The Existence of Laws

ByTrisidium

The Existence of Laws

A Blog by James Forrest for TSFM

I am a socialist, and as a socialist I believe in the fundamental goodness of people. Some people find that hard to believe when they read the stuff I write.

I published my first novel recently, on politics and the corrupting nature of it, and it is a deeply cynical book, a book where no-one has clean hands come the end. What has surprised some of those who’ve read it is that I didn’t focus on the lies and smears of the right, but the hypocrisy and deceit of those who claim to be of the left.

Corruption, you see, doesn’t respect political boundaries or points of view. It’s like rainwater. It finds every crack, and gets in there.

My political beliefs revolve around two apparently paradoxical elements; the belief in the inherent decency of people and the need for a strong, and powerful, state. I believe the second underpins the first, and this brings me into conflict with a lot of people, some on the left and some on the right. Too many people see the state as inherently evil, as something that interferes too much in the lives of ordinary people. As something suffocating.

Yet the state exists to protect us. It exists to provide a safety net. It exists to regulate and to oversee. If the state is made up of bad people, if the gears of society are captured by those with malicious or selfish intent, the results are obvious; war, corruption, chaos.

The vast majority of our problems in the modern age can be neatly summed up in two lines from Yeats’ poem “The Second Coming”, which I used to open my novel. “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

We live in a time when those who are protecting their own interests have assumed such power that they’ve cowed the rest of us. They have become a law unto themselves. They have changed the nature of the game, because they have sapped our will to the extent some barely put up a fight anymore. The weak get weaker, and the strong use their strength to crush the rest even more. It is a vicious struggle, a downward spiral.

Society is held together not only by the endeavour and common interests of its citizens but by a collection of laws. We elect the people who make those laws. They do so in our name, and we can remove that right every four years. That is a powerful thing, and we do not appreciate it enough. The present corruption exists because we allow it to exist.

The people around me continue to puzzle over my uncommon interest in the affairs of a football club on the west of Glasgow. My own club plays in the east end. I tell those who ask that my primary interest in the goings-on at the club calling itself Rangers is no longer about football; how could it be, after all? With promotion this year they are still a full two divisions below us, emasculated, skint, weak and unstable. If we were fortunate enough to draw them in cup competition the match would be over, as a tie, by the halfway point … in the first half.

In footballing terms they are an utter irrelevance.

Rangers is more than a football club to me. They are a symbol. Their unfolding calamity is an on-going outrage. What is happening there, what is being allowed to happen, is an offense to decency. It is a stain on the face of our country.

In short, it is a scandal. It is a scandal without parallel in sport.

Yet it’s not just a sports story either. If it was, I might not be so focussed on it. What is happening at Rangers is a colossal failure of governance. It is a damning indictment against the very people who are supposed to oversee our game. It is a disgraceful abrogation of responsibility from those at the top, those who claim to be “running things.”

If this is not a failure of governance it is a result of corruption at the heart of our national sport. It says they are bought and paid for, and I will say no such thing here.

So let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. We’ll say instead that what they are is weak, indecisive, inept and disconnected from reality.

It reminds me of our political class, which has become insular and ignorant about what the public wants, and what it needs. It’s not a wonder parties like UKIP can achieve national vote shares of 25% at local elections. Nigel Farage strikes me as a dog-whistle politician, the kind who knows how to appeal to a select group of voters. He is little different to Charles Green, the man who beguiled Rangers fans into handing over large amounts of money, because he was “standing up for the club.” It is easy to do what he did, easy to do what Farage is doing.

Real leadership requires toughness. Say what you like about the Tories, but they have that in spades. Yeats was right about the worst being full of passionate intensity. Green was. Farage is. Cameron and Osborne personify it in their political outlook.

It is easy to be cowed by blunt force politics, and by “tough talking Yorkshire men” and venomous speeches about “strivers and skivers.” The politics of divide and conquer is the oldest form of politics there is, and it’s no surprise to see it practiced by some of the vested interests in the game here in Scotland. Yet, lest we forget … something significant happened last year. The maligned and the ignored, the weak and the voiceless found something they never realised they had. They discovered that, in a very real sense, the power was in their hands.

Last year, the fans rose up when the governing bodies and the media went all-out to save Rangers from the self-inflicted wounds caused by a decade of cheating, malpractice and ineptitude. I have no problem calling that what it was.

What happened at Rangers seemed incredible, but it was all too predictable, and some of us had been talking about it for years before it hit. The Association seemed caught in the headlights but it would amaze me if they really were as insular and ignorant as they appeared. They must have known how bad the outlook was for Rangers. They just chose to ignore it.

They were aided and abetted by a thoroughly disreputable media, a collection of cowards and compromisers, charlatans and frauds, masquerading as journalists, but who long ago laid aside any claim to be bold investigators and settled for commenting on events as they unfolded. More often than not, with their ill-informed opinions, sometimes due to weaknesses in intellect and others wilfully ignorant, they failed even in that.

Entire newspapers became PR machines for crooks and swindlers. They aided in the scam because they didn’t do their jobs, some because they were lazy, some because they were incompetent and others because they wanted a seat at the table and were willing to sacrifice whatever integrity they once had in exchange for one.

That all of this was embraced by the Rangers fans is amazing to me. They trusted when they should have been asking questions. They closed their eyes, covered their ears and sang their battle tunes at the top of their voices so they wouldn’t have to hear anything they didn’t like. As incredible as I found it then, and still find it now – and now, even more so, when they have already seen the results of it once – I find it pathetic too, and I do feel pity for some of them.

A lot of these people are genuine football fans, and nothing more. They have no interest in the phony narrow nationalism, or the over-blown religion, or the notion of supremacy which manifested itself in a ludicrous statement from McCoist when interviewed recently on Sky.

Some of the Rangers fans look at their team of duds, kids and journeymen, they look at a boardroom of cowards and crooks, they look at a failing manager in his first (and last) job in the game and at a dark future and are not in the least bit impressed by, or interested in, the chest-out arrogance espoused in those ridiculous words “we are the people.” They know full well that their present crisis was made by men like McCoist, and they understand that pretentious posturing is not an act born of strength, but a scrambling around in the gutter, and a symptom of weakness.

They understand their position, and they hate it. And because they care about Rangers, because they value the club, because they cherish those things that made it a great Scottish institution, they want that back. They understand that before the Union Jack waving, Sash singing, poppy wearing, Nazi saluting, Orange element became the public face of their support Rangers meant something else, and that, above all things, is what pains them the most.

People do not hate Rangers. When the country appeared to turn its back last year, they were turning the back on favouritism and the bending of rules. Yet it would be a lie to say that there is not an element of dislike in the gleeful mockery of many rival fans.

But they don’t hate Rangers either. They hate the version of it around which a certain section of the support continues to dance. They hate the version which hates, and so too do many, many, many Rangers supporters, and they definitely deserve better.

David Murray chose not to openly challenge that version. Indeed, he encouraged certain strands of it to flourish and grow, with his “Britishness Days” and his effort to turn the club into the “team that supports the troops.” Other clubs have done as much, if not more, for the British Army than the one that plays out of Ibrox. Other clubs have given more money. Other clubs have lent their support to those on the front lines. They just chose to do it with respect, and with class, and with dignity. They chose to do it in private, understanding that there eventually comes a tipping point between looking after the ends of the soldiers and using them to promote your own.

The army has not battened on to Rangers. Rangers has battened on to them, and although it is unclear when an altruistic motive became darker, what started out as a gesture of solidarity is now used to entrench division and promote a notion of superiority.

Craig Whyte took over from Murray and immediately understood the lure of the “dog whistle.” He knew too that the media would accept whatever he told them, without question, and as he spoke up for “Rangers traditions” he made sure the lunatic fringe was well onside. He met face to face with the hard-core extremists in the support first and made them his praetorian guard. They spoke up for him until the day the club entered administration.

So, whereas Murray pandered to them and Whyte used them to further his own ends, it was only a matter of time before someone suggested to Charles Green that he could use the same tactics to win over the support. He went even further and blatantly promoted and encouraged this mind-set, and stoked the hate and nonsense to frightening new heights. The same people who cheered Whyte to the rafters jumped on board the Big Blue Bus and the results are clear.

Through all of it, the ordinary Rangers fan has seen his club buffered against the rocks, battered, broken, smashed to smithereens and sunk. Now there’s a big hole in the side of the lifeboat, and they are terrified that further tragedies await.

They are right to be concerned. Much of the media is still not telling them what they need to know. The people in charge of their club – the owners who have lied, the former hack who covered up the truth about Whyte and now acts as a mouthpiece for Green, the “club legends” who are content to sup with the devil and take his greasy coin when they should be standing toe-to-toe with the fans – are trying to silence those members of the press who do have facts to present.

How many times now have media outlets been banned from Ibrox for daring to report the truth? The manager who demanded the names of a committee last year defends those inside the walls who are desperate to keep secret the things that are going on. He is either an unprincipled coward, or he is, himself, bought and paid for. The fans suffer for it.

The “inconvenient truth” is still being kept from them, and this denies them any chance to play an active role in their club. Indeed, it is all too possible that they’ve passed a point of no return, and that their club is heading for a new liquidation event and it can no longer be stopped.

In either case, their power has been eroded to the point at which they must feel they have nothing left to do but stand back and watch what happens next.

They are wrong. I am a socialist. I believe in the inherent good of people. I think the ordinary decent Rangers fans are the only people left who can save their club … and the means by which they will do it is as simple as it could be.

They must stand up for “big government.” They must embrace the need for a “strong state.” They must lobby the SFA, and they must trust the SFA and they must get the SFA to follow its own rules and thereby save them from any further harm.

