A Guest blog by @heavidor:
Given The Takeover Panel’s success in procuring a Court of Session order to compel Dave King to make an offer for all Rangers International Football Club Plc shares not owned by the Concert Party it would be impossible for King to remain a director unless he complies with that Order.
The co-option of Barry Scott to the board and the elevation of Alistair Johnston as a person with significant control could be construed as repositioning, however it will be whether King makes an offer of 20 pence per share to all the shareholders not included in the Concert Party or not that will determine what happens next and we shall know later this month.
(King resigning) is the correct thing to do and should have already occurred. Instead, Rangers financial reputation has been dragged through the mud by association.
Irrespective of whether King complies with the Court Order or not this story is far from over, and it will continue to hamper Rangers’ prospects until it is conclusively resolved. A King resignation as a director of RIFC would reduce the prospect of contaminating the club, its directors and advisors from the full effect of cold shouldering should he decline to make an offer.
That would mean that King, as distinct from RIFC, had financial pariah status and not the club. That is the correct thing to do and should have already occurred but, instead, Rangers’ financial reputation has been dragged through the mud by association with King.
What should not be underestimated is the reality of cold-shouldering, not for just the offending party, but for those involved in business with the offending party. The consequences are dire for the individual or organisation who falls foul of the rules, making it impossible to carry out normal business activities within the sphere of influence of The Panel, and the same consequences face those who shelter the cold shouldered.
It should be appreciated that there are members of the RIFC that are members of regulated financial professions who would be further prejudiced through association with a cold shouldered non-resident King.
Perhaps unfortunately for a large slug of the mainstream media and football authorities, financial pariah status pursuant to cold shouldering in the UK coming on top of criminal convictions in SA would be impossible to spin in any positive way or to maintain continued fit and proper status. I mean, we could have the SFA cold shouldered, couldn’t we? All said though, the cognitively dissonant will carry on regardless.
If King does the right thing by resigning from the board, it is still important to appreciate that the ‘4 Bear’ Concert Party as determined by The Panel will continue to exist irrespective of how Kings deals with the instruction to make an offer for the shares. This is the elephant in the room that remains.
The Concert Party via their shares and loans will retain the same level of control they currently have, and therefore remain compelled to abide by The Panel’s rules.
King’s resignation would not remove that impediment.
It doesn’t end there. By challenging the authority and insulting the intelligence of The Panel and the Court, King has ensured all large share transactions in RIFC will be scrutinised and questioned and could additionally determine, for example, that the Concert Party is increased to include Club 1872 and Barry Scott on the basis they are working in concert with King and/or other concert party members.
There are some who think that The Panel has been slow to respond and impose sanctions and that they are all bark and no bite. It would be wrong to think so. The reality is that King has moved the whole dispute into uncharted territory. There has been no precedent for such continued brazen and naïve flouting of Panel rules. Accordingly, The Panel has chosen to move at its own pace, dotting the ‘i’s and crossing the ‘t’s and I suggest they’re being methodical rather than indecisive in dealing with the estimable Mr King.
The true value of RIFC shares was a key point in the recent court case with all kinds of claims being made. Some think that the lack of significant arm’s-length trades makes it impossible to arrive at a correct price, and others say that the price paid to Mike Ashley in recent trades is the benchmark. In my opinion, neither is correct. Current and prospective shareholders have the financial figures in the accounts to work with, and can determine the real worth from there. On that basis it is clear to me the shares are not worth anything like the last alleged trading price on Jenkins. Rather it seems that the shares only have nominal value given the business has never declared a profit, continues to lose money and is reliant upon ongoing shareholder loans to stay in business.
Any subsequent share issue – even with King gone – could muddy the waters further; The Concert Party members may expose themselves to another Panel instruction to make another offer should any of its members acquire more shares without coming to an arrangement with The Panel beforehand.
To illustrate such an arrangement, Dermot Desmond got Panel permission to increase his shareholding above 29.9% the last time Celtic had a share issue. This is preferable to trying to hoodwink the financial authorities with tall tales.
It should be clear to all followers of RIFC’s financial travails that the status quo is unsustainable. So, the question is ‘what’s next’? The chairman’s statement that accompanied the annual accounts once more talked about loan to equity conversion without reference to the impact of the existence of a Concert Party amongst the RIFC Board of directors and providers of loans. This is remarkable any such conversion cannot take place without the permission of The Panel and/or without dragging the other directors and lenders in the quagmire with another possible offer for the shares not owned by the Concert Party.
.. the shares only have nominal value given the business has never declared a profit, continues to lose money and is reliant upon ongoing shareholder loans to stay in business
So, what should happen and what is required for RIFC to rid itself of this terrible yoke? The answers are pretty obvious; King should make an offer of 20 pence per share to all those shareholders not included in the Concert Party. He has said the shares are worth more than that and that no one would accept. If he’s correct he has nothing to worry about and he would create a clear path forward for Rangers. He would also resolve the dispute with The Panel, creating the conditions for a debt to equity conversion.
So, why might that not happen? Because if the shares are worth 27 pence as the directors have suggested that means the loan to equity conversion would have to be at the same price and, of course, if the shares not worth anything like that there would be a rush to accept 27 pence and the ball would be on the slates, so to speak.
It appears to me the board is stuck between a rock and a hard place, that King will resign, and that there will be no offer.
If this happens the position would be precarious. The current board doesn’t have the credibility, money or experience to take Rangers forward. Being a true blue should not be the defining characteristic of what’s required to make Rangers competitive but it appears to be the preferred qualification of most of their customers.
I believe Rangers need a need owner with a controlling shareholding and deep pockets to sort out this mess, and I have reason to believe this view is shared by some of those with influence.
That is not to say that a solution is imminent, but the reality check is at least a start.
I don’t think I have ever heard any footballer respond so fluently, without hesitation, to the string of questions put to him by an interviewer. Even the more educated , or the natural ‘motor-mouths’ of the football-player community ,couldn’t give such a fluent interview as Ian Black is doing.
