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/
bogsdollox says:
June 10, 2013 at 4:06 pm
“…these services are being delivered in the UK to Liberty Capital Ltd…”.
———–
Thanks for the responses. Charlotte seems to know her VAT regulations.
On the Ticketus deal. The High Court ruling gives details of the arrangement.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/136013092/Ticketus-v-Whyte-Judgment-HC12F03282
Perhaps Hay McKerron, as a company, had not reached the VAT threshold as regards annual turnover.
£8,000 for 90 hours work, though . . . not bad going.
But did they get the cash?
On the Creditors list, RFC PLC RIP still owe Hay McKerron £3,600.
Whyte’s bill was to Belbios/Liberty Capital.
And Oor Wee Craigie didn’t get to be the man he is today by paying a bill on time. If ever.
My favourite-ever fugitive.
The Sage of G42 says:
June 10, 2013 at 4:32 pm
Re the question of the “wee tax case” not having crystalised; is that really the relevant test?
_________________________________________________________________
You’re right, it shouldn’t really be the relevant test. However, as the little tax case HAD crystalised – only the amount of the penalty was in dispute not the £2.8mn tax bill – this is kind of a moot point.
zerotolerance1903 says:
June 10, 2013 at 6:03 pm
0 1 Rate This
“You’re right, it shouldn’t really be the relevant test. However, as the little tax case HAD crystalised – only the amount of the penalty was in dispute not the £2.8mn tax bill – this is kind of a moot point.”
————————————————————————————————-
Reference to “crystalised” was picking up from earlier posting
chancer67 says:
June 10, 2013 at 1:52 pm
28 2 Rate This
I phoned Hampdem this morning, Mr Regan wasn’t available so I was put through to Head of Communicartoons a Mr Broadfoot who assured me that as the debt in question (the wee tax bill )) hadn’t crystalised at the time of issuing the license then the SFA are on solid ground.
So there you have it i can rest easy and stop being an internet bampot our national game is in safe hands.
zerotolerance1903 says:
June 10, 2013 at 6:03 pm
========================
If that is the case, and they were not appealing the assessment but only the level of penalty then there is no question they had an outstanding tax bill.
To say they didn’t because they were appealing the penalty which was accompanying it is simply nonsense.
It’s not even open to debate or interpretation.
Gaz says:
June 10, 2013 at 6:26 pm
zerotolerance1903 says:
June 10, 2013 at 6:03 pm
========================
If that is the case, and they were not appealing the assessment but only the level of penalty then there is no question they had an outstanding tax bill.
To say they didn’t because they were appealing the penalty which was accompanying it is simply nonsense.
It’s not even open to debate or interpretation.
————————————————————————————-
Exactly right.
Here’s how PR/Spin dominate the press,
http://www.flatearthnews.net/blog
Charlotte appears to be having a pop at Tom English now. Oh dearie me.
No wonder Whyte chose him to do his interview. He comes across as a fawning, deferential twit.
Maybe some of the MSM are trying very hard to ignore CF’s tweets, because CF has plenty of incriminating / embarrassing emails etc. on those same ‘journalists’ ?
Perhaps they have been lazy and complicit with Craig – and have asked for Craig to vet their proposed ‘stories’, as Darrell King seems to have done ?
Would that be the lowest point for a supposed Scottish sports journalist: having a chancer like Craig Whyte approve your copy ? 🙄
Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
June 10, 2013 at 6:43 pm
2 1 Rate This
Charlotte appears to be having a pop at Tom English now. Oh dearie me.
———–
And more than Tom English @Araminta, this wan’s a stoater:
“I cannot believe how idiotic Johnston was … what a tit!”
Tom English @TomEnglishSport 16min
@CharlotteFakes More rubbish I’m afraid. The programme was very far from being cráp.
(In reply to Ian McKerron telling CW that TE told him that the programme was cráp as per latest CTweet)
So does this mean the e-mail is altered ?
or
That McKerron (professional spiner at 250 notes per hour) is telling his client porkies ?