There is a tendency amongst some Celtic fans to see our governing bodies as pro-Rangers. If it is true then those running our game are ruining Scottish football without benefiting the thing they love more. The incalculable harm that has been done to Rangers in the last 20 some months is a direct result of the subservient media and the willingness of the football authorities to be “deaf, dumb and blind.” Those who believe this has actually helped the Ibrox club have not been paying attention in class. It has irrevocably scarred them, and it may yet have played a hand in destroying them once and for all, as a force if not as a club entirely.

For years, the SFA sat and did nothing as a club in their association operated a sectarian signing policy. They did nothing whilst the fans sang sectarian songs. In their failure to act they strengthened those elements of the Rangers support, instead of isolating, alienating and eventually helping to eliminate those who saw that club as a totem pole of division and hate. Their failure over EBT’s, and their lack of scrutiny, led to one of the greatest scandals in the history of sport, and I say that with no equivocation at all. The testimony of their registrations officer in the Lord Nimmo Smith investigation was a disgrace and in years to come it will rank as one of the most disreputable and damaging moments in the association’s history.

The most egregious failures of all were the failures in the so-called “fit and proper person” tests, which allowed first Whyte and then Charles Green to assume controlling positions at Ibrox. They will pass the buck and say the responsibility lies with the club itself, in much the same way as they are content to let the club investigate itself at the present time, but any neutral who looks at this stance knows it is unprincipled and spineless. It’s like letting the defence set the terms at a trial. It is foxes investigating the chicken coop.

It is a blueprint for corruption, and a recipe for disaster.

It is now too late for the SFA to declare Green “unfit”, as it was too late when they finally slapped that title on Craig Whyte. He and his allies own Rangers, and they control its destiny. They can push the club to the wall if they choose, in the final extremity, if that gets them what they want. The time for changing that is past. The damage has already been done. The barbarians are not at the gates. They are inside the walls, and sacking the city.

The SFA will be forced to punish Rangers for the sins of the owners, for the second time in as many years, and whilst it is right that the club face up to that, all the better to send a message to other clubs and other owners, the SFA cannot be allowed to slither off the hook here as though this was none of their doing. Green will skip off into the sunset. Craig Whyte has yet to pay his fine. These people never cared about Scottish football and they don’t care now.

The SFA are supposed to. Our governing body is supposed to govern, for the good of the whole game, and not as a support system for a single club. What they have allowed to happen on their watch is absolutely shameful and if the people responsible were men at all, with any sense of accountability, they would resign en masse.

They can pretend ignorance, but only the truly ignorant would accept that. Craig Whyte was not inside Ibrox a week before RTC and other sites were dismantling his entire business history, with some of the people here doing the work the SFA would not. Whyte himself claims to have made the governing bodies aware of the scale of what was facing the club, and they did nothing at all. Heads should have rolled a year ago.

In October of last year, on this very site, I posted an article in which I wrote:

“Which isn’t to say the due diligence matter isn’t worrying, because, of course, it is. Again, no-one is going to convince me that the SFA has conducted proper due diligence on Charles Green and his backers. No-one will convince me they are satisfied that this club is in safe hands, and that the game in this country will not be rocked by a further implosion at Ibrox. They failed to properly investigate Craig Whyte, because of lax regulations requiring disclosure from the club itself, regulations which are just a joke, but they can be forgiven for that as the press was talking sheer nonsense about him having billions at his disposal, and a lot of people (but not everyone!) were either convinced or wanted to be convinced by him.

To have witnessed what Whyte did, to have witnessed the Duff & Phelps “process” of finding a buyer, and having Green essentially emerge from nowhere, with a hundred unanswered questions as to his background and financing, for the SFA to have given this guy the go ahead, only for it to blow up in their faces later, would annihilate the credibility of the governing body and necessitate resignations at every level. There would be no hiding place.”

There are times when it is fun to be right, but this is not one of them. It is dispiriting and disquieting to have been so on the nose. It scares the Hell out of me, as someone who loves football in this country, to have seen this matter clearly when the people running our game apparently either did not or chose to ignore very real, very obvious, concerns. The Internet Bampots had no special insight or access to information that was denied those at the SFA. We just weren’t prepared to ignore it and pretend that it wasn’t there. There was too much at stake.

I have become convinced that things will never change until the Rangers supporters join us in demanding the full and unabridged truth here. They need to come out from under the bed, and confront their fears. They need to be willing to take the consequences, so that their club can emerge clean from this, and start again, with all this behind them.

And it can all happen with one simple thing. The application of the rules.

The existence of laws comes down to a simple principle; they protect society from those elements within it who are interested only in their own selfish ends. We may cry out at those rules and regulations we see as “restrictive”, but the law was not made to restrict our freedoms but to protect them. Had the SFA years ago acted against Rangers sectarian signing policy, and the songs from the stands, the club would not have mutated to the point where there was no help on hand when they needed it the most. Let’s not kid ourselves about this; Whyte and Green were only able to grab control because the club itself has a dreadful image which put off respectable and responsible buyers. The SFA could have helped change that perception years ago and did nothing.

The SFA could have conducted its own investigation into who Craig Whyte was. They could have asked David Murray for full disclosure when he was running up £80 million of debt, a sum of money that is beyond belief for a single club in a small provincial backwater league. Had they had the guts to do that the club would never have spent itself into oblivion and forced the hand of Lloyds, which led indirectly to their ignominious end.

The SFA could have fully investigated Charles Green and the means by which he took control, instead of rushing through a license. His emergence at the last minute was transparently suspicious and designed to force them into a quick decision, but they did not have to bow to that pressure by making one, without being in possession of the facts, as it is now 100% clear they were not.

Had they asked for every document, had they insisted on legal affidavits and personal securities from investors (and this would have been perfectly legitimate and is common place in other licensing areas) none of this would have come to pass. After Craig Whyte they had a moral responsibility to the rest of the game to get this one right and their failure is without parallel in the history of Scottish football.

As the club hurtles towards a new abyss, names are cropping up which should send a shudder down the spines of every honest, genuine supporter of not only Rangers but every team in the land. The SFA claims that a strong Rangers is essential for the sake of Scottish football, but they have been extraordinarily lax in protecting that club, and therefore the game, from destructive elements. Craig Whyte and Charles Green had dubious personal histories, and the acquisition of the club itself was mired in controversy and scandal. Yet it was allowed.

Neither Green nor Whyte were known to have operated outside the law, yet neither was worthy of trust or stood up to scrutiny. Neither man should ever have been granted the status as fit and proper persons to assume a role in our national sport, and if it is true of them what can we say about the three men who are, presently, being touted as the Great White Hopes for a bright, new Rangers future; Dave King and the Easdale brothers?

King recently cut a deal with the South African government over an on-going dispute over taxes. In other words, he pled guilty and accepted the central plank of their argument; that for years he was engaged in wilfully with-holding vast revenues from their Treasury. The media does not like to put it like that, and the SFA seems willing to ignore it utterly, and this would be scandalous enough. But it does not stop there. HRMC rules – as well as the SFA’s own governance documents – actually bar him from serving on the board of the new club.

Last but not least, aside from being an admitted tax cheat, King is also awaiting trial in South Africa, having been indicted for corruption, forgery and fraud – 300 charges in total. Yet as recently as last week, we were told that the Association was willing to look at him and consider representations from his lawyers. This is almost beyond belief.

If Dave King’s position is untenable, and he is yet to be convicted of a crime, what can we say about the position of the Easdale’s? One of the two brothers, Sandy, has already served jail time. He is a convicted criminal, a fraudster nonetheless, who’s “victim” was the same Treasury who are appealing one case involving the old club and liquidated it entirely over another. This is precisely the kind of “businessman” the fit and proper person test was supposed to weed out, and if the SFA holds its nose here the reek will stink out the halls at Hampden for decades. If King or the Easdale’s are judged fit and proper, then who exactly is the test for? What exactly do you have to do to fail it? How do we explain the existence of laws, when these are not applied?

Pascal says “Law without force is impotent.” The SFA’s weakness has allowed one version of Rangers to destroy itself, and has allowed an existential risk to another. If the next power at Rangers resides in South Africa or Greenock I can say with some certainty that the Association is engaged in an even more dangerous roll of the dice, because the surfacing of fresh scandal will be an ever present risk, and will be of the sort no-one will survive.

The damage to Scottish football will take years to heal. The Scottish game has been through enough trauma. It does not need more. It barely survived the last calamity to hit Rangers. The rest of us should not be forced to pay the price of the next one.

The greater damage will be done to Rangers itself. If the Green crisis ends in another collapse – as it well might; another administration event is a certainty, and another liquidation is a much more likely prospect than it was before 14 February 2012 – the club will once again have to start from the bottom, and this time the reputational damage will be impossible to repair. The club faces internal strife, sporting sanctions, and criminal investigations. The last takeover might be declared a fraud. the Whyte takeover will almost certainly be. The share issue might be invalid, as well as criminal, and the people involved may well end up in jail. Lawsuits could follow from investors, there could be as yet unknown consequences from the Upper Tier Tax Tribunal (thank you Brogan Rogan for pointing out what those might be) and a host of other issues.

Rangers fans must be the loudest voices here. How do you want the world to view your club in years to come? Do you want one to be proud of, or one forever associated with the shame and disgrace of these days gone by? The one which bailed out on its tax obligations. The one with supporters who disgrace your very name. The one which allowed Whyte and Green to take you to the cleaners and send you to the wall. The one which handed over control to one convicted criminal and another awaiting trial. Do you want to be reborn clean, or mired in the muck?

