutery in Scottish football would shame a mature society. There’s defective flat-screen televisions in Manchester; hearses at Celtic Park; programme notes at Montrose; unidentified white powder; porn peddlers in the 1980s, Joanna Lumley’s love-life, urinal-videos in Aberdeen; Leigh Griffith’s unique contribution to fatherhood; Hugh Dallas’s emails; Maurice Edu’s car and Lee Wallace’s air-rifle. They are surreal and seemingly endless.
As new technologies surround us daily, whataboutery has gone digital and online disputes are now frequently backed up by a stream of phone-footage, rogue tweets, photo-shopped imagery and spectacularly desperate analogies. We live in the white-heat of social media where whataboutery goes on ad nauseum and in perpetuity. It is the dismal art of the web and a habit we have to overcome if Scottish football is ever to find a settled democracy. The financial collapse of Rangers has brought us to a cross roads. Unless there is some kind of rapprochement and an ‘appliance of compliance’, then whataboutery will last for many more decades to come. Whataboutery is a defence mechanism which allows fans and the clubs they support to avoid moral responsibility. But it need not be like that. In February 2007, Scottish football was given a simple lesson in how the game could be run if we could look forward. It was a cold and wet night at Fir Park during a midweek Scottish cup tie. St Johnstone’s Jason Scotland was unexpectedly targeted by a small band of racist Motherwell fans. By most reasonable accounts of the events, a gang of right-wing casuals taunted the player with monkey chants. Season tickets were not valid and many fans were not in their regular seats. But within a few minutes, groups of decent Motherwell fans turned on the racists, shouted them down and alerted the police.
Online there was a brief and half-hearted flurry of whataboutery. Some denied it had happened, others said that Jason Scotland was “playing the race card” and a small vocal minority argued it was Airdrie fans. This is an unfamiliar twist on an age old deflection. Blaming phantom support from elsewhere is quite common in Scottish football, although it is usually the demonology of Chelsea, Millwall or England fans that are cast as the mysterious villains.
Whatever the motives of those that posted their defence of Motherwell, the whataboutery was short-lived and brought to a shuddering halt by a simple, prompt and unambiguous apology. In an official club statement, Chairman John Boyle said: “These people should never show their faces at Fir Park again and they have no place in football,” adding “We are utterly appalled by this behaviour by a small group of people who have tarnished the name of our club. We are writing to Jason Scotland and St Johnstone today to apologise for this disgusting behaviour which is totally alien to all of us.”
Motherwell had scripted a blue-print for change. Rather than deflect attention elsewhere or dispute the minutiae of events, clubs, fans and officials have to become “better at being wrong.” When there is a clear injustice, evidence of wrong-doing or powerful proof that mistakes have been made, then it is no longer acceptable to hide from the moral consequences. Apologise and pay the price. That applies equally to all of us and there is no hierarchy of importance. No special cases. The SPL may have a history of gifting privileges but common decency does not.
Stuart Cosgrove
Stuart Cosgrove is a St Johnstone fan. He was previously Media Editor of the NME and is now Director of Creative Diversity at Channel 4, where he recently managed coverage of the Paralympics, London 2012. At the weekend he presents the BBC Scotland football show ‘Off the Ball’ with Tam Cowan. This is the second of a trilogy of blogs he has agreed to write for TSFM. The first was about the era of Armageddon. He writes here in a personal capacity.
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:15
“Not sure where you get the official accepting he submitted false claims from – link?”
From the fact that Shiels was cleared on three issues relating specifically relating to claims made by Dallas. Cleared by the SFA disciplinary panel.
Bunion says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 01:55
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 01:37
“Could it be the case that the SPL/SFA are keeping their powder dry for the “Big one””
I would hope you’re correct but, when you consider Kenny Shiels is facing considerable sanction for accusing an official of ‘fabrication’ (when said official has been accepted as having submitted false claims) and yet Charles Green effectively goes unpunished for calling other teams bigoted and promotes calls for boycotts of SFA competitions then it would appear most unlikely.
=++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wasn’t Charles given a ticking off for his b!gots stuff and he hasn’t called for a boycott of SFA competitions what he did do is support the boycott instigated by his fans of the DUFC v TRFC game but not the Scottish Cup in general. Facts are important.
Bunion says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:31
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:15
“Not sure where you get the official accepting he submitted false claims from – link?”
From the fact that Shiels was cleared on three issues relating specifically relating to claims made by Dallas. Cleared by the SFA disciplinary panel.
======================================================================
Was he? Link?
Bunion says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:27
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:06
Sorry but your point ref keeing the calls flooding into the likes of SSB simply provides justification to them. Ignoring them starves them of much needed oxygen.
======================================================================
If its turned into a borefest they lose listeners and hence advertisers revenue(the lifeblood of the station) the slump in listeners will be noticed in weeks.Which is more effective?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ref boycotting the national team – this is the one action that will most affect, and be noticed by, the SFA heirarchy. Not a boycott of individual clubs – they have now clearly shown that course of action is of no interest to them..
=========================================================================
All I was saying was that there is no real need for an organised boycott of the national team – they are so bad nobody will turn up anyway.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ref Dallas, both father and son have now clearly been found culpable of questionable activity. Compounded by the defence of the actions of McCurry and McDonald this, from the adjudicators of the game, is both unacceptable and unforgivable.
========================================================================
Culpable or guilty? There is a big difference. However, I share your suspicion of a bad culture existing within the Grade 1 refs in Scotland after listening to Richmond and Hope on Radio Shortbread on Saturday plus what I know and witnessed about Andy Davies at Tynecastle.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Without honesty and integrity the game is a sham – By heavens you’re right.
bogsdollox says:
Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 15:58
10 4 Rate This
ordinaryfan says:
Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 12:12
I bet there are huge numbers of electrical goods companies, readying themselves for a bidding war to purchase Comet’s goodwill?
What!, You can’t purchase the “goodwill” unless they buy the business or company entity of Comet as a whole?
Sorry, my mistake, stand down Curry’s.