Were the questions carefully scripted and rehearsed, and the performance for the tape directed by Kenny Mac, then carefully edited?
What is the point of such an ‘interview’ ? Black is back at Ibrox, therefore must be rehabilitated?
JOHN CLARKJANUARY 16, 2018 at 18:53
Sadly, in spite of Kenny Mac and the other two members of the Sportsound Rangers Supporters Club, the Carillion of Scottish Football is still in Liquidation.although to listen to Kenny Mac, you would think he actually believes that TRFC Ltd is Rangers 2012 fc!Used to be the BBC required a certain level of intelligence in its front-of-house staff. Spoiling my enjoyment of my Costco chicken, listening to the crap.
——————————————–
When I found out Ian McCall and Alex Rae were the pundits I decided there was no way I could stomach it. The BBC are using the licence fee everyone pays to have a nightly Rangers magazine show.
Alex Rae £569,000 .EBT. Midfielder arrived at Ibrox in 2004 and spent two years there. Played 34 games.
Someone said the other day that we have been hearing that the club will run out of money for the last few years but they keep plodding along(sorry if i can’t remember that someone’s name).
Found this article.
Rangers are at the centre of a financial cover up investigation over claims the club will be broke in the next two weeks.
———
If i remember correct(but you know what my memory is like) someone put up the cash to keep them going otherwise it was curtains.I think phil may have mentioned something along these lines in a blog not long ago….. happy to be corrected
Oops sorry.. this article
JOHN CLARKJANUARY 15, 2018 at 14:47
I’ve been trying to find what ‘transactions’ are covered by the Takeover Panel Code. They are defined in…
——————————————————-
John, a far more recent and interesting case was Bob Morton who was cold shouldered just over a year ago – see http://www.fieldfisher.com/publications/2017/02/takeover-panel-gives-the-cold-shoulder#sthash.rACBmIef.dpbs and http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/2017-1.pdf
This guy was at one time chairman of RSM Tenon plc, the UK’s 7th largest accounting firm which scandalously went bust owing the banks £56M in 2013 but he was cold-shouldered for something else, an offence not unlike our dear friend, Mr King.
The general expectation is that all FCA regulated entities should be checking both the ToP website and their regulatory bodies’ websites on a daily basis – larger firms will have a person dedicated to just that, the likes of Campbell Dallas, sorry ‘Baldwins’, just have to rely on the internet bampots keeping them informed !
ALLYJAMBOJANUARY 15, 2018 at 18:18
22
1 Rate This
Saw this on twitter but have no idea where what is said emanates from, though it does look like Steve Clarke is quoted. Now, it’s not so much what this tweet tells us of what the TRFC offer might have actually have been, that piqued my interest, but the nonsensical criticisms of Killie’s stance the Ibrox faithful followed up with, including suggesting Kilmarnock have no right to deny the player a move to Ibrox as they are holding back his career! Now where have we heard that one before?
They really do think that their club should be facilitated in whatever they want to do, and not just by the game’s authorities, either!
From twitter:
‘Steve Clarke confirms @RangersFC bid for Jordan Jones “nowhere near acceptable. I would be a little bit sad if I was the player, it was so low. Easy to turn down.”’
—————-
Saw this in an article.
JOHN CLARKJANUARY 16, 2018 at 19:07
I listened to this interview as well John, and generally, I try not to get too excited/upset about Kenny McIntyre, but tonight’s episode made my blood boil.
The condescension in McIntyre’s voice, when he asked Ian Black, about signing for “Sevco” after they were “demoted” was real and palpable. He further re-iterated the demotion word, with an outright sneer, which was audibly clear to any listener.
Now truthfully, I couldn’t care less, but when it’s being pumped out nightly on the state broadcaster, frankly it’s a completely scandalous, and I choose this word carefully
A service, which is funded by the licence payer, should be accurate, or at the very least, not inaccurate, certainly not wilfully and deliberately inaccurate, which it & he is, on a nightly basis….
Cluster OneJanuary 16, 2018 at 21:12
And now, an Ex RFC player is entering the fray from the blue corner. Imagine that, the manager of Killie hating Ayr United, Ian McCall, is making disparaging remarks about a Kilmarnock player, in yet another TRFC puff piece. Can anyone think of a reason (well, other than the obvious one) why BBC Scotland might be asking McCall’s opinion on the latest failed TRFC bid?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42707252
If this was a genuine BBC interview, and not something passed to them from Level5, I can only think the Beeb was ‘advised’ to give McCall a ring for an ‘exclusive’! Unless, of course, there’s a game on at Ayr tonight, and the BBC are covering it! But, according to the BBC Sport website, there’s not, and there’s no other mention of either McCall or Ayr United on their site.
Rent-a-Gob journalism at it’s best.
ALLYJAMBOJANUARY 16, 2018 at 21:39
——–
Wonder if Nicky Laws agent was banging on the board of ibrox door demanding Nicky’s wages be in line with the ibrox boards valuation of him
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42707252
To continue from above
Oops just seen
ALLYJAMBO posted same link
It’s the reason I prefer Radio Clyde 6pm – 8pm. I quite like mine host Gordon Duncan, he tries to be even handed and non controversial. And he’s quick witted.
Yes the pundits can annoy the hell out of me at times but at least there is live fans coming on throughout the show to take them to task and balance things out. Some are better than others but the potentiality is there. Plus I don’t sense James Traynor lurking in the background.
When responding to phone ins there is no room for rehearsed replies.
Can Carillion not just come back as The Carillion. Scotland would accept this as a precedent has been set.
AllyjamboJanuary 16, 2018 at 21:39
‘.If this was a genuine BBC interview, and not something passed to them ‘
_________
Aj, McCall was live on the Sportsound programme this evening with Rae.
You’ll hear MacIntyre name his guests in the first minute or two of the podcast on this link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02nrsc7/episodes/downloads
John ClarkJanuary 16, 2018 at 19:07
‘…Black is back at Ibrox, therefore must be rehabilitated?’
___________
Where did I get that idea? Black is at Tranent, is he no’?