David Murray destroyed your financial stability. He made it so no bank would issue you a line of credit and no investor of note wanted to buy. Craig Whyte liquidated you. Charles Green has cast the future of the Newco into doubt and acted in a manner which has annihilated your credibility with the financial markets for decades to come.

Between these three men, they have taken everything from you, and the press and the people who run the game here, as well as some of your own blindly ignorant fans, have allowed them to do all this and more. Now they conspire to hand the keys to Ibrox to other men of questionable character, who will wreck further havoc on the reputation of the club.

The Scottish Football Association has damaged the game it was supposed to protect, but above all else their greatest failure of governance was a failure to protect one of its biggest clubs from its own excesses and those of its owners.

Rangers fans, the SFA have betrayed your trust, more than the trust of any other club. What you must insist on now is full disclosure and transparency from the powers that be in Hampden. The SFA has to end the charade of allowing your club to handle this in-house. They must hand everything over to an outside agency – whether a legal one, or a footballing body like UEFA – and they must demand co-operation and answers, and threaten to withhold the license if they don’t get them.

You must not be afraid of that. You must embrace it. The men with their hands on the gears at Ibrox are motivated by money, and nothing more. If the license is withdrawn their “investments” are worthless. They cannot risk that.

You must demand that the rules on fit and proper persons are applied, and where necessary even made stronger, to prevent your club falling into unclean hands. You must demand that they protect your reputation from further damage, by getting this all out there and acting accordingly, even if that means your club does not play football for at least a year.

You must be willing to suck it all up, knowing that what will emerge is a Rangers which has been cleansed and moves forward with honour, and dignity, led by custodians who treasure it rather than those who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

The Rangers Standard has recently emerged as a genuine voice for those in your support who are sick and tired of what Rangers has become, and want it restored to something that is worthy of the love and respect in which you hold it. On that website, there are discussions about the kind of club you seek to be and about whether the institution of Rangers is about more than just football.

If that’s how you feel about it then you know it is about more than how many titles the club can claim, about more than just results on the park, about more than just the game. Rangers, like Celtic, is an idea. It has to be something you are proud of.

I am a socialist, but one with a fevered imagination and a tendency to write very dark things. This piece won’t have been good reading for some of you (perhaps all of you haha!) but I think there’s more hope in here than in other things I’ve written.

In spite of everything that’s come to pass, I still believe. I believe in Scottish football. I believe in our system of football governance, even if those who are working in it are failing on some level.

In society, as much as we strain against them, laws exist for our protection. To fail to enforce them is to leave us at the mercy of those elements who would do us harm. The rules of football ensure the protection of all clubs, not just a few.

The failure to enforce the rules has never had graver consequences than here in Scotland.  The irony is that bending and breaking them has hurt the one club those violations were designed to help. It cannot be allowed to happen again.

The rules must be applied without fear or favour.

The best must find their conviction, and their passionate intensity once more.

James is a co-editor of the On Fields of Green Blog http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/

About the author

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

5,802 Comments so far

bogsdolloxPosted on1:09 am - May 20, 2013


paradisebhoy says:
Sunday, May 19, 2013 at 21:57
mullach says:

Sunday, May 19, 2013 at 21:38

“The audio suggests MM may not be in the right frame of mind to fight his corner”

MM sounds as if he is ” tired and emotional” and IA sounds as if he is taking advantage of the situation. Altogether a very embarrassing exchange for Murray , I can’t see him continuing after this .
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It does sound that MM had a few bevies in him but he didn’t let his guard down too much. Who fills the silences?

Was this call the morning after the incident that was caught on video? Why does Imran talk about “we” and then fall back on the pretence that he’s calling on behalf of Charles. This call is a real set up and maybe the shenanigans in the Blue room was too.

The Rangers are sorely in need of their decent fans to get behind the club and drive the spivs out.

View Comment

john clarkePosted on1:10 am - May 20, 2013


briggsbhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 00:40
‘.. I’m thinking of one particular scenario where I was informing my Assistant Manager that she had two choices, I was either going to sack her for gross misconduct or she stepped down from her role..
—–
briggsbhoy, I hope you were more humane in your approach to that difficult ( and I’ve been there) situation than that really repugnant and repulsive second-hand bully-boy Ahmad.

I also hope that your mention of this incident is not due to any kind of feeling that you were in the wrong and acting unjustly! ( I’ve been there too)

View Comment

CastofThousandsPosted on1:14 am - May 20, 2013


john clarke says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 00:56

Did post a few times as CastOfThousands.

I got introduced to the blog (RTC) January last year and took a great interest initially. The discussion even at that relatively early stage was quite detailed and I was really only able to provide an onlookers perspective. Changed name when I Tuped over due to an unfortunate mistype. I dropped away for a good while but I’m glad I returned.

I thought I had maybe been a bit pushy seeing as I’m relatively new knowledge wise. It is a real education. Sometimes its hard to appreciate how little I know given that many have turned over the arguments many times in the past. I’m very grateful for you kind words which give me much encouragement.

View Comment

john clarkePosted on1:30 am - May 20, 2013


mullach says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 01:14
‘.Did post a few times as CastOfThousands.’
—-
I’m glad you’re back.

My notebook ( i.e. pen and ink jotter) records ‘castofthousands’ as a poster.

I would love to say that I recognised the writing style

.So I’ll say it!

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on1:44 am - May 20, 2013


Mr Clarke & Bogsdollox regading our new poster Mullach can I just highlight that he failed to show at Glasgow Green for our pistols at dawn session, he obviously had a hot date and met his “match”.

You may rest easy that my approach to discipline was nothing like our good friend mr Ahmed’s. I really should have sacked her but I was a forgiving guy. My RM had stolen her from a competitor and imposed her on me even after I told him several times she was bad news.
The hardest one to one I ever had was telling a young female member of staff that her armpits were minging. Now she was bowfing and now of my all female staff were willing to tell. I ran the opening lines of that conversation over and over in my head, I was laughing with nerves and had to control myself before the event. I went for the praise sandwich, told her she was doing great in my opening salvo, flung your minging in the middle and finished with just me and her knew about this conversation (what a liar, the office was looking straight at me throw my office window, she had her back to them) and I told her she was a rising star to finish. Now I tell you she was a bit shelled shocked but she smelled likes roses from then onwards. 🙂

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on6:56 am - May 20, 2013


briggsbhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 01:44
3 3 Rate This

The hardest one to one I ever had was telling a young female member of staff that her armpits were minging …
————-

Ooft, too much information briggsy. Although bowfing & minging are excellent adjectives to add to the glossary of useful blog words 🙂

On the downside, Charlotte hasn’t turned up with any nocturnal twitter postings. Oh dear.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:20 am - May 20, 2013


chipm0nk says:
Sunday, May 19, 2013 at 22:21
==============================

Excellent clarification on the most likely reason HMRC did not push to appoint the Administrator. It has been one of the real bugbears of mine that D & P were appointed and allowed to act as they did, but it seems more understandable now why HMRC were not that bothered.

View Comment

Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt)Posted on7:32 am - May 20, 2013


Videos of MM surface

http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/?p=12237097&t=8804754

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:43 am - May 20, 2013


@Upthehoops
You do wonder if the chosen liquidators will turn out to be a paper tiger, with the only winners the liquidators themselves as they rake in huge fees.

A poster in the comment section following The Scotsman’s piece on the MM sacking tape linked to this video of MM. Well, I’m shocked. Here was me thinking all club chairmen were teetotal!

View Comment

paulmac2Posted on8:12 am - May 20, 2013


briggsbhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 01:44
…………………………………..

I’ve had the same issue…Always best to get a senior female member of staff to discuss such delicate things with another female..

View Comment

paulmac2Posted on8:13 am - May 20, 2013


Danish Pastry says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 07:43
………………………………………

To be fair that could be most of us on here on a Saturday night 🙂

View Comment

iamacantPosted on8:14 am - May 20, 2013


Danish Pastry says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 07:43

“Here was me thinking all club chairmen were teetotal!”
—————————————————————————————-

So was CG having a sly dig at MM in his xmas video when he said he himself was teetotal?

View Comment

paulmac2Posted on8:19 am - May 20, 2013


bogsdollox says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 00:35
……………………………………..

I agree he can be robust…which is a good thing…and I’ve no problem at all with NT…and it will provoke debate…

So apologies if my minor observation appeared unfair..

View Comment

Forres Dee (@ForresDee)Posted on8:38 am - May 20, 2013


Just watched the MM videos.

He’s drunk, so what, glass houses and all that.

However, if he has a problem, then rather than publicise this in a completely un-rangers way; they should be offering him help, not subjecting him to ridicule.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:44 am - May 20, 2013


iamacant says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 08:14

Danish Pastry says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 07:43

“Here was me thinking all club chairmen were teetotal!”
—————————————————————————————-

So was CG having a sly dig at MM in his xmas video when he said he himself was teetotal?
———————————————————————————————-

He has mentioned the teetotal thing a few times. I often find that people who have previously enjoyed alcohol and perhaps changed their lifestyle, for whatever reason, sometimes become militant teetotallers and wave that as their flag, even to complete strangers. Personally I find the white hankie much more endearing.Not that I would wish anyone to take my remarks as a reference to Mr Green of course.

If someone asks me if I would like a drink then my choice would depend on time of day, what I still had to do, the company I was in and whether I fancied a pint, glass of wine, a coffee or a soft drink. Even if I was a teetotaller I wouldn’t feel any need to announce that – I would just request whatever non-alcoholic drink I felt like having at that time.

My deep-seated suspicion of militant teetollaers was formed early in my business life because the nearest I ever came to complete financial disaster was through dealing with two Christian tee-totallers. They were the biggest and slickest con-artists I have ever come across. Even they didn’t realise what they were as it was all done in God’s name and in that I believe they were genuine. My mistake was I thought that their ethical code extended to business dealings with ordinary mortals like myself.