======================================================================
I’m sure someone posted up how the sale proceeds were allocated in the sale and purchase agreement. From memory I think Green & Co paid £1 for the goodwill.
£1 for goodwill ! He wuz robbed.
http://www.aberdeen-mad.co.uk/news/tmnw/milne_rules_out_sevco_invite_to_new_spl_773862/index.shtml
Stewartie says NO fast track to anyone
Any conclusions to this?
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11435450
ordinaryfan says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 01:53
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/leaguedivision3/4706256/Titles-are-all-ours.html#ixzz2FYKgyXft
“My position is unchanged. There is no jurisdiction over newco.
“Newco has never been a member of the SPL. We wanted to be, we were refused.
“It’s like any bar. If you’re thrown out, you don’t go back.
“Newco has no engagement whatsoever with the SPL or title-stripping.”
Chuckles logic. Newco: Thrown out of an organisation it was never in.
——————————————————
Charles is of course correct. The clue is in one of the words he uses. It’s a newco, as in new, unused, never seen before.
I have never been a member of Glasgow Golf Club. I cannot claim to have won the club championship.
Oh, and by the way Charles, your analogy about the bar is also incorrect. You cannot be thrown out of something you have never been a member of or visited.
Daily Record this morning:
CHARLES GREEN and Ally McCoist held talks with representatives of oldco Rangers this week on title stripping.
But the chief executive still has no interest in engaging with the independent tribunal set up to examine the alleged use of dual contracts in the SPL.
Green said: “Ally and I were at the lawyers getting our strategy on title stripping together.
“Newco has no engagement whatsoever with the SPL or the title stripping but we went to a meeting because oldco were having a get together and wanted to speak to us. We’re happy to support oldco because I’ve said to fans I’ll fight for Rangers.
“Those titles are mine, not oldco’s. I bought them, they’re part of newco and they’re staying in newco.
“If someone wants to take them, steal them or buy them they are not for sale. They are going nowhere. You’ll not see Charles Green at Hampden for the tribunal. No chance.
“My position is unchanged. There is no jurisdiction over newco. Newco has never been a member of the SPL. We wanted to be but were refused. If you’re thrown out you don’t go back.”
—–
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 01:37
rab says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 01:02
How can there be trust in a governing body that is bloated with supporters and shareholders of a club that wields more power than the governing body itself.
=========================================================================
Indeed. I’ve been thinking about this and Smugas posted above the outline terms of the five way agreement (as reported in the press). In it TRFC were allowed into Div 3 on certain terms relating to settling football debts and accepting the transfer embargo.
On the matter of “EBT’s” the SFA “reserved it’s position” I assume because the case needs to be heard by the Independent Panel led by LNS. Charlie was quoted as resisting this and “fighting” to retain titles, blah. blah blah etc. ( I think you can be a plain speaking Yorkie without wanting to fight all the time – but hey ho he’s got surrogates for that).
Could it be the case that the SPL/SFA are keeping their powder dry for the “Big one” in January by failing to engage Charlie in minor skirmishes arising from him having a big mouth which tries to provoke conflict with the “authorities”. I accept a major weakness in my thinking is that the current President Unelect of the SFA has the backbone of a jelly fish.
————————————————————————————————————————-
good point here.
but why was this 5way “agreement” even needed?
the independent panel decreed the “registration” embargo.
that embargo was at the bottom end of the scale of possible outcomes.
the CoS ordered them back to square 1.
[why were they not carpeted for not only not accepting the embargo – to compound that, they went to the CoS – which is ALSO AGAINST THE RULES, but the sfa, did SFA]
why wasn’t the panel told to choose one of the other reprimands available to them for what was deemed to be “just below” match fixing?
the reason was, so campbell ogilvie and his mates, could keep rangers/the rangers from actually getting the level of “punishment” they deserved –
at the very least a 1 year playing ban
If I had friends in the Scottish game and wanted to ensure that my club switcharoo was a success, the first thing i would do is bring in a couple of unknowns to run the game. People who do not know the history and who are happy to sit back and receiove their pay cheques for not much.
I could lean on them to do the right thing in the full knowledge that the buck stops with them. Once the switcheroo has been completed i could bring back some of my right minded friends to restore our place in the game. The double act can retire into the cricketing sunset with large pay cheques, oblivious to what they have left behind.
what happened to Regans transparency in the Scottish game, what about Doncasters prediction of Mayan proportions if sevco were not allowed into the SPL.
It feels like Regan is not reforming the scottish game and doncaster is begging for scraps from the tv deal budget and doing a bad job of it.
We need transparancy
We need a clearout at the top
We need to make it clear what language by clubs is acceptable.
We need one governing league body
We need honest referees and officials who do not have microphones and write up their reports separately at the end of each game so that their is no opportunity to collaborate on events..
We need to look at our officials selection process, why so many lawyers, i am sure people in lower professions can referee a game.
But how ?
“It’s like any bar. If you’re thrown out, you don’t go back.
eh, since when?
I’ve no allegiance to killie but would it be worthwhile putting our weight behind his clash with the authorities? Its not going to change Scottish football but by raising the imbalance of fairness by comparing Mr Charles constant rhetoric to Kenny Shiels stating the facts we might at least make them aware of our level of frustration.
ianagain says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 08:31
So the owners of this block of shares are Hargreave Hale who manage the vast majority for Malborough Fund Managers Ltd who no doubt manage the shares on behalf of a range of their clients, or perhaps in this case just one client. The remainder of the block fo shares are being managed for a variety of smaller.
Nothing wrong in that but I am sure the SFA can’t be sure who ‘owns the club’ and if they pass the sniff test. All they can do is vouch for Hargreave Hale being a reputable firm sanctioned by the FSA.
(Of course the name of Malborourgh has a has a connection with Rangers but I am sure that is just coincidence.)
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 01:37
Could it be the case that the SPL/SFA are keeping their powder dry for the “Big one” in January by failing to engage Charlie in minor skirmishes arising from him having a big mouth which tries to provoke conflict with the “authorities”. I accept a major weakness in my thinking is that the current President Unelect of the SFA has the backbone of a jelly fish.