E-mail 21/10/11 re. McKerron/CW/BBC Doc feedback
http://i.imgur.com/gpSl8c2.jpg
Scotsman (TE) Q&A with CW on the 22/10/11
http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/sport/football/interview-craig-whyte-owner-of-rangers-who-has-come-out-fighting-against-tv-allegations-1-1925040
Note the question.
Did you hear that your old mate, Johnston, cried no surrender !
This leads into a line of attack for CW as surely arranged via McKerron as part payment for access.
Edit in above post.
McKerron is a spinner rather than a spiner.
Have UEFA ever came out and said they were happy with the license awarded to deadco for the 11-12 season?
Tom English @TomEnglishSport 8min
@JellyTim @GarryCarmody @CharlotteFakes All through that saga they lied to each other prodigiously behind the scenes. This stuff is mild
Aye maybe Tom, but so have the Scottish press then.
Or they have knowingly and willingly been the instrumments of misinformation to the support for 30 pieces of silver.
greenockjack says:
June 10, 2013 at 7:08 pm
I find it quite interesting that his (English) only response to the email, so far at least, is to say the Daly programme wasn’t crap. He didn’t deny that he said it was to Ian McKerron, nor did he deny that he’d given him reason to believe ‘he’s very sympathetic (to Rangers/Whyte)’ Whether he believes the email is real or not, it would have been quite simple for English to rubbish the content if he hadn’t given anyone at Rangers cause to think him sympathetic. A strangely weak response from a man of words.
Have UEFA ever came out and said they were happy with the license awarded to deadco for the 11-12 season?
no, but Maribor & Malmö were chuffed to bits.
Auld hied says @ 3.41;
Auldheid I phoned and to be honest when I asked to speak to Regan and to be told he wasnt available I thought ah well at least I tried.To my surprise I was put through to Daryl Broadfoot who was decent enough ,but he knew I knew he was talking pash.
I will try again this week but I have a feeling the sandbags are being deployed around Hampden as I post this.
http://es.scribd.com/doc/146936945/Tom-English-Accounts
David Grier still involved on 30/11/11.
Betts to Whyte e-mail
“That would be good, it’s just that Grier has it as a topic to discuss tomorrow, so I assumed all was not finished.”
———–
Tom the poodle (Gordon Hay to Whyte)
“Tom English had said he’ll have a pop at Paul Murray in his column tomorrow (sun).Scotsman used his comments on the back page with our responses ie. Irrelevantand of no consequence”.
Allyjambo
We all know or have a very good idea of how Scottish football hacks go about their business but this lays it bare and Tom won´t want to say too much because he doesn´t know what will be on the next tweet.
McKerron inferred that he was being ‘sympathetic’ to CW, not Rangers.
Gaz says:
June 10, 2013 at 5:30 pm
“On the Ticketus deal. The High Court ruling gives details of the arrangement.”
http://www.scribd.com/doc/136013092/Ticketus-v-Whyte-Judgment-HC12F03282
————-
Thanks Gaz. The judgement had a lot of resonance for me. A few observations.
Para’s 30, 39, 44, 56 & 57 caught my eye. Paraphrasing except where indicated.:
30 . . The Director‟s Questionnaire has a sub-heading:
“For completion by: Craig Whyte, Andrew Ellis”
44. “…’Director’s Questionnaire’ referred to in the 14th
April email was the one prepared for a flotation of the second defendant on the PLUS market
39, 56, 57. CW claims that Octopus (Ticketus) had agreed to assist him in regaining control of the club if it were restructured in some way.
—
You can tell by the tone and wording that CW has been stiffed. He knew he was getting into dodgy territory and gained some sort of verbal agreement from Octopus to help bail him out in the event it all went pear shaped. Octopus may even have went along this road as the date of the agreement (9th May 2011) was exactly a year prior to CW getting into conversation with CG on the matter (Charlottes audio refers). The questionnaire where he fails to decalre his directorial ban was just an ’emergency stop’ lever for Octopus which they duly invoked when it became clear CW was stranded.
So Ellis was involved with CW. Ticketus were involved with (S)DM. If CW was the patsy all along, were Ticketus persuaded to change horses from 5088 to Scotland? It may have been the only way of recouping their loss.