It was a lesson expensively learnt at the time but one that saved me a lot financially and in terms of angst over the years.

View Comment

TSFMPosted on8:53 am - May 20, 2013


bogsdollox says:

Monday, May 20, 2013 at 00:35 (Edit)

I’m really struggling to understand why Night Terror gets such a hard time on here.

To me, NT generally sounds pretty objective. Is that a bad thing?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No it’s not a bad thing it is vital to the health of this blog.

He is a very “robust” poster very much like the Aberdeen posters on here he really provides some non West of Scotland insight on various matters which I find valuable. It looks to me that some of the Celtic minded posters find it difficult to deal with and I can understand that.
____________________________________________________________________________

I agree. NT provides a robust alternative POV from that which many hold, but he has emerged as a real asset to the blog.

NT is also one of the reasons why I am scratching my head a bit at the accusations of bullying by a contributor yesterday. I think robust debate in the spirit of mutual respect is good for us all. My view is that one of the many strengths of this community is that most of us actually listen to what is being said by others – even if it doesn’t fit in with our own preconceptions.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:55 am - May 20, 2013


Well we’ve had Charlotte and now we’ve got Joe90

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-braced-release-tape-boardroom-1899978

Rangers braced for release of tape of boardroom meeting that led to removal of ex-chief Charles Green

GREEN was placed on gardening leave after the meeting on April 13 in which he was grilled about his links with former chairman Craig Whyte. He resigned six days later.

RANGERS are braced for the release of a tape of the dramatic board meeting that led to the ousting of former chief executive Charles Green.

The meeting – one of the most controversial in the club’s entire history – has reputedly been recorded on a tape which is now set to be put on the internet.

An email sent by someone going by the name of Joe Ninety has threatened to make the meeting public at the conclusion of the internal Rangers investigation into Green’s links with disgraced ex-chairman Craig Whyte.

The meeting – on April 13 – saw Green grilled by his fellow directors about Whyte. He was put on “gardening leave” and resigned from Rangers six days later on April 19.

The threat to go public with the boardroom tape comes after the release of a recorded conversation between sacked Rangers commercial director Imran Ahmad and underfire chairman Malcolm Murray, which has been made public via a Twitter account.

The same emailer is involved with both tapes. In a reference to the Rangers internal commission, the emailer claims: “Have VR (voice recording) of board meeting discussing sacking IA (Imran Ahmad)/CG (Charles Green) whatever happens to prove this but will release this after commission is finished.”

The email goes on to claim Walter Smith and the rest of the club’s non-executive directors (NEDs) will be booted off the board at an extraordinary general meeting of Rangers
shareholders.

The meeting has been called for by controversial tycoon brothers, Sandy and James Easdale, who are expected to buy Ahmad and Green’s Rangers shares.

It claims: “Rangers NEDs will all be voted out at EGM for gross negligence.”

View Comment

TSFMPosted on8:55 am - May 20, 2013


Whilst I am in soft-focus mode 🙂 , I feel I should echo the sentiments of JC and others with a nod of appreciation in the direction of a relatively new poster, Mullach, who has done a tireless job of shining a light on the CtH path for us. A lot of effort and research for which I am sure most will be grateful.

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on8:55 am - May 20, 2013


Paulmac2 08:12

Whilst not unattractive (not that that matter) she unfortunately was a rather unrefined young lady at times and a bit of a rough ticket at times, feared by most of the staff. An Orange Rangers supporter fae Larkhall, RFC jewellery and all that, can’t accuse me of being biased where employment was concerned. Whilst she may not have whiffed like a violet she was not of the shrinking variety. I spoke individually to all my staff who had all complained about her and suggested they drop a bit of deodrant in the toilet or have a private word with her, they all refused as they were scared of her, therefore it was left to me.

View Comment

zerotolerance1903Posted on8:56 am - May 20, 2013


Trying to catch up on goings on after a busy weekend. Charlotte, and others, appear to have been busy.

Stepping back from it all, I find myself wondering if Charlotte may actually be a genuine whistleblower – maybe from one of the many professional firms (or governing bodies) that have been involved in the process – as the revelations seem to be slowly but surely working towards discrediting every one of them.

i hope so. It would be good to cleanse the whole Scottish game and in that environment, perhaps, a new Rangers could have a proper fresh start.

View Comment

y4rmyPosted on9:05 am - May 20, 2013


Just listened to the Ahmad tape and watched the video. If IA/CG somehow think this is going to help them then it is a huge idiotic miscalculation. And MM was drunk at a social function: so what?

From the outside these look like clumsy, ill-conceived smears contrived to discredit a man who appears to be trying to enforce proper corporate governance (at last!).

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on9:06 am - May 20, 2013


Whilst my comments on handling awkward staff situations may seem well OT when discussing MM and mr Ahmed can I just highlight the fact that in my opinion the conversion between the two is not something that should have taken place over the phone. If he had any degree of professionalism mr ahmed should have had a face to face with MM, he took a cowards option

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:12 am - May 20, 2013


zerotolerance1903 says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 08:56
1 0 Rate This

… Stepping back from it all, I find myself wondering if Charlotte may actually be a genuine whistleblower – maybe from one of the many professional firms (or governing bodies) that have been involved in the process – as the revelations seem to be slowly but surely working towards discrediting every one of them …
———–

Indeed @zero. If CF is sitting on hundreds of documents it would be great to see them dumped Wikileaks-style, as was mooted earlier. Open every window and let the light shine in.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on9:19 am - May 20, 2013


TSFM says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 08:53

I think robust debate in the spirit of mutual respect is good for us all. My view is that one of the many strengths of this community is that most of us actually listen to what is being said by others – even if it doesn’t fit in with our own preconceptions.
===================================================================

I have been involved in internet comment for a long number of years and believe I have something to offer in that regard and also a lot to learn.

But when I first came here I was treated to a very abusive and nasty attack by one of the regular posters which was totally unwarranted IMO. Some posters would have gone never to return but I happen to be cut from a different cloth.

However, I received no support from other posters and it appeared obvious to me that that, to an extent, there is a feeling of an old guard clique on the site. I may or may not be justified in making that observation but whether it is incorrect or not it happens to be my feeling.

I dealt with the matter by resolving to ignore the poster concerned in future. I don’t read his posts and I would never respond to him and tend to ignore discussions that he is heavily involved with. I have no fear of the person concerned as it is easy to spot the playground bully and I’ve never had any problem with dealing with them in real life but on the internet I would rather ignore them because they tend to come with a closed-mind which has no interest to myself as I want to debate with the possibility that not everyone has entrenched positions.

All I would say that sometimes a new poster can appear a bit gauche on a new site when they try to appear calm and collected while their feet are paddling furiously, out od sight, trying to just remain afloat.

I don’t btw ascribe that condition to NT 🙂 Basically all I’m saying is that sometimes it would do wonders for a new poster to get a bit of moral encouragement with a TU not necessarily for the content of a post but for the effort in making it.

This is a good site and disagreement is often healthy but you can learn much more about the strengths and weaknesses of your own position through debating with opposing posters rather than basking in a mutual admiration society of those who share exactly the same position.

This post is not meant to be divisive but is just my observation which underpins my belief that in Scottish Footballing terms that unity of purpose forged from many different viewpoints is what will provide fans with a say at the top tables and the power to change and improve that that brings.

View Comment

barcabhoyPosted on9:22 am - May 20, 2013


Yet another example of the Green / Ahmad faction failing to understand the reality of being Scottish.

A guy has a bit too much to drink at a social function. That’s a rarity amongst us Scots.

How many looked at that video and thought ” There but for the grace ………. ”

We are seeing the real character of these spivs coming to the fore. There are no boundaries for them. They like to play rough. Wouldn’t it be apt if the City of London Police decided it was time for them to pay serious attention to their activities

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on9:33 am - May 20, 2013


Apologies for reverting to Friday, but I had a big weekend… ;p

Night Terror says: Friday, May 17, 2013 at 10:33
“Are you saying because a player, Larsson for example, is sometimes fouled it’s OK for him to go down when not fouled?”
My Q: How the heck did you get that from what I wrote?
Your answer: “Erm, by reading your words and understanding them is how I got that from what you wrote. I’m still getting it.”
You didn’t get it from my words, because that’s not what I wrote. What I did write was that minimum contact can force someone into seemingly tripping themselves, especially those running at pace – but it was still the contact from the “tackler” caused it.

I’m also saying just because you didn’t see a foul doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

In summary: players sometimes deliberately draw what seems accidental contact – every player on the pitch can do this for different reasons. The tackler wants plausible deniability of it being “accidental”, so stopping the man on with the ball with minimum penalty, if any at all; in the case of the man with the ball, they want it to seem deliberate, and then get a foul their way. The ref makes a judgement. For the record, my opinion is that refs are fallible.

In summary

 Should players not dive? Yes players shouldn’t dive. That’s the laws of association football.
 Should players not trip? Yes players shouldn’t trip. That’s the laws of association football.
 If players they get tripped should they fall? Yes players should fall, that’s the law of gravity.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:45 am - May 20, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 09:19
4 0 Rate This

… This is a good site and disagreement is often healthy but you can learn much more about the strengths and weaknesses of your own position through debating with opposing posters rather than basking in a mutual admiration society of those who share exactly the same position …
———–

Well said ecobhoy.