Daily Record 20/12
“Newco has no engagement whatsoever with the SPL or the title stripping but we went to a meeting because oldco were having a get together and wanted to speak to us. We’re happy to support oldco because I’ve said to fans I’ll fight for Rangers.
“Those titles are mine, not oldco’s. I bought them, they’re part of newco and they’re staying in newco.
“If someone wants to take them, steal them or buy them they are not for sale. They are going nowhere. You’ll not see Charles Green at Hampden for the tribunal. No chance.
—
AS I said in a reply (plea) to Stuart Cosgrove. Here we have the Myth (Green) clashing with the reality (oldco) as it eventually has to.
Someone has to win this particular challenge, he says carefully avoiding the “f” word. If wrongdoing surrounding contracts was committed a penalty has to be applied. Normally the defence would be to say sorry, that’s oldco, nothing to do with us and the case would disappear into the world of liquidation. Yet Charlie seems to be be doing his utmost to attach the case to the present, in fact he almost seems to be welcoming the challenge. So, either
a/ M’lady she doth protest too much. I’ve said all along if the money men, I assume King but whoever, can get a hold of brand-Rangers without the debt by simply shedding a few tin pots they will whether the fans like it or not.
b/ Chuckles feels he can win – and this singularly sums up why Ogilvie shouldn’t be anywhere near the place at the moment, in fact at any time since 14th Feb when this clash was inevitable.
c/ Chuckles is prepared to lose, possibly to facilitate his own exit, surfing a wave of huffiness as the blue masses demand to know, commit to get them back etc etc etc.
So which is it to be?
Oh, and for what its worth I’m not in favour of boycotts.
pau1mart1n says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 09:25
“It’s like any bar. If you’re thrown out, you don’t go back.
eh, since when?
_____________________________________________
Seems Chuckie has had experience of being thrown out of bars! Cheating at dominoes perhaps?
tomtomaswell says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 09:06
‘I have never been a member of Glasgow Golf Club. I cannot claim to have won the club championship. ‘
—————————
Good point, tomtom, and well put! And if you bought said golf club, you still couldn’t claim to have won the championship! And if Joe Bloggs had won the championship 54 times, and you changed your name to The Joe Bloggs, you still couldn’t claim the titles!
Not sure about SCs emotionally the same, legally different arguement
Copernicus, using Ptolomy’s insights, stated the earth went around the sun.
The average punter at that time (not the scholar), when faced with this truth, would’ve emotionally felt threatened preferring to remain with the old paradigm.
The truth that it’s a new club must not be distorted allowing the lie to flourish.
If this is not done we will never move on.
There is nothing to be done except walk away.
All fans of all clubs need to state that the entire enterprise is corrupt and rigged and disgusting and that we live in a state without a press which is prepared to print the truth and which acquiesces in propaganda. The teams we purport to support are all party to this.
There is no law which forces us to watch football.This is how football is in this country and how it has always been – the present situation has merely brought the naked corruption at the root of the game into the open.
The clubs won’t change it unless their fans force them to; the SFA won’t change ever. All that can be done is to walk away – each of us individually cancel all connection with our clubs and leave. They will all then fold or be forced into effecting dramatic change before they fold – and create a fair and just and open system of governance. While the fans turn up, watch on TV , subscribe to SKY and buy papers this systematic fraud will continue.
Walking away is all that can be done.
As you do so write to your club explaining your decision. If enough individuals do this then the clubs , despite themselves, will have to force change upon the SFA. There is no point in even communicating directly with the SFA its sole purpose is the continuation of the Rangers, its sole raison d’etre over many years has been the illegal protection of Rangers, hence the issuing of UEFA licences in two successive years when the SFA knew they did not qualify, the entire refereeing structure where appointmeny and evaluation are in the hands of dishonest place men to ensure their success.
The clubs can enforce change – but only if forced to do so by the fans. there should not be a single day boycott but an indefinite non participation by fans.
Any fan who continues to pay money to support their team, or buys a daily newspaper, or subscribes to either SKY or ESPN is directly supporting The Rangers – and no amount of excusing or justifying can change that.
A person by person, fan by fan abandonment of the game is what is required here.
All the posturing, threatening, pleas of innocence and hot air emanating from Charles Green are similar to the actions performed by nefarious characters huckled by the police. Most coppers just ignore them and let them rant and rave because they know that it all means nothing and the slow wheels of the justiciary will finally determine their fate regardless of their protestations.
In some ways I have some sympathy for Chuckies confusion.
All sides have tried to play the oldco/newco both ways to suit their own needs.
That has then led to confusion and the mess we are in now.
I am a person who often tries to avoids making hasty black and white decisions as there is nearly always some grey in there somewhere.
However the longer my time on this planet, the more I feel that sometimes the grey results in paralysis through analysis , or that the hassle trying to live with the grey brings to your life is not actually worth it.
Maybe its my age now but I find I don’t have the time (or want to waste time) overly worrying about the grey so much.
An everyday example is that I nearly missed getting one of my wife’s Christmas presents because there was the possibility of reasonable a price reduction. Looking on the web last week the stock was marked as getting low but I thought I’d hold of till Monday. Blast the required item had gone. Luckily checked the website again last night and they had stock again. Bought it at the same price it was for the last week or so and then noted I got the last one – phew.
New Years Resolution for me that should be followed by the footballing authorities.
Play by the rules. Don’t muck about hoping things will get better. Make a decison and no matter now much it may hurt at the time, stick with it and move on.
Many on here assume that the SFA is some kind of governance body for Scottish football with a rule book to adhere to and to uphold. It’s not!
Once you have understood that then it all makes sense. It is not about football or rules or the future of the game . it’s solely about the protection of vested interests.
Have no truck with it i say!
Iceman63 10:11
Harsh, very harsh & fraught with emotional difficulty but you’re not wrong. For any meaningful change to happen, something dramatic has to occur.
We can pussy foot around various issues as much as we like but this will not force change. Our football governance is predicated by self protection, establishment & cosy arrangement that benefits very few pockets. Hitting pockets has brought result before & I assert will do so again but as you say, the heat will have to be turned up from last time.