“Ian Black in the Juniors ….. that’ll be a LOT of red cards for him!” said one twitterer/tweeter/social media communicator last week.
If everyone boycots the BBC Kenny Mac Fanzine hour they will have no-one to broadcast to apart from their selfs and the usual brain dead gullibles. I have not listened to him since he started bringing on bangers like Rae whao are lets be honest cheerleaders and drinking partners of the gullibillys.
We know what is put out is propaganda and we know were to source the real news. Just turn off the Kenny Mac Hour and find an alternative stream.
More on Sportsound. Another regular pundit is Darryl Broadfoot, ex Herald Journalist, ex SFA Communications Officer, current PR provider to the SFA, and of course Rangers supporter. The last part almost goes without saying mind you. However, any time I have listened when he is on I am convinced he is there to provide unofficial backing for the Scottish football establishment. If the SFA ever find a form of words to report on their investigation into Rangers Euro licence in 2011, Sportsound will be fully behind whatever fudged outcome they present, as they always have been. Broadfoot will be there to provide the inside track on how honest the SFA are. The key message will be, move on, no punishment can be administered, the SFA are innocent, and tough titty to all the paranoid Celtic fans who think otherwise.
JOHN CLARKJANUARY 16, 2018 at 23:49
AllyjamboJanuary 16, 2018 at 21:39‘.If this was a genuine BBC interview, and not something passed to them ‘_________Aj, McCall was live on the Sportsound programme this evening with Rae.You’ll hear MacIntyre name his guests in the first minute or two of the podcast on this linkhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02nrsc7/episodes/
______________
Cheers, John, that lets me know that the BBC didn’t have to make a phone call to speak to him, but if this pathetic piece of puffery is all he is capable of contributing, why the hell did the BBC pay him to appear on it’s program? If he did contribute anything, at all, that was in the least way newsworthy, why did they not feature that? No need to tell me, for I have no doubt that what they wrote in that online article was the sole motivation for his invite to appear.
If he did mention Ayr United, we also know that that was not what he was there for.
UTH,
You missed out “for the good of the game”
My goodness how the bears have turned on their ex darling Kris Boyd! They are calling him all sorts of names which I can’t repeat on here. Mainly pertaining to his vital statistics. And of course all their worst opinions have been confirmed by Ian McColl last night. So well done to Ian – mission accomplished – and to BBC Scotland for giving him a platform.
Of course it would be hypocritical of me not to acknowledge the ex Celtic players who have been turned on by the Celtic support for some of the things they say.
Par for the course I suppose.
oops, McCall
I have to say, I like this, it sums up the BBC, and the SMSM in general, quite perfectly.
From Twitter,
“Last night’s @BBCSportsound…
@BBCKennyMac : “Aberdeen and St Mirren looks like a cracker to me. Any that stand out, Chic?”
Young: “Rangers at Fraserburgh…”
That genuinely happened.
(They eventually remembered the Edin Derby with 1 min to spare??♂️)
Embarrassing.”
‘Stand out’ cup-ties are usually the one’s that could go either way, or the underdog has a chance of winning. Or was it just that it had been 90 seconds since Chic’s favourite club had been mentioned?
In their desperation to bring them into every conversation, they really are making TRFC look ever more ridiculous.
Firstly re the T’Rangers loan deals.
As I said the other day the reality of the situation is that the new club is no different from any other Scottish Club bar Celtic.
Yes they have decent income but they have huge costs combined with ongoing internal debt. To reach their aims and ambitions the wage bill for the squad most probably needs to be at a high level. Based on previous accounts going back to the SDM days they really only have around £10m to play with and that is where they were in the last published accounts.
In recent years they tried to go down the upcoming coach route with the aim of uncovering rough diamonds in the English Lower divisions. Other than Windass recently coming onto a game that didn’t really work out.
Next they tried the ‘continental’ route with the impression of splashing some cash on a marquee signing and that hasn’t worked out either.
Now it is untried coach supported by a Director of Football scouring the country for loan deals and, as usual, trying to unsettle the domestic opposition’s talent.
The quicker folks in love with all things emanating from Ibrox realise and admit they are just scrambling around like everyone else the quicker we could all ‘move on’.
Secondly
I have no problem with the BBC in the form of Richard Gordon, Willie Miller, Michael Stewart, Steven Thompson, Cosgrove and Cowan. Pundits like Alan Preston and Tam McManus seem to give honest opinions without any agendas. Packi Bonnar is a Celtic man thru and thru and while shows elements of green tinted specs he but comes across as being honest and fair. English I can take or leave, he has the intelligence to make a real difference but chooses the easy route far too often.
Even Chic Young, through accident or design, can stir the pot now and then, as he did the other night querying why the SFA were dragging their heels re the Scotland Managers post and questioning (Broadfoot) if they really had a objective selection process and a short list or it was only O’Neill they were chasing.
He then let himself down saying he thought McLeish or Souness should be in the running (FFS!!!)
However (and related to the end of my first point above) the constant drivel on Sportsound from folks connected with the old club being blinded by the ‘achievements’ of the past is fast becoming a joke.
I only caught a wee bit of last night’s programme but it really was poor stuff.
You would have thought, given their minimal time at Rangers compared to long wide and varied careers in football, both McCall and Rae would be able to offer a wider perspective on the game.
However all that comes across is they are fans of the club from Ibrox and close to blurting out WATP on air. They clearly have knowledge about how the game works but appear unable to face the reality that has marched up the marble staircase.
You would be as well having posters from the Bears Den or Follow Follow picking up an appearance pay cheque for all the value they bring to the shows.
bigboab1916January 17, 2018 at 00:28
I stopped listening to the phone-ins some time ago as it was obvious it was just a voice for whoever was stationed at Ibrox. I think a date should be agreed and everyone who phones into Sportsound immediately asks what is happening with the Compliance officers report . I know you get “precognosed” these days prior to on-air but that doesn’t mean you can’t change your mind about what you were going to speak about.
wottpiJanuary 17, 2018 at 11:16
Firstly re the T’Rangers loan deals.