View Comment

bluPosted on9:49 am - May 20, 2013


jockybhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 09:33
===========================================
Jocky, maybe you could have left Friday’s discussion behind? CtH’s been busy albeit she hasn’t yet released the on-pitch recordings of John McDonald, Barry Robson or Henrik Larsson telling team mates that they were definitely going to get a penalty as soon as a defender breathed on them.

View Comment

Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt)Posted on9:51 am - May 20, 2013


Excellent summation of Charlotte Fakeover’s little teases…

http://www.thefootballlife.co.uk/post/50755340972/extreme-fakeover-glasgow-edition

Well worth the read……..some folks like Tom English might want to read it so he can understand that all Scottish football fans (not just Celtic) are interested in all of this because it shows the corruption going on around us, while Tom and his group sit idly by saying nothing to see, move on here………….

View Comment

barcabhoyPosted on9:56 am - May 20, 2013


Keith Jackson today

“It is to be hoped that lessons have been learned from the Rangers debacle of 12 months ago because that one was treated like a hot potato before the Ibrox club was dropped into the Third Division in the worst piece of decision making since a peckish Luis Saurez dipped his own arm in barbecue sauce.”

Leaving aside the inevitable debate over whether Rangers were dropped into SFL 3 or fast tracked into ahead of every other interested club, the statement above is being repeated ad nauseam by many journalists, without justifying why Rangers in the SPL would have stopped UKIO and UBIG going into administration and what positive effect it would have had on Dunfermline , who don’t play in the same league.

The other irritating aspect of this type of statement is that it ignores what should have been done to a Club who went into liquidation . Creditors are unlikely to receive even 1p in the £. What in Jackson’s view should have happened to Rangers, in terms of punishment for going into liquidation ? Should this punishment only apply to Rangers ? Should it only apply to clubs who have an average attendance of over 40,000 / 15,000 / 10,000

Jackson and others claim Rangers demise has caused a knock on effect , without producing a shred of evidence to back that up.

They claim Rangers in the SPL would be the solution to cure many ills, yet again produce no evidence to support that claim.

It’s easy for Journalists to load up the Gatling gun and blast away at whatever target is easy/ popular/ will boost circulation. What would be immeasurably more helpful is using the platform they have been provided with to detail the problems and presents a solution , and does so without undue weight being given to the position of any single club

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on9:58 am - May 20, 2013


Good Morning,

I ,for one, feel very uncomfortable about the position of Malcolm Murray in the media and within social media this morning.

I am not keen at all on the release of video footage or audio clips which suggest or confirm that Mr Murray has a habitual problem with alcohol.

If– and I stress that it is a big if— Mr Murray has been brought into this affair to lend an air of public respectability to the face of the current Rangers’ companies, to provide a degree of professional qualification for the benefit of the AIM placing, and to provide a degree of business PR to the Rangers Support — only to be booted out when and if he does not tow the party line– then that may be viewed as underhand.

However, if all of the above was planned in the knowledge that Mr Murray may well have a personal problem and should be counted as among the vulnerable in society and so can be placed under unreasonable personal pressure by those who wish to manipulate a situation for their own personal gain— then the release of video tape and other material to further those ends whilst potentially damaging Malcolm Murray’s personality is despicable.

I have never met Malcolm Murray and have no knowledge of the man.

However, I have met many people who have had a drink problem– and have met many who at the time did not know or recognise that they have a drink problem. I have seen people die from such a condition and I have seen many recover and walk on in life — Thank God.

Anyone who seeks to exploit or manipulate anyone in such a situation deserves nothing other than total and complete contempt. Equally those who choose to mock or find any form of amusement or justification in such a distasteful situation should take a right good look at themselves,

We will all know people who have had such problems and whilst I enjoy my glass of wine and a pint I often think of others who have struggled and say — There but for the grace of God go I.

This is a dirty dirty business– a wretched business– played out by an entire pack of suited lowlifes and if any of them had any moral fibre at all they would walk away from such a dirty wee cabal.

It all has nothing whatsoever to do with furthering the beautiful game or sport in general.

A plague on all their houses.

They are not for me.

View Comment

Honey Toast (@HoneyToaster)Posted on10:01 am - May 20, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:

well said – agree totally

View Comment

bluPosted on10:10 am - May 20, 2013


Barca @ 9:56
Jackson and others claim Rangers demise has caused a knock on effect , without producing a shred of evidence to back that up.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
But of course Rangers demise had a knock-on effect on at least the two clubs you mention. Mr Masterson’s club stewardship was the same credit-card style as Mr Murray and Vlad’s predecessors (including Mr Jefferies) adopted a ‘speculate to accumulate’ approach to chase Rangers and Celtic. It failed, that’s why they had to sell to Vlad. I’m sure that Mr Jackson would understand that.

View Comment

twopandaPosted on10:39 am - May 20, 2013


Wow! – Shocking treatment of Malcolm Murray. Don’t have a say or a vote but all the people behind this should be thrown out of Scottish Football – and Scottish Business life. Reprehensible intents and actions.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:40 am - May 20, 2013


blu says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 10:10

But but but but but but but…….its a one-horse race and thats a bad thing shirley, especially when its them.

On a more serious note, the point is which do you rank more highly, a one horse race due to historic size principally down to the nearest competitor falling by the wayside, through a situation that continues to be entirely of its own making, or a corporate entity within sport stiffing creditors including my good self through tax fiddling and false competition and then subsequently receiving (demanding?) a degree of cushioning from both the authorities and the media at large.

I would suggest in Mr Jackson’s case that it is the former.

And yes the fact that the other teams won’t or can’t step up to the plate is frustrating, but neither do I wish any of them, my own included, to take an excessive flyer just to collect a bit of tin. Also relevant here were Tam Cowans comments on Saturday re CL qualification in the spurs arsenal broo haha.

Oh and in case your reading Stuart Tam’s comment on Mr Souness was inappropriate whatever the situation. No need to pronounce the ‘T’ we’d have got the joke just the same!

View Comment

abigboydiditandranawayPosted on10:41 am - May 20, 2013


briggsbhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 09:06

I just listened to the Malcolm Murray tape this morning and found it excruciating…
I must agree with your view that Mr. Ahmad should have had the courage to arrange a meeting with Malcolm Murray on a face to face basis to discuss the issues of concern…
Malcolm Murray should, of course, been made aware of the purpose of the meeting prior to it taking place…

With regard to the video clip of Malcolm Murray in an “over-refreshed” condition, i would hate to think that the release of said video would cause him any long term damage, it is at worst embarrassing…
I despise the current trend for recording people’s social faux pas and always give short shrift to such “information”

What i think shall, perhaps, cause Malcolm Murray more long term problems is his lethargic responses to Mr. Ahmad in the telephone call. Mr. Murray would have been far better, in my view, to tell Mr. Ahmad, robustly but politely, that this was not a situation suitable for resolving in a phone call…
I think he made an error there, although he did sound as though he had been caught completely unaware by the call…

Whatever, it looks as if he’s yesterday’s news at The Rangers and in my view should thank his lucky stars for that…

pure poison…

View Comment

greenockjackPosted on10:49 am - May 20, 2013


BRTH
Whilst acknowledging that you stressed the word “if”, the main part of your post speculated on MM having a drink problem.
Neither you nor I know if that is the case.
Surely more than a smear campaign carried out by spivs is required before such detailed debate into alcoholics is apt.

What the smear campaign does point to is the level and perhaps desperation of the spivs at this juncture.
As far as Malcolm Murray is concerned, I think it more apt to look at what he´s achieved and against the odds.
He seems to have complied with his remit very well.
The smear campaign is in some ways a backhanded compliment.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:53 am - May 20, 2013


abigboydiditandranaway says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 10:41

he did sound as though he had been caught completely unaware by the call…
=================================================================

I haven’t listened to it again but going from memory he wasn’t caught unawares so much as surprised by what appears to have been his perception that he had actually been sacked prior to the call. He was taken unawares IMO by the semi olive branch being extended by Imran as he says something about having adapted to the position (presumably being sacked).

Of course it was no olive branch but more a realisation that his sacking would need to be revealed to Cenkos who in turn would have needed to have made an AIM announcement and the unpredictable results of that might have been judged to be potentially harmful to Green and Ahmad.

I also think Murray said he had just come in from somewhere – although I couldn’t catch where – and this was apparently known to Ahmad.

I still think the important thing is that we never heard the call-back and certainly either by then or a short-time later MM decided to fight and he’s still here. Whether he found that strength within himself or it was provided from elsewhere I’m not sure.

But it all ended with Green having to resign and Ahmad according to the Darkside being sacked without a penny compensation. So MM didn’t end up as the pushover they thought they had.

View Comment

Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt)Posted on10:54 am - May 20, 2013


A little OT while we wait for more videos coming (Leggo claims there is one of IA coming soon as is Follow Follow on one involving IA at Stockbridge’s wedding – not that anyone is wondering how close they are when he attends his wedding mind you!)……

What is it about football strips nowadays that we have to watch teams play in away tops all the time?

Yesterday Dundee Utd played in an all white strip while Celtic played in an all black strip.

This weekend will see Celtic play in an all black strip.

In these days of HD TV’s how come someone has decided that wearing home tops would mean that I could mistake who was playing for which team – if I could see clearly that Dixie Deans doing a jig after his goals against Hibs in the days of fuzzy black and white small TV’s, how come this weekend in age of massive TV’s in HD colour might I mistake the teams?

Just a pet hate of mine – sorry for the diversion!

View Comment

Carl31 (@C4rl31)Posted on11:00 am - May 20, 2013


Re the Hearts situation:
“…
“It’s a terrible situation and a situation that was always going to develop, the way the club was being run,” the East Fife boss told BBC 5 live.