I agree there is no point adding to the SFA email delete box. Clubs need to hear from their own that if they want income in 6 months time, they must do the right thing now. That will take considerable persuasion but again there is no point moaning about self interest of others if we place our own self interest first.
We must unite for the good of all & present a united front. I cant see how much else would have the gravitas to even get oxygen let alone increase the heart beat of our current officers.
I think a complete boycott of the next Scotland game would be a good starting point.
Galatasery v Schalke
Celtic v Juventus
Arsenal v Bayern
Shaktar v Dortmund
AC Milan v Barcelona
Real Madrid v Man Utd
Valencia v Paris SG
Porto v Malaga
iceman63 says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 10:11
13 0 i
Rate This
There is nothing to be done except walk away.
All fans of all clubs need to state that the entire enterprise is corrupt and rigged and disgusting and that we live in a state without a press which is prepared to print the truth and which acquiesces in propaganda. The teams we purport to support are all party to this.
There is no law which forces us to watch football.This is how football is in this country and how it has always been – the present situation has merely brought the naked corruption at the root of the game into the open.
The clubs won’t change it unless their fans force them to; the SFA won’t change ever. All that can be done is to walk away – each of us individually cancel all connection with our clubs and leave. They will all then fold or be forced into effecting dramatic change before they fold – and create a fair and just and open system of governance. While the fans turn up, watch on TV , subscribe to SKY and buy papers this systematic fraud will continue.
Walking away is all that can be done.
As you do so write to your club explaining your decision. If enough individuals do this then the clubs , despite themselves, will have to force change upon the SFA. There is no point in even communicating directly with the SFA its sole purpose is the continuation of the Rangers, its sole raison d’etre over many years has been the illegal protection of Rangers, hence the issuing of UEFA licences in two successive years when the SFA knew they did not qualify, the entire refereeing structure where appointmeny and evaluation are in the hands of dishonest place men to ensure their success.
The clubs can enforce change – but only if forced to do so by the fans. there should not be a single day boycott but an indefinite non participation by fans.
Any fan who continues to pay money to support their team, or buys a daily newspaper, or subscribes to either SKY or ESPN is directly supporting The Rangers – and no amount of excusing or justifying can change that.
A person by person, fan by fan abandonment of the game is what is required here.
————————
Yet another disappointing post, which only proves the bitter and hypocritical nature of many posts on TSFM.
Abandon the game?…..please do!
So the owners of this block of shares are Hargreave Hale who manage the vast majority for Malborough Fund Managers Ltd who no doubt manage the shares on behalf of a range of their clients, or perhaps in this case just one client. The remainder of the block fo shares are being managed for a variety of smaller.
Nothing wrong in that but I am sure the SFA can’t be sure who ‘owns the club’ and if they pass the sniff test. All they can do is vouch for Hargreave Hale being a reputable firm sanctioned by the FSA.
(Of course the name of Malborourgh has a has a connection with Rangers but I am sure that is just coincidence.)
Do the SFA know who all the shareholders are at Celtic?
Are all the shares owned by undividuals, no compabies or Investment firms?
Have the SFA done a fit and proper test on all these shareholders?
A person by person, fan by fan abandonment of the game is what is required here.
——————————————————————————————————————
I thought that is was supporters threatened if Rangers were allowed to stay in the SPL?
Looks like they are doing that anyway judging by the attendances at some clubs this season.
Grant King says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 11:14
Why mention Celtic in particular?
The same could be said for many football clubs which is why I said there is nothing wrong is multiple share holdings.
However the fact remains that, especially in relation to T’Rangers mutli share ownership, the footballing authorities cannot apply the sniff test.
For other clubs there tends to be a majority shareholder they can identify, if they need to, and can ask questions with regard to the intentions of the club and the way in which it is run.
Any answers for the company will come through a CEO or Chairman but it will often be the case what is going on is at the will of the majority shareholder.
With the mishmash of shares owners, some who may have no interest whatsoever in T’Rangers in particular or the Scottish game in general, who knows what is in store for the future.
It may all work just fine and dandy, and if so good luck to them, but no one should be surprised if it all goes pear shaped and because of the spiv element we may not find out about its demise until it is too late.
I have thought about this a lot (which equates to approx. 5 minutes or so…) and I don’t like these calls for mass boycotts, I basically don’t like people telling me how I should think, which is why I have never had any time for unions even though I am a socialist. But I digress…
I prefer the facts laid out and then I make my choices, much like I did in the summer. I normally start the season by laying out a couple of hundred Euros to purchase the new strips for the kids and other merchandise from the club, this year I waited until my club took the decision (along with others) to tell New Rangers that playing by the rules means no direct entry into The SPL, then I invested as I would normally do. If I feel at the end of next season that rules have not been applied once more, I will take the same stance, informing the club that I cannot contribute until I am satisfied they have acted in the best interests of all fans (“all” as I know they cannot make decisions based only on my views).
I don’t need someone to tell me not to buy the Daily Record or have SKY TV, I make that decision on my own.
What I do appreciate is when someone dissects a statement, interview or opinion piece that assists me in making the choice to avoid a specific reporter, topic or media outlet. I appreciate that because I do not currently have that skill, I am learning but even if I studied it in great length, I still would not be able to match some of the talent on here.
So here is how I would normally offer my opinion:
“I personally will not directly support the SFA until I believe it represents my club fairly”
“I will not attend that game as the club did not respond to my concerns in the manner I expected”
Here is what I don’t like to hear:
“Burn the witch!”
Like todays weather, a depression seems to be passing over the tsfm bringing very unsettled conditions.
However, like the actual weather, this will soon pass.
At this time it is far better to forget about matters Sevco and turn one’s attention to the festive season and especially to Christmas itself.
Come Saturday, I for one will be switching Sevco well and truly off.
After all, why spoil Christmas by smearing govanshit © all over it.
Ps. A sunny spell is forecast for the new year – in the form of LNS.
If he doesn’t shine then I will concede there will be probably be a deep depression across the
football landscape.
In addition, we may well see a lengthy eclipse of hope.