_____________________________
Very fair assessment of BBC, WOTTPI.
I like to listen to Willie Miller, Packie Bonner whenever they commentatate – both have huge knowledge of game. Best in class for BBC pundits. And the others you mention are good. English sits on some kind of fence – you can hear it in the way he speaks; Young is a blowhard imo.
As I’m confined to home in NE Scotland, I don’t get to matches now so reliant on what radio / computer produces Sat afternoons. Can’t stand Superscoreboard, though did listen for laughs once or twice.
Remember the days when Traynor was allowed his phone-in. Used to listen on the way home fae Brechin after a match. Now I’m thinking… What the hell was going on there? He was always rudely shutting down callers and BBC let him carry on; he acknowledged liquidation, then apologised to McCoist. Now we know his company has good contract with TRFC. You get very little comment about Traynor on BBC, though on occasion “our old friend” gets mentioned by Stuart Cosgrove.
I wonder what the back story was. Cosgrove, Cowan, English must all have their own stories to tell on that period. I wonder too what they say to each other.
To all the guid Dons fans out there, I sincerely hope your clubs’ proposal (for the new ground etc) goes through. However, your main obstacle, it seems to me, is not ‘common sense’ or economics (for the area, and Scottish football, will surely benefit), but quite simply, the nimby (not in my back yard) attitude.
A thought just occurred to me. The top division includes lots of footballers. Although not all of them are Scottish and I guess a good number of the Scottish ones are either ‘Rangers-minded’ or too thick/disinterested to know/care about the new club issue, there still must be a good proportion of players who agree with this site’s viewpoint that TRFC is a new club, based on the same intelligent review of the same evidence that we see. You would imagine that the population of Scottish footballers must be split similar to the Scottish population so that a smaller, but sizeable, number of them care about the issue?
We all know that none of them will ever be invited by radio, TV or the print media to state their beliefs in the way that the pro-same club guys regularly are
I know there are some who have made jokey/disparaging twitter comments over the years, but I wondered why none of them, when interviewed on TV or radio ahead of a game against TRFC don’t take the opportunity to voice their viewpoint. It would be easy when an interviewer asks them about playing against ‘Rangers’ or – heaven forbid – how good/crazy an ‘Old Firm’ game is, for them simply to turn round and without malice say “But, of course, we’re not playing against the Rangers you’re referring to” or “They’ve done well since starting out and are now a good challenge for us” or anything of that sort. If their views are anything like ours, I couldn’t play along with that line of questioning, yet even Celtic players talk about them being great games to play in and the games you look forward to.
Is it just that none of them have the same point of view, or don’t care enough to argue it? Are they told not to voice that message by their club…by the SFA? I would love for someone to do it and ask the interviewer/the SFA to prove them wrong or punish them under misconduct rules.
Regarding ‘nimby’. I wish they would build a new National Stadium in my backyard. I’d buy a burger van and sell buckie under the counter for a tenner!
My fees for watching their cars would be affordable too.
JOHN CLARK JANUARY 15, 2018 at 14:47
I’ve been trying to find what ‘transactions’ are covered by the Takeover Panel Code. They are defined in
… ——————————————————-
slimshady61 January 16, 2018 at 21:03
John, a far more recent and interesting case was Bob Morton who was cold shouldered just over a year ago – see
——————————————-
Slimshady,
I got an Error404 message when I clicked on your second link so I’m (fingers crossed!?) reposting the correct one.
http://www.fieldfisher.com/publications/2017/02/takeover-panel-gives-the-cold-shoulder#sthash.rACBmIef.dpbs 
At my age I should know better than to tempt fate
http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/statements/panel-statements/ps2017
Scroll down to the foot of the page for the link to Hubco Investments plc
nawliteJanuary 17, 2018 at 14:35
Why would a player invite all the crap that calling out the myth would bring when their employers appear to be perfectly happy to maintain the non-death of 2012? It would be rather more interesting to hear the views of Milne, Bankier, Keyes, McDonald, Budge, Petrie, Bowie, McMahon, Beattie, MacGregor and Brown.
NAWLITE @ 14.35
I would think it’s possible some players feel that way but for the sake of their family don’t want the hassle and intimidation either in public or even our media.
—————————————–
Anyone think of the headlines in the chip shop wrappers tomorrow if the current Hibs manager said his team had played Dundee and the play yet linked with a move to Celtic is only worth less than half the price quoted by an ” award ” winning journalist?
On having a look on the FCA website via the link posted by woodstein at 17:58 on January 15, 2018; I found the following Statement
https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/cenkos-securities-fined-failure-maintain-high-standards-required-firm-providing
That name rang a bell but for the life of me I can’t remember why? I’d be grateful if one of our resident archivists would enlighten me of whether Cencos Securities had any involvement with RIFC plc,?
NAWLITE @ 14.35
I would think it’s possible some players feel that way but for the sake of their family don’t want the hassle and intimidation either in public or even our media.
—————————————–
Anyone think of the headlines in the chip shop wrappers tomorrow if the current Hibs manager said his team had played Dundee and the player linked with a move to Celtic is only worth less than half the price quoted by an ” award ” winning journalist?
Blu, all I’m getting at is that if it were me and I knew the truth, I couldn’t help but point it out publicly given the opportunity. I mean if Jason Cummings and Jamie Murphy can say what they’ve been fed, sorry believe (!), then why can’t I? I agree it would be great to hear from club execs, but they’re not actually interviewed that often to be honest. Peter Lawell just did the same as some players with his jokey/snidey comment about Rory Bremner FC but, like you, I’m disappointed he (and any other Exec)hasn’t gone further.