“But surely today the SPL board can’t relegate Hearts. We’ve already had one of the biggest teams in the world [Rangers] relegated to the lowest division and now we’re going to potentially relegate one of the biggest teams in Scotland as well.

“It’s crazy. We’ve got to keep the top teams in the top league or else there’ll be no competition at all.

“The way the owner of the club was spending money and paying money to players that really wasn’t sustainable.

“It was a crazy situation for the size of club we are, but Hearts can run perfectly well on their own and surely they can’t put them down, they are too big a club. We need all the big clubs in the top league in Scotland as far as I am concerned.”
…”

[my emphasis]

from bbc story at http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22593734

Is it just me, or are we about to revisit the whole commercial interest v sporting integrity issue again this summer?

With respect to Billy Brown, its not crazy that a club that liquidates starts again from the bottom. The opposite is actually the case, that Scottish Football turns into some kind of WWE type freakshow with choreographed matches should it go down the road of propping up clubs that fail.

View Comment

Galling fiverPosted on11:01 am - May 20, 2013


Hearts face a problem today, the rule book has been ignored for over a year now. If they are docked points and relegated, then are Dundee safe or is Morton on a winner, or yet another excuse for leapfrogging. And given the relations between Hearts, Dunfermline, Morton (see CO/EBT’s, Bank scandal & recent investors respectively), may even go unchallenged, again.

View Comment

ZilchPosted on11:07 am - May 20, 2013


Well the SPL season is over – and Armageddon has never looked so good. What a season!

OK, so Celtic took the title, as widely anticipated, but with what must be the lowest points tally in years.

Motherwell had a cracking season, St Johnstone are in Europe for the second year in a row, Inverness Caley and Ross county both had fantastic seasons, Hibs are in the Scottish Cup final second year in a row, St Mirren won the league cup, Dundee Utd and Aberdeen didn’t do great but have two new managers ready to bring them forward. Wow, just wow!

Of course there have been downsides too.

Poor old Dundee had a fairly torrid time, but largely as a result of the lack of preparation time to get ready for the unexpected promotion. They look good for a rapid return though. Good luck to them.

Hearts are in serious financial difficulty and we can only hope that a buyer can be found to get them back on track – wouldn’t it be great to see significant fan involvement in a rescue package? Hope they make it.

Dunfermline are also in serious financial difficulties. Again, you have to feel sorry for the fans who have watched their great club crash like this. Hope they make it too.

Then there is the Ibrox omnishambles that continues to rumble on, damaging the reputation of Scottish Football at every turn and shedding further light on the corruption at the heart of Scottish football governance. Again, I genuinely feel sorry for decent fans that simply want to watch their team play football.

Which brings me to the point of the post.

Are there lessons to be learned? Where are the common denominators? (This is for the MSM lurkers…)

Weeeelllllll…..

You could point out that the three cases of football insolvency (potential insolvency in Hearts case) all involve clubs that have “benefited” from the patronage of so-called business men who it turns out all had a penchant for fairly dodgy dealings. Fit and proper people? Mibbee we should have a rule for that?

You could also point out that in each case highlighted above, the situation has been massively compounded by the fact that the Association rules were inadequate for dealing with the complexity of modern football financing and club ownership. Mibbee time that the rule book was looked at by a competent football administrator??

You could also point out that in each case above, the same folks that are charged with looking after the governance of Scottish Football have made a complete pig’s ear of it. Their ineptitude is only matched by their blatant bias towards one club, including the receipt of tax free loans by Mr Ogilvie. Mibbee its time we campaigned for a change of leadership at the top – including application of a fit and proper person test for each role?

You might also want to ask the SFA what they intend to do about those people who have wrought such ruin upon once great clubs such as Rangers, Hearts and Dunfermline? Mibbee there might be a rule for people that bring the game into massive disrepute? Mibbee it should be applied. I believe it involves a funny wee latin phrase – sine die.

Yup that’s the one. Sine die. Mibbee we should be actively campaigning to have this applied to those people who have done such damage to the game? Hmmmm. Where to start with this one? Well I reckon the good folks at TSFM could come up with a fairly comprehensive list for you in jig time.

A starter for ten perhaps?

SDM – for blatant attempts to subvert player registration rules in a co-ordinated and furtive (BRTH rights acknowledged) manner and for knowingly introducing CW and cronies to the Scottish game. Sine Die.

CW – for bringing the game into disrepute through failure to pay social taxes.

CG – for bringing the game into disrepute through improper business practises and by use of racist language and attempts to stuir up sectarian tensions.

Masterton – for improper use of banking powers to apply pressure on other clubs to effectively supply Rangers with cheaper than market rate players and for running DAFC into the ground.

Other members of the old Rangers board (Martin Bain, John McClelland, Alasdair Johnston) during the EBT period – for blatant attempts to subvert player registration rules in a co-ordinated and furtive (BRTH rights acknowledged) manner.

Others? I am sure we can provide the names of those whose status as fit and proper persons is in need of serious scrutiny.

But hey MSM hacks! Forget it. Just you keep on demanding the immediate acceleration of the Ibrox club to the top and supporting the instatement of ‘Rangers Men’ like Dave King and the Easdale brothers. All problems sorted. That will work out fine.

Won’t it?

View Comment

Forres Dee (@ForresDee)Posted on11:07 am - May 20, 2013


Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 10:54

Just a pet hate of mine – sorry for the diversion!

———————————–

With that awful colour utd wear they shouldn’t even need an alternate kit.

However, they do and they sell replicas, if they didn’t wear the kit during a game would it still be a replica top or just a rip off?

View Comment

timtimPosted on11:16 am - May 20, 2013


Joe 90 is IA according to FF
Here is the email that was sent with the recording.

This VR is why MM has a personal vendetta and is not objective re CG and IA. The £1m spent on Pinsents could have been spent more wisely by spending £500k with Allen and Overy to shut CW up forever.

Much more to come. CG/IA delivered £35m to Rangers and everyone makes them villains when proven liar CW comes out with a pack of lies. It will take a few months but the truth should hopefully come out.

Just need Malcolm’ s personal Witch Hunt/Vendetta ahem “Independent Commission” complete and lawyers will sort CW (lawyers don’t want to start case just in case anything out of MM personal witch hunt contradicts case against CW) out once and for all….

Whole Rangers board is grossly negligent carrying on with a Witch Hunt which can never be conclusive. The only way to know whether CW is involved or not is to take him to a real court and shut him up forever.

MM and WS have made a big mistake. They have set up a firing squad independent commission when they were planning on firing CG and IA whatever the outcome (have VR of board meeting on 15/4 discussing sacking IA/CG whatever happens to prove this but will release this after commission is finished). They’re now stuck with an internal investigation which can only harm the club if it comes up with an inconclusive decision as it will give the CW conspiracy theorists a field day if they do not come up with a definitive yes or no.

Rangers NEDs will all be voted out at EGM for gross negligence as petitioners have the right to amend and add resolutions which they will of course do.

FPTP as usual (first past the post)

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:20 am - May 20, 2013


Zilch2

Fair comments you make. Interesting that, once again, Paul Murray escapes without mention. He must truely be the new teflon kid down Ibrox way now Stewart, McLoy, Walker etc have hung up their gloves!

I’m not disagreeing on your Ogilvie point either, other than to say that a true administrator would realise that it is not whether or not that he is conflicted, but rather the damage created by the mere perception that he is conflicted.

hard neckit just doesn’t do it justice.

View Comment

abigboydiditandranawayPosted on11:21 am - May 20, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 10:53

So Ahmad and Green depart and Malcolm Murray stays…
In my opinion that is a long journey from the audio clip we have been privy to…

How does that happen?…How does Malcolm Murray come back from what appeared to be a fait accompli…
Someone else must be involved to get Ahmad and Green removed , i take it that that will be our hero? Or is everybody at “The Big Hoose” gathering intelligence on each other…

Maybe CtH’s proposed wiki type dump would give clarity to the massive shaftathon which appears to be going on at Ibrox…

Furthermore Ahmad references the mythical “Rangers Way” of doing things in the disgraceful phone call to Murray…I guess he doesn’t do irony?

View Comment

arabest1Posted on11:22 am - May 20, 2013


RE this forum and bullying….can’t say I have seen any such thing. Football forums are a relatively new phenomenon and there are plenty to chose from, this is by far the most tolerant, informed, forensic and welcoming I have ever encountered. It could perhaps do with a few more from the south side of the Clyde but other than that its actually quite representative of Scottish football. The format may bring frustrations on occasion, not having separate threads can occasionally mean we are disturbing other people’s debates, but by and large the mods keep this in check, and I cannot think of many occasions when anyone has been subjected to abuse as such……once again I would invite anyone to look at a few other forums. ;). While I on this subject, genuine thanks for the hours of engrossing debate and analysis that this place has brought me, without doubt the most extraordinary community of fans I have ever been involved with, thanks to you all.

As for Night Terror….he has a refreshing and valuable anti establishment quality, Moore power to his keyboard!

View Comment

bluPosted on11:29 am - May 20, 2013


jockybhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 10:43
============================================
Sorry Jocky, I’m paying the price of nosing into other people’s squabbles. So here goes by way of explanation:

1. I do think the penalty/diver discussion was heading nowhere, but you’re right I’m not the site moderator.
2. NT was also taking a number of hits for forcefully expressing views that may not sit with the majority and was also invovled in the diving/penalty discussion
3. CtH (Charlotte the Harlot) = CF
4. I linked 1 and 3 above in a failed effort at a joke
5. I still think that the penalty/diver discussion only serves to fill gaps between the real action. What a shame for Gareth Bale though, eh? Just as well it made no difference to the CL outcome.
6. There seems to be a growing feeling that CtH/CF has not manufactured the material at home.
7. I don’t think that Adam is high on the suspects list.
8. Estranged Mrs CW, Mrs RTC, CW, genuine whistleblower have all been mentioned in dispatches.
9. Odds have not yet, as far as I’ve seen, been offered on Mr or Mrs Traynor being Deep Throat.