I did muse some time ago that Charlotte could be Ticketus, or any of the other major creditors (you won’t recognise me now, I’ve grown a beard and moustache, dyed my hair and donned dark glasses). Others have alighted on this possibility recently which gives it more credence. It still doesn’t fit perfectly with the information (apologies Charlotte if I’m wide of the mark but even if I’m wrong it merely preserves your anonymity until your time of choosing) but there is something about the aroma of the judgement that suggested this to me.
The mention of a flotation on the PLUS market. I suppose that must have been CW’s pre-derailment plan.
Tom Enghlish on Paul Murray
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport/football/rangers-paul-murray-calling-for-core-values-1-2912290
Versus
m English: ‘Paul Murray’s bid was well-meaning but not based in reality’
Published on Sunday 4 December 2011 01:32
PAUL Murray, the former non-executive director of Rangers, raised his head above the parapet in The Scotsman yesterday when expressing his concerns about the way the club is being run by Craig Whyte, his old foe from the takeover process earlier in the year.
This column has given short shrift to Murray in the past – and especially to his cohort, Alastair “No Surrender” Johnston, the great show-boater of the old guard.
That is not to dismiss Murray’s concerns over Whyte. He’s entitled to be uncertain about Rangers’ future and worried about Whyte’s stewardship. There is so much secrecy and inconsistency surrounding Whyte that cynicism is not just an understandable instinct, but a necessary one.
The contradictions are many. In October, Whyte gave an interview to STV in which he stated that he nothing to hide in his professional life. An hour later a BBC investigation revealed that Whyte had been disqualified from being a company director for seven years. At the outset of his ownership he rubbished the possibility that Rangers might go into administration. Now he is saying that it has always been an option. He said from day one that he would appeal should the HMRC decision go against the club, but he appears to have changed his mind on that one. In the wake of the BBC documentary he stated that he was going to waste no time in suing the broadcaster, but it seems he has not taken that step yet. He might yet, of course.
There is a suspicious air around Whyte and much of it is of his own making, born out of his determination to keep his business affairs as private as possible. When he is asked to name a couple of his companies that he is particularly proud of and then refuses to name them, people are entitled to wonder what he’s all about. The mystery creates an information vacuum that then gets filled with speculation. Informed speculation, some of it. But the fact is that, when it comes to Whyte (his money and his motives), a lot of what is out there is little more than guesswork.
His merits as Rangers’ owner can only be judged in time. This is where this column and Murray go our separate ways because there are things that Murray says that just don’t stand up to any kind of scrutiny.
First of all, Murray expresses surprise at the talk of Rangers, potentially, going into administration. “I am puzzled that administration is even being discussed,” he said. “The HMRC tax tribunal will not deliver a decision until well into next year so at the moment there is no tax liability to pay.”
Puzzled at administration being discussed? Hold on a second, there. Johnston, his big mate on the old board, was talking about administration away back in April. In fact, he got himself embroiled in a controversy about whether or not he stated the club could, in a worst-case scenario, actually go bust. “Yes, if there is an excessive (HMRC) judgment against us then we might not be in a position to pay it,” said Johnston on 1 April. “But I never said the club would go bust as a result of it. The very worst thing that could happen is that we lose the case and, as a result, could be looking at going into administration.”
So it was OK for Johnston (and by extension, Murray) to talk about administration but, when Whyte does it, Murray is “puzzled”.
He’ll have to explain that one.
And, while he is at it, he might enlighten us further on his supposed counter-bid for the club and why he waited and waited and waited before he did something, which, effectively, was nothing. According to Whyte, it amounted to a “five line e-mail sent from his Blackberry” when the Whyte deal was as good as done. Sir David Murray, it is understood, gave it no credence whatsoever, nor did Lloyds Bank.
And nor would Johnston have given it the time of day had he applied his own rules to his mate’s offer. Johnston wanted transparency, but the Murray bid supposedly involved a £25 million share issue underwritten by a businessman whose name he would not reveal, with other backers coming on board as well. He wouldn’t name them either. The “bid” also stated that Lloyds would only be paid off in stages, this despite Johnston having earlier stated that a prerequisite of any takeover was that Lloyds were paid off in full and removed from the Rangers landscape permanently.