Sorry for double post I was trying to edit
nawliteJanuary 17, 2018 at 14:35
A thought just occurred to me. The top division includes lots of footballers. Although not all of them are Scottish and I guess a good number of the Scottish ones are either ‘Rangers-minded’ or too thick/disinterested to know/care about the new club issue, there still must be a good proportion of players who agree with this site’s viewpoint that TRFC is a new club, based on the same intelligent review of the same evidence that we see. You would imagine that the population of Scottish footballers must be split similar to the Scottish population so that a smaller, but sizeable, number of them care about the issue?We all know that none of them will ever be invited by radio, TV or the print media to state their beliefs in the way that the pro-same club guys regularly areI know there are some who have made jokey/disparaging twitter comments over the years, but I wondered why none of them, when interviewed on TV or radio ahead of a game against TRFC don’t take the opportunity to voice their viewpoint. It would be easy when an interviewer asks them about playing against ‘Rangers’ or – heaven forbid – how good/crazy an ‘Old Firm’ game is, for them simply to turn round and without malice say “But, of course, we’re not playing against the Rangers you’re referring to” or “They’ve done well since starting out and are now a good challenge for us” or anything of that sort. If their views are anything like ours, I couldn’t play along with that line of questioning, yet even Celtic players talk about them being great games to play in and the games you look forward to.Is it just that none of them have the same point of view, or don’t care enough to argue it? Are they told not to voice that message by their club…by the SFA? I would love for someone to do it and ask the interviewer/the SFA to prove them wrong or punish them under misconduct rules.
____________________________-
A wee story from a great many years ago.
Many of us will remember Donald Ford, a legendary Hearts player, and a very well educated and intelligent speaker. He was a big hit on that old faithful ‘Quizball’ and, along with Jim Craig of Celtic (I think it was) dispelled the myth that footballers were all thickos. Never booked, he was respected by supporters of all clubs. He was around at the start of the football player morphing into a pundit, and looked likely to appear often on the likes of Sportscene and Scotsport.
Hearts played Rangers at Tynecastle, and with Ford out injured, were expected to take a good hiding, but were a wee bit unlucky to only get a 2-2 draw, and though the Scotsport editors tried hard, they were unable to change that impression of unlucky Hearts on Sunday Scotsport. Ford was the guest speaker, and, as always, spoke clearly and intelligently, but, of course, Rangers’ second goal, and equaliser, was a penalty! Alec Cameron, that doyen of impartiality, went on about how vehemently Hearts had disputed the penalty, and tried hard to get Ford to agree with him that it was undoubtedly the correct decision – like any true supporter of the benefitting club would do.
In those days, though there were ‘action replays’, they were basically just a slow-mo version of the main recording, and not very decisive, but Cameron went on and on at Ford, trying to get him to agree it was a penalty. I can’t remember the actual ‘foul’ that led to the award, and was, of course, just as blinkered as the neutral Cameron, but Donald Ford was not going to give way, and after at least three ‘aw come on Donald, it was a penalty’ appeals from the ‘neutral’, Ford came out with, ‘OK, it was Rangers, it was a penalty’. Analysis instantly over, cue next match highlights.
I do not think I ever saw Donald Ford as a guest on any more versions of Scotsport (I’d say he was definitey never seen on it again), or even Sportscene, yet most viewers would have seen him as a natural in the role of a guest commentator.
Now, he was a qualified accountant, and set up his own practice on retiring from football, so had no ambitions for the easy life of a pundit. But if all those years ago the media could be so protective of Rangers, and not allow any critic of their favoured club a voice on air, imagine what they are like now, and how they can ‘encourage’ a player/ex-player to toe the party line should he fancy the easy money available for just chatting about the game they love. So much easier, though, when most of the players they let into their studios mostly have an affinity to whatever club plays, or played, at Ibrox.
sannoffymesssoitizz January 17, 2018 at 15:48
On having a look on the FCA website via the link posted by woodstein at 17:58 on January 15, 2018; I found the following Statement
https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/cenkos-securities-fined-failure-maintain-high-standards-required-firm-providing
That name rang a bell but for the life of me I can’t remember why? I’d be grateful if one of our resident archivists would enlighten me of whether Cencos Securities had any involvement with RIFC plc,?
==========================
Cenkos was Charles Green’s Nomad for the IPO. They were replaced on 9th July 2013 by Strand Hanson.
Nawlite at 14.35
As Naismith has found to his cost, stating an unavoidable truth is a costly game when an apparently gravity defying comforting lie is (only recently) available. But I guess with only a few glib and shameless exceptions said comfort is directly proportional to the number of millions lost.
BECT67 January 17, 2018 at 12:53 To all the guid Dons fans out there, I sincerely hope your clubs’ proposal (for the new ground etc) goes through. However, your main obstacle, it seems to me, is not ‘common sense’ or economics (for the area, and Scottish football, will surely benefit), but quite simply, the nimby (not in my back yard) attitude._________________________
JIMBO January 17, 2018 at 14:51 Regarding ‘nimby’. I wish they would build a new National Stadium in my backyard. I’d buy a burger van and sell buckie under the counter for a tenner!My fees for watching their cars would be affordable too._________________________
But it’s not all nimby-ism though. The club has been playing a very strange game on this one, insisting that they must co-locate stadium and training facilities (OK, Man City have that – on a brownfield site – but how many other clubs need that). They were told by the planners 2 years ago that the site was totally unsuitable but pressed ahead anyway, insisting that it is the only site big enough for their needs.
I cannot think of another 20,000-seater stadium anywhere in the UK that is so far from the nearest rail/metro station (6.5 miles). The proposed travel/parking/pedestrian-access plan is farcical. The pedestrian bridge, shuttle-bus laydown/pickup, and nearby parking restrictions are all matters for Aberdeenshire Council, which has already objected to the plans.
All the economic-benefit arguments are based on a weird assumption that if the club stay at Pittodrie crowds will go down to a level below anything in the last 10 years, but if they move they will go ‘up’ to a level below current attendances. It doesn’t make any sense – unless of course there is some alternative agenda unrelated to football.
But Smugas, how is it a costly game. Naismith called it right so he could benefit by walking away. It certainly didn’t cost him albeit I know the dumber bears hate him (and Whittaker) for doing so. I realise any player making the sort of statement we would like them to would be hammered by online comments from TRFC fans but so what. That’s easily coped with surely.