Caveat : Scotland’s weather, AWAK, is notoriously unpredictable.
Pps. Merry Christmas everyone and a Happy New Year!
rapscallion;10;51,can’t for the life of me under stand why anyone would TD your kind efforts to provide us with the CL draw
Celtic were mentioned because I am awate they are also on the AIM stock exchange, I have no knowledge of how other clubs distribute shares if they do in deed.
My point was that is is impossible to classify every shareholder as fit and proper, and also where shares are held by companies it is even harder.
There has been significant focus on the Rangers shareholders and their dealings, the same cannot be said about other clubs
lochone says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 04:27
9 2 Rate This
bogsdollox says:
Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 15:58
10 4 Rate This
ordinaryfan says:
Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 12:12
I bet there are huge numbers of electrical goods companies, readying themselves for a bidding war to purchase Comet’s goodwill?
What!, You can’t purchase the “goodwill” unless they buy the business or company entity of Comet as a whole?
Sorry, my mistake, stand down Curry’s.
======================================================================
I’m sure someone posted up how the sale proceeds were allocated in the sale and purchase agreement. From memory I think Green & Co paid £1 for the goodwill.
£1 for goodwill ! He wuz robbed.
……..
He certainly was conned, because whoever told Chuckles he bought goodwill for his £1 has told him a big fat lie. Duff & Bluff are cheeky wee rascals, being administration and liquidation experts, they know there is no legal mechanism for purchasing goodwill this way.
When Jock Stein talked about football being nothing without the fan, he was of course talking about the professional game.
People will always want to kick a ball, and to assemble in teams to play competitively against each other. There will always be the games in the park, the Sunday Leagues, the amateur game. This is the real football, played, managed and supported out of love of the game. Look at the growth of women’s football for example. Football will survive watched by the proverbial three men and a dog. The professional game can’t.
We buy fair trade coffee and other goods whose production is guaranteed not to exploit. If the product is bent, corrupt, exploitative or offensive, we don’t buy it. Scottish professional football is all of those things. I agree with others on here. I won’t buy the product until it’s guaranteed fair trade.
Iceman has been posting the same nonsense for months now. Abandon the game? That would delight the “Rangers” fans more than anything and would bring the clubs to their knees. I have walked away from Hamilton Accies for various reasons, not just their vote last summer, but I still go to games as a neutral and have been to around fifteen so far this season. I’ll not be turning my back on the game, despite my anger and frustration with the authorities.
Grant King says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 11:19
2 19 Rate This
A person by person, fan by fan abandonment of the game is what is required here.
——————————————————————————————————————
I thought that is was supporters threatened if Rangers were allowed to stay in the SPL?
Looks like they are doing that anyway judging by the attendances at some clubs this season.
……….
If only Sevco were allowed to corrupt the League further and join at the top, Scottish Football would be booming like last season. Oh wait, Scottish Football was on its knees last season and has been on its knees for 2 decades because of bias, corruption and appeasement of RFCRIP.
Grant King says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 12:01
Celtic were mentioned because I am awate they are also on the AIM stock exchange, I have no knowledge of how other clubs distribute shares if they do in deed.
My point was that is is impossible to classify every shareholder as fit and proper, and also where shares are held by companies it is even harder.
There has been significant focus on the Rangers shareholders and their dealings, the same cannot be said about other clubs
========================================================================
Grant, your fundamental point about scrutiny of all clubs’ ownership being of interest, and difficult, is fine. However, of course there’s been a focus on Rangers – the club went bust owing over £100m, the assets were bought from the administrators for a pittance and creditors lost out hugely. Charles Green now says its the same club and it looks like his group stand to gain £millions – what’s not to question?
manandboy says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 11:47
At this time it is far better to forget about matters Sevco and turn one’s attention to the festive season and especially to Christmas itself.
——
OT. What really gets on my tit at his time of year is all the “remember the true meaning of Christmas!” guff. Well, technically, it’s true that the real meaning of the word “Christmas” is a celebration of the birth of Christ (which was most likely not at this time of year) – but let’s remember the true meaning of the winter festival.
Call it Yule, call it Saturnalia, or simply associate it with the solstice. Wonder about the pagan symbolism attached to the Xtian festival – evergreen trees, yule logs, angels, shepherds – wonder why Xtians complain about the term “Xmas” when the X actually refers to Jesus’ chi-ro symbol
The real meaning of Christmas is an excuse for a gigantic midwinter naked piss-up. Let’s not forget that.
Io, Saturnalia!
(On a slightly fitba-related note … 29 years ago today, Aberdeen FC became the undisputed Champions of All European Fitba. And I was there to see it happen. 🙂 )
The most sickening thing about this attendance nonsense is not that it has been an issue for decades before RFC kicked the bucket. It is not even that the MSM and Sevco supporters conveniently ignore the FACT that had Sevco been allowed in at the top there would practically be attendances of about 5 or 8 people as the rest certainly did do walking away. No, what really infuriates me, is that supporters in Scotland are not being PRAISED and LAUDED for turning up at all! After what has been exposed and with what is STILL going on, supporters still turn up to games in numbers. Our sport has been corrupted, collusion is rife, the Football MSM spend every second appeasing one Club and talking down the rest of league, the governing authorities are as crooked as a question mark. Yet supporters are mocked for not flocking to watch games in a corrupt league in their tens of thousands. Infuriating isn’t the word when I hear that sh*te.
Who is Phil Cartmell from ?
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11435932
An interesting fact about the aforesaid Super Cup Final in 1983 is that the Aberdeen side consisted entirely of Scottish players and management, and the Hamburg team entirely of Germans (til Allan Hansen came on as a sub, anyway, and they did have an Austrian manager).
In the words of the mighty Bucks Fizz, “now those days are gone” …
Right Charlie, the Double Ds, in their final report to creditors, listed exactly what you had bought for your £5.5 million
According to that report, you bought some player registrations, some property, plant and machinery and other odds and sods including “goodwill”
What you did not buy, was a company, or a club, or history or trophies and titles
So somebody is telling fibs, or maybe you and the Double Ds are both telling fibs
If you bought all that you claim, it shouldn’t be to difficult to prove, should it ?