Murray’s solution to the HMRC issue was to get Sir David to pay whatever bill came the club’s way. Lovely idea, but unless he is an expert in hypnosis there was no way Paul Murray was going to get the then owner to agree to that. So his “bid” was probably well-meaning but not based in reality. Meanwhile, Whyte was ploughing on and doing a deal. It’s not a deal that Paul Murray or Johnston like and Whyte is not a man they have faith in, but the alternative was that Sir David kept the club – and they didn’t want that either.
The fact is that, when Johnston came in as chairman, the mission statement he set out for himself was to find a new owner who would liberate the club from the grip of Lloyds Bank. Johnston found nobody. He failed. Paul Murray failed, too. He had his chance to buy the club and he didn’t take it. He sat and waited and came up with far too little, far too late.
“Everything we said has come home to roost,” said Murray. “I don’t take any pleasure from that. . . Talking about administration, being pursued by suppliers and the possibility of a fit and proper investigation at the SFA. . . it’s humiliating and embarrassing.”
Yes, it’s troubling, no doubt about it. But there was no nirvana option available to Rangers. The club had to accept Whyte’s offer or stick with Sir David and live with the consequences. There was no third way worthy of consideration. Sniping from the sidelines is understandable. For sure, Whyte needs to be scrutinised given the potential horrors that await the club. But to Paul Murray we ask: “What would you have done?” Once the attempted brainwashing of Sir David into accepting liability for a £49m tax debt ended in failure, what was the alternative?
And the answer is, there wasn’t one.
It would seem as Tom English howls at the moon when he is told to.
Why bother buying/consuming the MSM when they are too often indirect mouthpieces for others ?
Could someone explain why Hay McKerron sent an invoice which related to services provided to Rangers to Belbios BV
What is the link between that Dutch company and Rangers.
They weren’t an advance ticket purchaser as well were they.
greenockjack says:
June 10, 2013 at 7:42 pm
Allyjambo
We all know or have a very good idea of how Scottish football hacks go about their business but this lays it bare and Tom won´t want to say too much because he doesn´t know what will be on the next tweet.
McKerron inferred that he was being ‘sympathetic’ to CW, not Rangers.
_____________________________________________
I’m sure your right about his reasons for not wanting to say too much in case something is revealed later that contradicts what he says now; but isn’t that the point, if he had never said what was claimed in the email, nor appeared sympathetic to CW, he wouldn’t have to worry about what might appear next, in that regard at least. By not denying it, it could be construed that he did say it, to someone at Rangers, but just can’t remember to whom.
My reference to Rangers/Whyte was because he would only ever be sympathetic to Whyte as owner of Rangers and, like so many of his ilk, didn’t want to unearth anything that might cause the club harm. I’m sure his sympathies would not be with Craig Whyte the, until then, unheard of businessman and asset stripper. However misguided that might have been 😉
Right, sorry, it’s because Craig Whyte asked them to send the invoice there.
=============================
Ian/Gordon,
Thanks for your invoice. Would you mind invoicing this to:
Belbios
BVKorte
Muiderweg
2Weesp
Netherlands
If you could email it to me I will pass it to the accounts there for payment.
Best regards,
———————————————–
Which still begs the question, why, what is his link with that company and why would they be paying his PR invoices.
That should be
BelbiosBV
Korte Muiderweg 2
Weesp
Netherlands
obviously
Gaz says:
June 10, 2013 at 7:51 pm
“Could someone explain why Hay McKerron sent an invoice which related to services provided to Rangers to Belbios BV”
———–
Charlotte says :
scribd.com/doc/146878014/Hay-McKerron-Invoice-1-Original
http://www.scribd.com/doc/146877141/Hay-McKerron-VAT …
http://www.scribd.com/doc/146878218/Hay-McKerron-Invoice-1-Revised …
scribd.com/doc/146878014/Hay-McKerron-Invoice-1-Original
Gaz says:
June 10, 2013 at 8:09 pm
It’s the address of Tixway
http://www.scribd.com/doc/146878014/Hay-McKerron-Invoice-1-Original
That should work now.