I’m wondering more if there is a threat of ‘misconduct’ charges stopping some from responding to questions alluding to same club with a “Naw it’s no”-type answer.
This is naked sectarianism – but I cannae help it – there is a special circle of hell for town planners. Their belief is that their taste is professional opinion. Development control is one thing and necessary but some of what they do goes beyond that into totalitarianism
Apologies to anyone I offend here except for Planners…
Talking about stadia, the final hour 7-8pm on Radio Clyde tonight is dedicated to the future use of Hampden. With special guests. Looking forward to it.
Kopweb
Good post.
Mr Milne builds houses and makes money from land deals.
Neither he nor his directors need public transport to be there in time for the pre match sherries.
Once again he he is out of touch with many ordinary fans who like the Hearts fans who helped save their ground.
Stewart Milne is the guy who told us all we need a smaller league with more televised old firm matches.
I hope sense prevails and the club stay at a new iconic Pitoddrie.
And a new chairman too who is a fan first and an opportunist second.
Vincent Lunny on sportsound tonight
Waxing lyrical about how decisions are made with mitigating circumstances and the public don.t always get to hear the whole story .
Looks like the SFA have decided the carpet needs lifted again soon and are laying the foundations for their latest whitewash
Vincent Lunny, why don’t we get to hear the full story? Never heard of transparency?
It’s not MI5/ MI6.
IMO ,It’s nice of him to tell the listeners how things are not black and white .
Tony Mcglennan will be pleased
Just to confirm
A good as new refurbished Pittodrie between Don Street and the beach and not high up on the back road to Alford.
Pitoddrie is Aberdeen’s Home in the same way as other iconic grounds.
FAN OF FOOTBALLJANUARY 17, 2018 at 19:22
Vincent Lunny on sportsound tonight Waxing lyrical about how decisions are made with mitigating circumstances and the public don.t always get to hear the whole story .Looks like the SFA have decided the carpet needs lifted again soon and are laying the foundations for their latest whitewash.
=========================
I wonder what ‘mitigating circumstances’ he is referring to. Is it the need to preserve a ‘club’ no matter how much they steal from the public purse and others? Is it the need to allow a convicted tax cheat power over that ‘club’ even though he is as far from fit and proper as could be? Is it the need to tell that ‘club’ they face a transfer ban then let the ‘club’ dictate the terms and conditions of how it will work? Is it the need to refuse to allow an investigation into how they handled the tax cheating of that ‘club’ even though the highest court in the UK ruled they were guilty?
I can’t really think of anything else the SFA have been involved in with any other club that is so major that leaves us to question what mitigating circumstances led to them acting the way they did.
I agree this may well be the prelude to a whitewash on the 2011 Euro licence investigation.
Ally, I don’t know what to say. I’m speechless. Have you led us down a path of deceit!?
“In what world could Hearts beat Rangers on any level to anything? Rangers might not currently be the force we used to be, but we still have a much bigger budget, a much bigger stadium, much better players, and Hearts were even reduced to selling their star player for £300K.”
(Ibrox Noise.) (My emphasis)
I think we deserve an explanation.
UPTHEHOOPSJANUARY 17, 2018 at 20:45
very much so
Bits from Lunny,s question and answer session tonight .
Ian black thought he was victimised in his betting case
lunny got a letter accusing him of being a celtic fan
terry butcher would reenact red card decisions with a ball ,with some success
he accused a ref of fabricating a report that would have ended the refs career if proved (not dougie gate) obviously
his hardest case was two charges of ragers 1872 and CW which were appealed again and again
and he doesn’t miss the gig and wouldn’t want to be in TMacs shoes
oh and the he compiles the evidence and it,s then the panel that decides if there is a case to answer .
The panel has to many unqualified volunteers , as they would have to pay for a smaller pool of better qualified people .
Hope that covers all the excuses needed for the euro inquiry
I note from the Rolls of Court that it will be a full shift tomorrow:
” LORD MALCOLM STARRED MOTIONS 7 hours A295/16 David Whitehouse v The Chief Constable of Police Scotland Ledingham Chalmers LLP A & W M Urquhart ”
No time of commencement is given, so I would assume that the normal time of kick-off (10.00 a.m) applies.
I’m encouraged in that view by the fact that in three or four cases in other Courts tomorrow the kick-off time is given variously as 9.00 a.m, or 9.30 a.m , or between 9.30 and 10.00 a.m., which suggests that only when (exceptionally) it’s not 10.00 a.m, is a different time given.
Rangers need funding and debt funding cannot be a viable long term option to meet the club’s on-going needs.
———
Have a read it is Mr king back in February 10 2014.(sometimes it reads as if the names have just changed,but the problems are still there.
ok have a read
I have become aware of a particularly apposite German compound word which encapsulates much of what is commented on her “emporungsgesselschaft” (there is an umlaut missing at the o). This is related to a kind of society characterised by outrage but as usual with such compound words is replete with many meanings not easily captured by a simple transliteration. – there is a cogent explanation at davidwarrenonline.com (he is serious at heart but a very skilled wind up merchant also)
A lot of what goes on in the minds of the cadres which favour the Ibrox entities appear to epitomise this ” emporungsgesselschaft”
Applying this word to Scottish Football is probably an exclusive which you can read about elsewhere later and my peers regard me as an authority in that very small area.
fan of footballJanuary 17, 2018 at 21:38
‘…Bits from Lunny,s question and answer session tonight’
___________
That’s not a bad wee summary, fof.
I think, though, in absolute fairness , that it’s worth re-emphasising Lunny’s statement that the Compliance Officer does not himself ( except, perhaps, where the protocol empowers him in minor matters where the alleged offender admits the charge and accepts the penalty) actually decide a ‘case’, any more than procurator Fiscal or advocate depute would decide a case in the Courts.
Disputed cases, and the consideration of ‘guilt’, ‘innocence’ and questions of mitigating factors or aggravating factors are for the ‘panel’ to decide, when the CO is not present.