I suspect though that just like everything else in this mess, the truth is what you want it to be when you waken up in the morning, and think how can I spin it today to keep Sevcovians from my door
Grant King says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 12:01
I guess that a lot of interest is focused on this particular AIM listing for the simple reasons that no other clubs have gone into liquidation recently owing 276 individual creditors tens of millions of pounds, no governing body in world football, except the SFA, SPL or SFL has rewritten, ignored then ended up throwing out its various rulebooks; the said “currently liquidating” club has neither accepted its lot, issued an apology to the rest of Scottish football for the unholy mess it and its buddies at the SFA have created, nor taken any steps to reconcile its legacy of bullying-behaviour with its rather lowly position in the greater scheme of all-things-football in Scotland. In other words: move along, nothing to see here… is becoming a little bit boring.
ordinaryfan says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 12:02
He certainly was conned, because whoever told Chuckles he bought goodwill for his £1 has told him a big fat lie. Duff & Bluff are cheeky wee rascals, being administration and liquidation experts, they know there is no legal mechanism for purchasing goodwill this way.
————————————————————————————————————————-
Ordinaryfan – This is simply not true. You have now posted this a few times based on your interpretation of the rules regarding Goodwill. The fact is that parts of a company can be purchased giving way to either positive or negative goodwill. So, i can purchase a company, tell the previous owners that i don’t want to take on the liabilities (just the assets) and there is still a goodwill calculation to be done.
guys….talk of boycotting your own clubs
I kinda kicked this off yesterday in an exchange with Auldheid
It was not simply my intention to launch a boycott against our own clubs – that is the last step
before that, we need to be clear what we want from the SFA
we need to then put it to our clubs to push for answers/response from the SFA and a confirmation (or otherwise) from the individual clubs that they support the SFA’s management of the game
If neither the clubs and/or the SFA acknowledge our requests – or provide unsatisfactory answers – then the next stage is up to individuals.
If you want to continue to support your club and therefore the SFA/SCottish game fine.
If you want to voice your displeasure, then your protest will be more effective if co-ordinated with others – from your own team and across the spectrum of football fans
No one wants to hurt their own team, but at the same time, i don’t think anyone wants to see the game continue down this road of poor leadership/governance and intimidation
the fans want answers, the fans are being ignored…..time to push for answers from our own clubs and do it now so that they have time to respond – and fans then have time to make up their mind about any further actions they feel is appropriate
the 1st thing is…..WHAT DO WE WANT FROM THE SFA AND FROM OUR CLUBS
No-one is demanding that everybody supports a boycott, no-one is being physically threatened if they dont support a boycott, i suspect that deep down most people are disappointed that such an extreme sanction is the only way that we will be offered the chance to state our opinions. The governing bodies seem desperate to allow sevco to assume rangers identity, in the top division as soon as possible, titles intact and lets all move on now and continue with the failed structure of a propped up dominant rangers, marketable with Celtic and the rest of the diddies as fodder. This is only acceptable to rfc/sevco fans, yet the voices of all other fans are not given a platform. The recent boycott debate is just exploring ways in which we can have our say ( not our way ), reasonable correspondance has proved fruitless so more extreme measures are being explored. No one is forced to agree or partcipate but ive yet to see another idea which gives us an opportunity for dialogue. Support it or dont support it, thats the individual choice, any other suggestions to increase fan inclusion will be taken on board and discussed so feel free to offer alternatives.
Everyone has the absolute right to make their own choices.
I have not attended a game this session and given up my subscription to SKY. That is my choice. My team has had a remarkably successful European campaign which I have refused to support and will continue so to do.
This does come at a degree of emotional cost and disagreement with many in my family. Has it made a difference? Probably not. It may well be self seeking or self serving – my brothers and my dad – I imagine, think so – but for me personally I can’t support the game in any way – hence no tops and merchandising for my kids – no buying any newspapers.
Season ticket sales at Celtic Park are down substantially – hidden by the European success. . I suspect that if this situation with The Rangers continues as it does and we see the LNS enquiry subverted – then regardless of how successful Neil and the team continue to be, we can see another significant drop off next season.
Some think Celtic have played a blinder on all of this – they have actually taken a craven path of least resistance at all times and by not stating anything of consequence, they have, by omission, been complicit in all of this. They are indeed only one club, but I suspect that had they been more forceful over this then others would have followed and we would not be in the moral miasma we are in today. There were clear unambiguous rules to deal with clubs which failed – these were deliberately not followed causing catastrophic – I suspect fatal – damage to the game.
I suspect the true reason for non publication of the 5 way agreement is that it will reveal that the SFA/SFL and SPL acted beyond their powers and the whole licence trandsfer was actually ultra vires and thus illegitimate. CG knows this – and he knows that if it is ever revealed then together with The Rangers down go the three governing bodies themselves. He has cleverly tied them all in his own web.
rab says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 01:02
‘How can there be trust in a governing body that is bloated with supporters and shareholders of a club that wields more power than the governing body itself.’
_______________________________________________
Encapsules the situation perfectly.
Just as it required fan power to make sure Rangers ended up in division 3 where they belong, the same power must be brought to bear to ensure no one club can be treated favourably at the expense of others.
Madboy,
I have no time for boycotts either, I hate the word, but there is no other alternative. The emails have been sent, the letters have been posted, the the internationals have been half-heartedly boycotted,all to no avail. Tell me what options are left. If we prevaricate much longer the haemorrhaging of the fans from the game will commence, and, IMO, will be impossible to staunch.
These are desperate times for our beloved game they call for desperate measures.
I personally will not be telling any one what action they have to take, that will be their own decision.
On the issue of trade unions all I will say is ‘eaten bread is soon forgotten’.
I would like to thank all contributions to this topi,c particularly the idea of systematically boycotting main sponsors products. This has huge potential in calling the SFA to account.
rab says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 01:17
Maybe McCoist is going to gazump the unnamed, unknown galaxy bid of £29 million for Gary Hooper.
He’d run amok in div2.