View Comment

chipm0nkPosted on11:30 am - May 20, 2013


I will keep reminding people that Rangers are being liquidated for as long as people take the stance “move along, nothing to see here” .

I will also keep reminding people that Rangers are a new club, otherwise they would be in the SPL this season, they would have been seeded in the cup, they would not have had to apply for a new licence and they would still have held a lot of players registrations without them having to “TUPE” to the new club.

I was listening to the radio the other night, and that is clearly the unfortunate truth they all just want to go away. It was disgusting listening to the way they spoke to the callers in a condescending and dismissive way. Talk about bullying, that’s exactly what was happening.

It would seem that a few people here are now taking the stance that it really doesn’t matter to them or that they are bored with discussing it. Fair enough, that’s your option and your opinion. You are perfectly entitled to it. I am entitled to mine.

View Comment

AllyJamboPosted on11:30 am - May 20, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:

Monday, May 20, 2013 at 09:58

I think you’ve summed up exactly what most on here will be thinking. The actions of Green and Ahmad in taking advantage is far more deserving of condemnation than Murray needing help at the end of a night out. What sort of sad character films a drunk man at the end of a boozy do? A private dick (pun intended) perhaps!

View Comment

Carl31 (@C4rl31)Posted on11:34 am - May 20, 2013


On the diving issue, I once had a lengthy discussion with a footy coach at a low level in the game – I found it insightful. A few points to share…

Its a contact sport – sometimes there is very little contact on an attacker and its enough for him to go down but the same kind of or impact contact takes place on another player, or the same player, in different circumstance and they dont go down.

Players go past each other at different speeds, thay have different balance, control etc.
The same player can have different speed and balance when running at different times of the game, especially if tired or playing with injury thats been picked up.

Each time a defending player makes a challenge that doesn’t get the ball or is quite physical, they take the chance that they’ve committed a foul, but that doesnt mean a coach wants shrinking violets on the pitch. They want their players to be physical and use physicality up to the point where its at the edge of being a foul. The top players are best at judging the limit. But this physicality also leads to examples of physical but legal challenges ending with the ‘challenged’ player flopping to the floor – ahem – ‘theatrically’.

There is such a thing as anticipating a challenge – if, through a game and in other areas of the pitch, or in previous games a player has been challenged in a certain way its not unreasonable to anticipate a similar challenge – this lends itself to sometimes some players seeming to go down easy.

Its no coincidence that the guys who get a rep for going down easy are the guys who have a lot of the ball, are fleet of foot and receive more than their fair share of physical challenges and fouls.

View Comment

Forres Dee (@ForresDee)Posted on11:46 am - May 20, 2013


Would just like to say hello to my serial thumbs downer, hiya Pal!

View Comment

zerotolerance1903Posted on11:57 am - May 20, 2013


timtim says:

Monday, May 20, 2013 at 11:16

Joe 90 is IA according to FF
Here is the email that was sent with the recording.

This VR is why MM has a personal vendetta and is not objective re CG and IA. The £1m spent on Pinsents could have been spent more wisely by spending £500k with Allen and Overy to shut CW up forever.

Much more to come. CG/IA delivered £35m to Rangers and everyone makes them villains when proven liar CW comes out with a pack of lies. It will take a few months but the truth should hopefully come out.

Just need Malcolm’ s personal Witch Hunt/Vendetta ahem “Independent Commission” complete and lawyers will sort CW (lawyers don’t want to start case just in case anything out of MM personal witch hunt contradicts case against CW) out once and for all….

Whole Rangers board is grossly negligent carrying on with a Witch Hunt which can never be conclusive. The only way to know whether CW is involved or not is to take him to a real court and shut him up forever.

MM and WS have made a big mistake. They have set up a firing squad independent commission when they were planning on firing CG and IA whatever the outcome (have VR of board meeting on 15/4 discussing sacking IA/CG whatever happens to prove this but will release this after commission is finished). They’re now stuck with an internal investigation which can only harm the club if it comes up with an inconclusive decision as it will give the CW conspiracy theorists a field day if they do not come up with a definitive yes or no.

Rangers NEDs will all be voted out at EGM for gross negligence as petitioners have the right to amend and add resolutions which they will of course do.

FPTP as usual (first past the post)
=======================================================================

If it will only take £500k to shut CW up forever then why hasn’t it been done already?

Malcom Murray’s investigation is a “witch hunt”? Really? Based on the information in the public domain the board had absolutely no choice.

View Comment

ZilchPosted on11:59 am - May 20, 2013


smugas says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 11:20

Fair comments you make. Interesting that, once again, Paul Murray escapes without mention. He must truely be the new teflon kid down Ibrox way now Stewart, McLoy, Walker etc have hung up their gloves!
————————————————————————————————————————

Smugas

Good shout. Add him to the list.

I would say that a Name and shame list might be useful, but not sure that many of those on it know what shame is. Still, it might be useful to keep a tally of culprits and misdemeanours for future reference. I imagine the list could become pretty substantial quite quickly….

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on12:08 pm - May 20, 2013


Good luck to Hearts today. Hopefully the SFA will be able to apply their own rules today, which as far as I can see means no action need be taken unless things get much worse financially.

Couple of precedents to bear in mind:
– Hearts completed the season yesterday. Per the evidence given to the LNS judgement, the season is now passed and it is not appropriate to revisit its results.
– Hearts are still in a better financial position than RFC were in their final year, or than Sevco were in their first year, so there should be no licence problem.
– Hearts are now run independently from UBIG and Ukio. Any action taken would compel the authorities to take action against any club whose major shareholder goes belly up regardless of whether there is evidence that this will impact the club. In effect they would be stepping in to PREVENT an insolvency event, even if it could be avoided.

Rules about starting the season with negative points were put in place for a reason. If any points deduction takes place, I hope the club takes them to court as Hearts do not deserve that unless the club is actually insolvent. Especially when we all know that exactly the same rules will be ignored or circumvented some time next year unless Sevco finds a sugar daddy.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on12:10 pm - May 20, 2013


ZT

I think that once again it is indicative of a common misconception about debt down Ibrox way being a two way street. They do not appear to understand what the £20m+ ticketus funds were actually used for. They seem to believe CW still has them in his account and thus Ticketus are simply asking for them back hence a £500k pay off would be just the ticket(us).

Lloyds TSB? naw they went away cos WATP etc etc

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on12:11 pm - May 20, 2013


Zilch

there’s no team named inverness caley now

it is inverness caledonian thistle – to represent the merger of two inverness teams, formerly they were — inverness thistle and inverness ‘caley’.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on12:16 pm - May 20, 2013


Radio reporting a deal to bring Kenny Miller back to Ibrox could be completed by Thursday!

Firstly,where’s the money coming from.
Secondly,he’s way over 21.Hope the SFL are keeping watch(but I wouldn’t bet on it).

View Comment

Brian McHugh (@pbmchugh)Posted on12:23 pm - May 20, 2013


Spiers.
Twitting like a madman this morning:
Sample:
Graham Spiers ‏@GrahamSpiers 41m
What a grisly mess at Rangers. Can this venomous shit flying around directors or ex-principals get any more debased than this?
—————————————–
benny blanco ‏@realmarkdoc 10m
@GrahamSpiers what happened to CG being great copy, a character, and a godsend to guys like you?
——————————-
Graham Spiers ‏@GrahamSpiers 8m
Nothing happened to it. That remains the case. Just don’t confuse fodder for journalists with the health of Rangers

Interesting last comment. Presumably a touch of Post-Modern irony here, after all
who on earth could possibly confuse fodder (from CG) for journalist with the health of ‘Rangers’?

View Comment

ZilchPosted on12:24 pm - May 20, 2013


jimlarkin says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 12:11

Zilch

there’s no team named inverness caley now

it is inverness caledonian thistle – to represent the merger of two inverness teams, formerly they were — inverness thistle and inverness ‘caley’.

————————————————————————————————————————-

Hi Jim

My apologies. Should have said Inverness Caledonian Thistle (ICT). These things are important.
No offense intended. Congratulations to them on an excellent season and commiserations on not making it into Europe – so close!

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on12:24 pm - May 20, 2013


smugas says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 12:10
0 0 Rate This
ZT

I think that once again it is indicative of a common misconception about debt down Ibrox way being a two way street. They do not appear to understand what the £20m+ ticketus funds were actually used for. They seem to believe CW still has them in his account and thus Ticketus are simply asking for them back hence a £500k pay off would be just the ticket(us).

Lloyds TSB? naw they went away cos WATP etc etc

——————————————–

i always wonder how much LTSB/HBOS got – surely they didn’t get the full £18M? if they did, then it was clearly a stitch up from day one.

They wanted out, i wouldn’t be surprised if CW offered them somewhere between 50-75% of the total owed to pay them off and let them exit stage left

View Comment

Long Time LurkerPosted on12:24 pm - May 20, 2013


O.G.Rafferty on CQN – providing his/her endorsement on the [@CharlotteFakes] tapes and documents:

O.G.Rafferty 18:17 on 19 May, 2013

For all the posters on here who ask are those tapes and documents real. They are.

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?cqn_match_reports_=dundee-united-0-4-celtic

View Comment

zerotolerance1903Posted on12:26 pm - May 20, 2013


In considering Hearts’ position I think there are two big questions.