I’m personally happy to accept that the CO , having provided the facts and such evidence as there may be, is not responsible for whatever decision the panel arrives at:
at least in the operation of the Protocol as it bears on ‘routine’ disciplinary, rule-breaching matters by clubs, players, officials, ball-boys, or managers..
I do have difficulty with what I consider was the misleading attempt by the SFA to imply that they have asked the CO to investigate the SFA itself, hoping to satisfy those of us who wanted (and still want) a wholly independent review of all and anything the SFA did in relation to the alleged wrongful granting of a UEFA competition licence to RFC-as-was.
They simply asked the CO to look into the procedures that were operated by the applicant club, to see if ‘lessons could be learned.’
We can be fairly certain that the power-brokers in the SFA were pretty sure to have arranged things in such a way that while the CO may find that their own Licensing Committee was too ready to believe, without thorough investigation, the guff provided by RFC about the status of their ‘wee tax case’ tax-indebtedness, he will not find anything to show direct complicity by the SFA board in any misfeasance or abuse of office.
That would not be the CO’s fault.
In my opinion,we are entirely justified, by the ‘Big Lie’ machinations, in being suspicious of the SFA board and all its doings in respect of both the dead RFC, and the struggling TRFC Ltd.
But I think that we can reasonably acquit the Compliance Officer as was, and the present CO, of being ‘art and part’ guilty of what many of us think were serious breaches of sporting integrity and, possibly, criminal law.
BFBPUZZLED
JANUARY 17, 2018 at 22:15
Sorry for being pedantic but the word is spelled “empörungsgesellschaft” with a double “ll” rather than a double “ss” but you’re correct about the umlaut. It literally means outraged or indignant society.
Martyn McLaughlin has an article in today’s “The Scotsman” which relates to
” …the bequest of a game stewarded by a meek and complicit governing body which, two years ago, disbanded its anti-racism task force on the basis it had fulfilled its mission. Who would have thought the lure of money and power would prove greater than the cause of social justice?”
Mc Laughlin is, of course, speaking of FIFA.
His article is about the late Cyrille Regis, who suffered appalling racial abuse. He mentions a recent example of current racism in Scottish football. But his main point is that in Russia, hosting the World Cup this year, racism in football is rife, and FIFA chickened out.
If I add the words “or sporting integrity” to his question, I could truthfully say that I would have thought it, in relation to our own wee SFA.
Thanks EJ, I wonder if Green chose them as the NOMAD for the consortium of chancers he fronted in the knowledge that
“Cenkos failed to put in place adequate systems and controls to ensure appropriate oversight of Sponsor Services, and to ensure that all their Deal Teams were adequately supervised when carrying out Sponsor Services mandates. Certain deal teams were left largely unchallenged and unsupervised which increased the risk that serious issues would occur, undetected, on client mandates.”
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/new-and-recent-issues/new-recent-issue-details.html?issueId=8816
….. and
“Auditors of Rangers International Football Club Plc (RIFC) picked up fees totalling £594,000 for “non-audit” work in the 13 months to June 30 2013.
Accounts filed by RIFC for the 13 months to June 30, 2013 reveal the company’s auditors Deloitte were paid £90,000 for audit work but amassed six times that in additional fees for non-audit advisory work.
Those non-audit fees include £314,000 for corporate finance services in relation to the floatation, £128,000 for ‘accounting investigation services’, £117,000 for ‘other tax advisory services’ and £35,000 in ‘audit-related assurance services’.”
Read the full report at
https://www.insider.co.uk/news/rangers-auditors-paid-594000-non-9879732
sannoffymesssoitizz
January 17, 2018 at
That name rang a bell but for the life of me I can’t remember why?
easyJambo
January 17, 2018 at 16:45
https://rangers.co.uk/news/tag/cenkos-securities/
It’s like waiting for a bus, long wait and 3 arrive at the same time. 🙂
John Clark
Up the Hoops.
I listened to the Lunny item on Sportsound and it was good to hear him explain his role and that of The Judicial Panel. It met my understanding.
This is the process that Celtic have to observe but if it is limited to just the grant aspect then that does not mean the full remit of Res12 has been addressed, which was the whole process in 2011.
Having heard whatever the case and JP decision is, Celtic still have to look not only at what their shareholders put to them in 2013 but what was put to them in support in Dec 2016 when the Res12 reps handed the matter over to Celtic.
There are a number of questions parked until the Comp Off process runs it’s course. If it is thorough they will not need asking. If it isn’t then the SFA part in the process will not go away.
As regards whitewash there is not enough whitewash to paint all villages in Andalusia five times over a ten year period, to hide the dirt.
Part of the Comp Off role is evidence gathering and that is being done as evidenced by a recent request for a document they did not hold that could be significant in proving a breach of FFP with wide consequences.
Just a random query…
IIRC, the SFA was involved with the arrangements WRT Joey Barton’s acrimonious departure from TRFC.
[Possibly in a guarantor-type role?]
It seemed like highly unusual assistance provided by the SFA at the time – and it generated much online discussion.
As we have many Bampots here who are clued up about SFA rules – and the rule changes following the demise of Rangers…
Would the SFA be allowed to provide ‘ongoing financing’ to TRFC directly – or even act as guarantor on TRFC’s behalf with a financial institution?
And if this was allowable, would it necessarily need to be disclosed or voted on by SFA member clubs?
I have, as a former (low grade) officer in Her Majesty’s Home Civil service, the most enormous respect for HMRC, who fight the good fight against the sods that would rip us all off.
But there’s always some silly b.gger who speaks out of turn.
Or, at least, there was one bloody idiot of an HMRC spokesperson who, in 2012, gave quite false aid and comfort to the ‘continuity Rangers’ absurdity. I have not forgotten that!
I thought then that that HMRC spokesperson thought it fine to encourage the cheating of other creditors, while a rogue company was permitted to enjoy a continued debt-free existence.
And I mention it only because I know ( well, I take it for granted) that no HMRC spokesperson will come out with a statement ” that Liquidation will enable a sale of the Carillion assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that Carillion will continue in business.It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA.”