____________________
And maybe even div 3 next season.
Why Boycott SuperScoreBoard ?? Boycott Radio Clyde !!
Bunion says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:31
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:15
“Not sure where you get the official accepting he submitted false claims from – link?”
From the fact that Shiels was cleared on three issues relating specifically relating to claims made by Dallas. Cleared by the SFA disciplinary panel.
———————————-
I think that we were misled on that bunion. It seems the SFA did find him guilty but decided that particular offence did not merit further punishment. Part of the problem is the SFA don’t seem to have published these findings in the usual way. The suggestion he as completely exonerated was a very misleding one if the SFA are to be believed.
===========================
iamacant says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 08:24
http://www.aberdeen-mad.co.uk/news/tmnw/milne_rules_out_sevco_invite_to_new_spl_773862/index.shtml
Stewartie says NO fast track to anyone
—————————————————-
This was also confirmed by the Afc board at one of their roadshow events a few weeks ago.
It also explains why Celtic and Aberdeen were the 2 clubs that blocked the proposed change in voting structure a few weeks ago. I believe they are determined to keep and use the “2 vote veto” so they can block any stupidity from the other SPL clubs if needed.
Why don’t we delay and hold TSFM xmas party in the away end at tannadice. A wee drink among friends, fitba to watch, boost for charity, support D Utd and a massive GIRUY to CG and the SFA.
Everyones a winner.
Taysider and Arabest could put us up.
I’ll get the first round in.
iceman63 says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 13:12
….
I suspect the true reason for non publication of the 5 way agreement is that it will reveal that the SFA/SFL and SPL acted beyond their powers and the whole licence trandsfer was actually ultra vires and thus illegitimate. CG knows this – and he knows that if it is ever revealed then together with The Rangers down go the three governing bodies themselves. He has cleverly tied them all in his own web.
————————————————
I fear you are correct. And all the more reason that we must ensure it does come out and all the parties involved pay the consequences so we can move on with a clean slate.
Put Football people in charge of Football (and referees)
Allow each member of each Division a position on ALL panels relating to their Division
(including Refs)
ALL with a single vote
e.g. The Kenny Shiels saga
Killie are in the dock … so ineligible to vote
the “11” other teams vote ……… Aye OR Naw
Job done … end of story … next !!
And in this day and age there are no reasons for all to commute to Hampden
Thus all situations could be dealt with within a week
Simples
We Don’t Need SPL/SFL/SFA panels … deal with it yersels guys !!!
I had a beer last week with a guy from Sheffield
Who didn’t really have much to say about CG
But he could not believe we put REGAN in charge of the SFA
Says he totally destroyed Yorkshire Cricket
iceman63 says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 10:11
There is nothing to be done except walk away.
==========================================================================
He’s right you know. Time to put our worldly belongings into a spotted cloth attach it to a stick, put it over our shoulder and walk forlornly away from the ground never to return. Or we could continue to keep supporting our clubs and put pressure on them to press for change.
Grant King says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 11:14
So the owners of this block of shares are Hargreave Hale who manage the vast majority for Malborough Fund Managers Ltd who no doubt manage the shares on behalf of a range of their clients, or perhaps in this case just one client. The remainder of the block fo shares are being managed for a variety of smaller.
Nothing wrong in that but I am sure the SFA can’t be sure who ‘owns the club’ and if they pass the sniff test. All they can do is vouch for Hargreave Hale being a reputable firm sanctioned by the FSA.
(Of course the name of Malborourgh has a has a connection with Rangers but I am sure that is just coincidence.)
Do the SFA know who all the shareholders are at Celtic?
Are all the shares owned by undividuals, no compabies or Investment firms?
Have the SFA done a fit and proper test on all these shareholders?
=======================================================================
I’m very surprised by your questions. I thought a guy like you would know the answer already. But as you don’t here it is – it is irrelevant who the shareholders of the company are because the company and club are not the same thing. It is only important who runs the football club.HTH
I am sure that someone connected with Dundee Utd. will be trying to work out how best to deal with the boycott problem posed by Sevco and the unwillingness of the SFA to bring charges of Disrepute against TRFC.
Bearing in mind that TRFC have already been censured by the SFA this season for bringing the game into disrepute and another such charge would probably put their ‘conditional licence’ at risk to say the least and maybe this is a pointer as to why the corrupt SFA will not act at this time.
Dundee Utd fans will want to see their team take to the field in the Scottish Cup and this should not be denied them by a home fan boycott. My solution to the problem of playing in front of a huge home support whilst ensuring that TRFC costs are as high as possible would be to bring in extra security. Lots and lots of extra security.After all as Mr Green stated no fans safety should be put at risk.As the cost of security is taken from the overall profit before share out is established then in effect TRFC are paying towards the added security thus lowering their potential purse. I dont buy into the charity thing. The previous club had a bit of a chequered history when it came to paying cash due to charities and the newclub, judging by it’s performance to date, may well have inherited this trait.
This should also be accompanied by any cheap ticket/programme offer/deal from the club.
Added bonus would be the away fans area full of those nice luminous Green High Vis jackets. How colourful.
or just state that you will sell tickets direct to any sevco fans wanting to attend.
see how sfa react to that.
vforvernacular says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 13:32
Bunion says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:31
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 02:15
“Not sure where you get the official accepting he submitted false claims from – link?”
From the fact that Shiels was cleared on three issues relating specifically relating to claims made by Dallas. Cleared by the SFA disciplinary panel.
———————————-
I think that we were misled on that bunion. It seems the SFA did find him guilty but decided that particular offence did not merit further punishment. Part of the problem is the SFA don’t seem to have published these findings in the usual way. The suggestion he as completely exonerated was a very misleding one if the SFA are to be believed.
===================================================================
Like I said “Facts are important”. Now youse go back and remove the TD’s I got for being right and no more groupthink please.
…”Let’s not beat about the bush here: this flotation will be a disappointment to Green and Rangers. It was, in effect, a snub from the City.”
http://www.sportsdirectnews.com/tony-yorke/10561-tis-the-season-for-rangers-folly.php#.UNMggYmLLL5
iceman63 says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 13:12
….