1. Have Hearts suffered an insolvency event already?

I posted to the effect on Friday that based on the current rules (or any application of common sense) that HMFC have not had an insolvency event. Their position may be precarious but at this point neither HMFC nor it’s parent company UBIG have gone into administration.

There are certainly doubts over UBIG, but as yet they have not entered administration. That Ukio Bankas have entered administration is irrelevant at this stage. Hearts owe them money, as do UBIG but at this stage they are just creditors.

2. If UBIG goes into administration have HMFC suffered an insolvency event?

The follow up to consider is whether HMFC will have had an insolvency event IF and when UBIG enter administration. My personal opinion is that they will not given that they have operated independently of UBIG for the last 18 months.

The real danger for HMFC is that the bankruptcy of either or both of Ukio Bankas and UBIG COULD crystalise debts within HMFC that will then fall due immediately and are unable to be paid, or trigger a security over Tynecastle. At that point things could get brown and messy.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on12:32 pm - May 20, 2013


Help required.

I keep reading about Dave King in the MSM (Jackson in the Record mainly) and how he is possibly/maybe/could be poised to intervene in the The Rangers shaftathon (saw this word above in another post – liked it – and decided to make it my word of the day). But there is never any comment on whether he could be allowed back as a Director.

Is it not the case that given his business track record in SA and at the Oldco Rangers that he would not pass the SFA “fit and proper person” test? I read somewhere that his legals are talking to the SFA about this but surely the matter is cut and dried?

View Comment

Night TerrorPosted on12:35 pm - May 20, 2013


jockybhoy says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 09:33

Apologies for reverting to Friday, but I had a big weekend… ;p

Night Terror says: Friday, May 17, 2013 at 10:33
“Are you saying because a player, Larsson for example, is sometimes fouled it’s OK for him to go down when not fouled?”
My Q: How the heck did you get that from what I wrote?
Your answer: “Erm, by reading your words and understanding them is how I got that from what you wrote. I’m still getting it.”
You didn’t get it from my words, because that’s not what I wrote. What I did write was that minimum contact can force someone into seemingly tripping themselves, especially those running at pace – but it was still the contact from the “tackler” caused it.

I’m also saying just because you didn’t see a foul doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

In summary: players sometimes deliberately draw what seems accidental contact – every player on the pitch can do this for different reasons. The tackler wants plausible deniability of it being “accidental”, so stopping the man on with the ball with minimum penalty, if any at all; in the case of the man with the ball, they want it to seem deliberate, and then get a foul their way. The ref makes a judgement. For the record, my opinion is that refs are fallible.

In summary

ü Should players not dive? Yes players shouldn’t dive. That’s the laws of association football.
ü Should players not trip? Yes players shouldn’t trip. That’s the laws of association football.
ü If players they get tripped should they fall? Yes players should fall, that’s the law of gravity.

Thanks for your reply, jockybhoy. I too believe that TSFM can cope with more than one thread at the same time. With no option but to use the latest comment thread under the latest blog post (how many comments actually referred to the actual content in James Forrest’s post, I wonder), there is no alternative unless the mods want to enforce discussion on only one topic at a time.

Of course, if the board was in messageboard format that would not be a problem and nobody woudl be forced to read or skip past posts on topics they were trying to avoid. But, alas, that opportunity seems to be long passed.

Anyway.

On the one hand, you seem to summarise your opinions that players should not dive and should not foul, and should not stay up when fouled. Who could argue with that? Well, me. The rules are there to punish players that dive or foul. Players diving and fouling run the risk of being penalised by the referee. I like nothing more than seeing a United player taking one for the team by bringing down an attacker as they are about to burst forward into a very dangerous position. It’s not fair, it’s against the rules, but the player knew what he was doing and the likely consequences. Good football intelligence, I say. Infuriating for the opposition, no doubt. Good. That was the point.

That’s not to say one can deny that the foul took place in the first place just because it was your own player who committed it.

The same goes for the art of, in ascending order of deviousness, “drawing the foul”, “making the most of a challenge” and “diving”. I’m not one to say any of these are morally reprehensible – they’re part of the game. As I said earlier, much earlier, Barry Robson was especially poor at the last of those when at United, but improved greatly once he moved to Celtic. This was in comparison to Pawlett, who made a similarly awful Robson-esque attempt at portraying that he had been fouled when he hadn’t and there hadn’t been any contact at all. No foul, bad dive, justifiable booking.

And then we come on to Larsson, an exponent, in my and many others’ view, of very competent versions of the last two of those categories. Sometimes he drew a challenge and went down, sometimes there was heavy contact, sometimes minimal contact, sometimes, yes, none at all. The man was a professional footballer who made the most of his talents and opportunities – and I have great respect for him. I simply resent that he a) scored a lot of goals against my team b) gained a lot of advantage for his team by crafty endeavours not within the laws of the game c) supporters of this team often refuse to acknowledge his ability to get the best of the laws of the game on a fairly regular basis.

For me, Robson’s diving was an embarrassment and made it very easy for referees to book him and not give him fouls even when he had indeed been fouled. They rumbled him and damaged his effectiveness to us as a team. The refs never rumbled Larsson, mostly because he was so infuriatingly good at what he did.

I don’t condemn him for it. You don’t need to spring to his defence on any moral grounds. You do even seem to acknowledge that some players engineer the slightest contact, or the appearance of contact, and go down as a result. I don’t think we’re disagreeing about that in any way. We only seem to be disagreeing about whether Larsson did it, and did it very well.

I still think you’re trying to justify an attacker going down under minimal contact (it’s a contact sport, remember), contact that does not otherwise impede the attacker, or even no contact at all because they are often fouled by defenders.

I say to you that a foul is a foul, albeit there are grey areas that are near impossible to judge, even with multiple angle replays. Referees may not always detect them correctly – how could they? – and some players are much more adept at misleading the referee. Robson at United was not one of them. Larsson certainly was.

Do you, can you, disagree with that?

View Comment

Carl31 (@C4rl31)Posted on12:36 pm - May 20, 2013


I was under the impression that when HMFC were paying players late, they only managed to pay the players at all by some form of cash injection from the company who own them, UBIG?

I ask because it doesnt align with HMFC operating independently of UBIG for the last 18 months.

Happy to be put right on this one.

View Comment

timtimPosted on12:39 pm - May 20, 2013


@bogsdollox
the official comment from the blazers was
“they have no problem with his return in principal”

View Comment

greenockjackPosted on12:41 pm - May 20, 2013


LTL
re.OGRafferty

What do his confident pronouncments on leaks wrt content and timescale tell us about CF ?

Does anyone know why OG.R frequently has info.
Close to press/ club / other ?

View Comment

Night TerrorPosted on12:51 pm - May 20, 2013


arabest1 says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 11:22

As for Night Terror….he has a refreshing and valuable anti establishment quality, Moore power to his keyboard!

Do not encourage me.

P.S. – There are a few decent other football messageboards out there. Even one Arab joint I can think of.

View Comment

Forres Dee (@ForresDee)Posted on12:51 pm - May 20, 2013


greenockjack says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 12:41

LTL
re.OGRafferty

What do his confident pronouncments on leaks wrt content and timescale tell us about CF ?

Does anyone know why OG.R frequently has info.
Close to press/ club / other ?

———————————————–

Celtic fans I know hold him up in high regard, very rarely gets things wrong according to them.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on12:54 pm - May 20, 2013


greenockjack says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 12:41
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Your terrier like qualities of trying to out every poster who has info are to be admired. I agree it would be good to know who was involved but I resolved a long time ago to not let it bother me and just enjoy their show. After all I suspect anonymity is important to their personal safety.

@timtim – that is a strange comment but it doesn’t surprise me.

View Comment

dedeideoprofundisPosted on12:58 pm - May 20, 2013


bogsdollox says:
Monday, May 20, 2013 at 12:32
1 0 Rate This
Help required.

I keep reading about Dave King in the MSM (Jackson in the Record mainly) and how he is possibly/maybe/could be poised to intervene in the The Rangers shaftathon (saw this word above in another post – liked it – and decided to make it my word of the day). But there is never any comment on whether he could be allowed back as a Director.
==============
How do we know that he is not already involved, the names of the investors were never made public

View Comment

greenockjackPosted on12:58 pm - May 20, 2013


Forres
That was the impression I get.
Does anyone know why he might be in a position to know about CF ?

I ask because it would be useful to know or have a better idea of who was managing the leaks process.

I don´t doubt that they are genuine or based on genuine documents.

View Comment

ShooperbPosted on12:59 pm - May 20, 2013


Given the precedent that was set by LNS, If Hearts are bought up by a new owner over the summer, couldn’t they just claim that they shouldn’t lose 15 points or whatever, since the offences took place under the ‘old co’, and therefore the SFA/SPL should apply the punishments to UBIG? Or is that a bit simplistic (or facetitious?) If nothing else, it would force the SFA to clarify once and for all how they view Rangers?

That judgement opened a can of worms, the results of which I think we are still to fully see.

View Comment

bad capt madmanPosted on1:02 pm - May 20, 2013


Reply from Manchester Utd

I emailed Manchester utd re concerns over Rangers Charity as previously raised on this site, on the 16th May, and received the following today:

From:
Date: 20 May 2013 09:21:28 BST
To: (I’ve removed this bit)
Subject: RE: Concern over Rangers Charity match
Thank you for your email and for bringing this to our attention.

We have passed the details to the Manchester United Foundation and our Legal and Business Affairs Team who are best placed to look into this.

Kind regards,

Shelly

Enquiries
Customer Care Team Advisor

T +44 (0) 161 868 8000
F +44 (0) 161 868 8452
E Enquiries@manutd.co.uk

View Comment

Comments are closed.