And, in all honesty, when I read and then heard the appallingly bad HMRC performance during the FTTT and the UTTT tribunal hearings I was inclined to think that dark forces were at work.
As I was when I listened to the equally appallingly bad efforts by the Crown in the Whyte, Grier, Withey etc trial.
Honest to God, I was ready to believe that a kind of magical, circular pressure had been brought to bear.
I laugh at it now, of course.
But I don’t forget that stupid remark by HMRC .
AuldheidJanuary 18, 2018 at 00:22
‘..Part of the Comp Off role is evidence gathering and that is being done as evidenced by a recent request for a document they did not hold that could be significant in proving a breach of FFP with wide consequences.’
____________
On which happy note, Auldheid, I bid you ( and anybody else still up) ‘buenas noces’
JOHN CLARKJANUARY 18, 2018 at 01:36
7
1 Rate This
AuldheidJanuary 18, 2018 at 00:22‘..Part of the Comp Off role is evidence gathering and that is being done as evidenced by a recent request for a document they did not hold that could be significant in proving a breach of FFP with wide consequences.’____________On which happy note, Auldheid, I bid you ( and anybody else still up) ‘buenas noces’
————–
At least we now know that after all these months the compliance officer is doing something, and had not fallen asleep
JOHN CLARKJANUARY 17, 2018 at 22:41
I’m personally happy to accept that the CO , having provided the facts and such evidence as there may be, is not responsible for whatever decision the panel arrives at:
=======================
That’s fair enough, but it reminds me of a statement made by the late Paul McBride QC on what he believed were flaws with the jury system in Scotland. He said “jurors in Scotland don’t have to be able to read or write, and they can be full of prejudices”. Now, I’m not suggesting for a minute that the panels the SFA call on can’t read or write, but given the secrecy surrounding the process we can’t really be sure of the second part. Who chooses the panel and what ‘qualities’ are required? IMO it is just another reminder of how the SFA needs to be disbanded, and completely reformed with regulation in place to ensure the customers are getting genuine fairness and value for money.
The next huge SFA call is going to be on the Rangers 2011 Euro licence. What chance real justice?
JOHN CLARKJANUARY 18, 2018 at 01:22
Nothing circular about it JC although it is geometry related. More a case of being on the square
AULDHEIDJANUARY 18, 2018 at 00:22
John ClarkUp the Hoops.I listened to the Lunny item on Sportsound and it was good to hear him explain his role and that of The Judicial Panel. It met my understanding.This is the process that Celtic have to observe but if it is limited to just the grant aspect then that does not mean the full remit of Res12 has been addressed, which was the whole process in 2011.Having heard whatever the case and JP decision is, Celtic still have to look not only at what their shareholders put to them in 2013 but what was put to them in support in Dec 2016 when the Res12 reps handed the matter over to Celtic.There are a number of questions parked until the Comp Off process runs it’s course. If it is thorough they will not need asking. If it isn’t then the SFA part in the process will not go away.As regards whitewash there is not enough whitewash to paint all villages in Andalusia five times over a ten year period, to hide the dirt.Part of the Comp Off role is evidence gathering and that is being done as evidenced by a recent request for a document they did not hold that could be significant in proving a breach of FFP with wide consequences.
__________________
Depends on who they requested the document from, but if it’s from those in charge of administration at Ibrox, then I seem to remember a similar case where the LNS enquiry requested very pertinent documents from there, and I don’t think they ever appeared.
Perhaps, though, the SFA made a grave error of judgment when they appointed the new Compliance Officer, and accidentally found someone of integrity, who will endeavour to ensure nothing he uncovers, or is denied access to, adds to the lumps in the Hampden carpets.
Today’s proceedings at the CoS with David Whitehouse is only against Police Scotland, who are claiming immunity from prosecution.
There is another hearing scheduled for May in respect of his action against the Crown
Was it not the case, Stevie, that there was money due to TRFC and that money was earmarked for JB, if TRFC failed to pay it? Not so much acting as guarantor as being prepared to divert payments.
nawliteJanuary 17, 2018 at 14:35
“We all know that none of them will ever be invited by radio, TV or the print media to state their beliefs in the way that the pro-same club guys regularly are.”
Tom Boyd is the best example of this. Over 550 appearances in top flight Scottish League football. Scottish Cup winning captain of Motherwell and one of their greatest ever players. League, Scottish and League Cup winning captain of Celtic. Winner of three Premier Leagues, three Scottish Cups and three League Cups in his career. Former Scotland captain and hall of fame member with 72 caps for his country (sixth most capped Scotland player of all time) including appearances at three major Championship finals. In every sense of the word, Tom Boyd is a legend of the Scottish game.
I know from personal experience that he is also a complete gentleman and extremely modest. He is also capable of offering insightful and knowledgeable analysis on our game (and has done so for Celtic TV). Tom is an obvious candidate for TV or Radio punditry / co-commentary. Yet he doesn’t get any gigs and is never asked for his opinion. Why?
Because Tom has always maintained in public and when asked by the media that this version of “Rangers” are a new club. Because he publicly criticized SFA Chairman Alan McRae when he said Scottish football “needed a strong Rangers.” Because he blamed Rangers woes squarely where the blame lies – with Rangers themselves. In short, because on the few occassions Tom was asked for his opinion, he told the inescapable truth. As a result, they don’t ask him any more.
The media in this country are often portrayed as incompetent. I guess that all depends on what one thinks they are trying to achieve. If they are trying to be objective and truthful then they are indeed incompetent. However, if their aim is to whitewash Scotland’s greatest sporting scandal from history, then one must conclude that they are in fact very good at what they do.
Giovanni
You are correct
I noticed the extra s too late to change it having distracted myself by the missing umlaut.
Thanks
I hear that Administrator extraordinaire and good guy Bryan Jackson has written a play about Scottish football – entitled The Pieman Cometh. Should be fun?
The play is to be part of the Glasgow International Comedy Festival and will be shown at Oran Mor for 4 nights, 18-21 March, starting 8pm.