I suspect the true reason for non publication of the 5 way agreement is that it will reveal that the SFA/SFL and SPL acted beyond their powers and the whole licence trandsfer was actually ultra vires and thus illegitimate. CG knows this – and he knows that if it is ever revealed then together with The Rangers down go the three governing bodies themselves. He has cleverly tied them all in his own web.
=======
I have posted several times on the 5 way agreement (just to be precise, an agreement for the transfer of RFC’s membership of the SFA, not a licence). I believe you are spot on, Iceman. The agreement was a Faustian pact, which has completely neutered the authorities in any dealings with Green. He knows full well that he has them over a barrel, and he behaves accordingly.
What mystifies me is the role of the clubs in that agreement. Can it really be the case that none of the clubs know the precise terms of the agreement? If they don’t know, why don’t they know? What kind of executives keep secrets from the members that they answer to?
What surprises me is that the parties to the agreement have managed to keep it secret for so long. I can only surmise that the contents would fatally compromise four of the signatories, those being the SFA, the SPL ,the SFL and Duff&Phelps (for oldco). The fifth signatory, Charles Green, is keeping his powder dry, but I’m sure using the threat of publication to extract whatever concessions he requires from the other four.
And finally the $64,000 dollar question- why would the authorities enter into such an agreement at all? Green was,on the face of it, begging for SFA membership without which Sevco were finished as a football enterprise. Yet Green dictated the terms, played hardball all the way, got exactly what he wanted, and conceded next to nothing. Why did the authorities negotiate at all? Why not just tell Green what the terms were, take it or leave it?
Answer that question, and everything else will fall into place- I am totally convinced of that. Reveal the final contents of the five way agreement, and the people at the top of Scottish football are dead meat- of that I am certain.
We need to put pressure on the clubs to extract the detail from the leagues and/or the SFA, and publish them. Wasn’t it Regan who promised us a new era of total transparency? Get on to your own club, we are all entitled to know the truth about this seedy carve-up..
Senior says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 13:20
I have no time for boycotts either, I hate the word, but there is no other alternative.
——
I think there is. I have no intention of boycotting anything at this time.
What I will do, however, is keep a very close eye on how the situation unfolds over the next 1, 2 or 3 years. I hold out no hope of the history which Mr Green claims to have bought being separated from TRFC (and there is precedent around Europe, so it’s a moot point anyway). The circumstances of this purchase should be publicised – I assume Mr Green has paperwork to support his ludicrous claim. Let’s see it, Mr Green – you can produce it when you front up with the Title Deeds.
Anyway – the authorities have already been given notice that any underhand dealings will be at the very least the subject of suspicion, if not exposed.
They are effectively on a Final Warning already.
Some explanation from PMG re the red tops support for The Govan Club.
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/on-the-record-2/?
pau1mart1n says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 14:28
1 0 Rate This
or just state that you will sell tickets direct to any sevco fans wanting to attend.
see how sfa react to that.
=============================
i love this idea
DUFC just give them an allocation, advertise the tickets for sale and simply let berz buy them
let the boycott bears set up their picket line – let the keyboard terrorists on the forums throw out their threats – let the in fighting begin – shame the MSM won’t report it though
“New Ibrox spin doctor James Traynor faces his first big battle with The Sun showing signs of breaking ranks with the gospel according to Charles.”
http://videocelts.com/2012/12/blogs/traynors-ibrox-fire-fighting-begins?
neepheid says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 14:43
Reveal the final contents of the five way agreement, and the people at the top of Scottish football are dead meat- of that I am certain.
—————————————–
More than that, surely the news media in any other country than that in Scotland would be bursting a gut to find out what it was and publish it. It would be a massive scoop.
The 5 way agreement is on the SPL website since 21st July The only thing about it is CG is refusing to acknowledge he agreed to it.
ianagain says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 15:15
0 0 Rate This
The 5 way agreement is on the SPL website since 21st July The only thing about it is CG is refusing to acknowledge he agreed to it.
—————————–
no it’s not
there is a statement about it…..but it’s contents are not there for the world to see – what are they hiding?
and have Rapid been paid yet?
OK see wht you mean. I would think rapid will get their money (the discounted amount) now that Chuckles filled his boots.
Actually Ill email tem and let them know he can now afford 100% of what he owes them.
whisperer18 says:
Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 13:41
On referees this is how business would address the issue.
The Referee Service
This would be split with the SFA doing the recruitment, training and match appointments (having taken the nature of the game to be officiated into account). However the monitoring and evaluation would be the province of the customer, using referees or ex refs from anywhere to mark to a standard set by the customer. This spilt of responsibilities would prevent any one person being in a position to exert his own influence on referees as a result of being part of the appointment and evaluation process.
It would safeguard the SFA from the kind of suspicion that led to the referees’ strike and lead to a higher standard of referee because the customer would be setting the standard not the supplier (as happens everywhere in business but football)
If it did not, it would free the SPL/SL to hire their own referees from wherever they could get them. A bit of competition never did anybody any harm and that includes our referees who, if they reached higher standards, would be in more demand outside Scotland.
Taken from
http://celticunderground.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=693:sfa-reform-one-down-three-to-go&catid=45:season-2010-2011&Itemid=80
In business it would be a no brainer but in the football there is little evidence of brainpower and lots of self protection.
nevilleprat 11:54
Nor can I so I shall explain.
I posted the Champions League last 16 draw because it is the greatest club competition in the world & a Scottish club is in it. This is a tremendous achievement given Scotland’s demographic & recent footballing history. As this is a Scottish Football Forum, the matter should be of interest to all supporters within Scottish Football.
To avoid doubt, I am not a Celtic supporter. My passion lies elsewhere in the SPL.
A lot of comments on boycott or not to boycott
My own view, is that a boycott on its own would be fairly meaningless, and unfortunately, ineffective
Unless we can get this into the media, at a consistently noticeable level, we will forever be the voice crying in the wilderness
At the moment the MSM hold all of the publicity cards, and we need to find a way of competing with them
That, in my eyes, is the real challenge