Ain`t forgetting HMRC pics
!
StevieBC says:
June 10, 2013 at 6:58 pm
9 2 Rate This
Maybe some of the MSM are trying very hard to ignore CF’s tweets, because CF has plenty of incriminating / embarrassing emails etc. on those same ‘journalists’ ?
Perhaps they have been lazy and complicit with Craig – and have asked for Craig to vet their proposed ‘stories’, as Darrell King seems to have done ?
Would that be the lowest point for a supposed Scottish sports journalist: having a chancer like Craig Whyte approve your copy ?
___________
she said she is moving on to others but will come back to English
wonder how many times Gym Trainer will feature 🙂
It’s the address of “a” Tixway – but Tixway.b.v, not Tixway uk . Is that better?
Allyjambo @ 8:02
You could say this is a difficult situation for “Tom the Poodle” and the rest of them who have engage with the lobbyists/spinners/PR companies (delete as you prefer) for their stories and surrender their slant for what the lobbyist wants it to be at the same time.
They´ll say that this is how it works so don´t get your knickers twisted.
But think about it, do we accept that this is how it should work and are we not the consumers who pay their wages ?
Why not stop consuming ?
———–
I repeat, he was being sympathetic to the CW camp, not Rangers.
Just as he sold the SDM story about the London Hotel room and a deal to sell the club about to be signed, only for the “Noble Knight of the Realm” to refuse at the last moment out of duty to the club and the support.
Just as a high percentage of the Media House output has been geared towards lobbying media outlets in the interests of the custodians and against the interests of the club and the support.
http://www.tixway.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=49&Itemid=53&lang=en
Way2Cinema
Tuesday, 17 August 2010 08:42
On site
The new Tixway Product Suite offers a high performance application server and various clients designed to meet the in-house business needs of each market in the ticketing industry. Special features include:
price/discount rules and tax combinations as much as you like;
box office and cashier management, including secure recovery in case of power failure;
integrated online internet sales, including print-at-home ticketing through the Belbios network;
for cinemas; automated reporting to Maccsbox;
optimised planning and programming functions without the trouble of reprogramming already known data, mostly a few action will be sufficient for a new schedule;
automated access control;
fast swapping performances or sessions between halls or days, therefore capacity problems can even be solved just before the beginning of an event.
The multi-tier architecture of the software is completed with a very powerful graphical user interface (GUI). Different clients with their own look-and-feel can be branded in a company style. The OpenGL technology guarantees superb and fast graphical seating maps (supporting 100,000+ seats) with instant zooming.
Network
The Tixway network solution is designed to enable sales and reservations over a network consisting of multiple sites. The local venue box office is connected through a series of gateways and services to a network server. Various distribution channels can be deployed through which consumers can book reservations or purchase tickets. Adapted technologies like SMS messaging and print-at-home barcode automate the ticketing process further more and make it even simpler for end consumers to buy a ticket.
The Tixway group can supply all software and equipment to set up a turn-key ticketing network.
From 1996, Belbios B.V. in the Netherlands operates the Tixway network. Now the company facilitates over 100 cinemas in distributing their tickets through and IVR call center, the internet and mobile solutions. Belbios is the most popular source to get cinema tickets and reservations in the Netherlands.
With the Remote Access Service (RAS) of Belbios any website can be turned into an e-commerce site where tickets can be booked online while the corporate indentity is preserved.
Venue network support
The Venue Network Support of Tixway is the next generation solution for ticketing markets. Modular independent applications, each responsible for a specific task (like: sales, accounting, reporting, etc.), work together in an open network topology, which may incorporate 3rd party products. This technology can link functional in-house systems to each other although they might be operational in different segments of the ticketing market.
=================================
I still don’t see how this relates to Craig Whyte and why they would be paying bills for him.
I know he had a company called Tixway UK, is that what the relationship is supposed to be. I thought his Tixway UK was being wound up.
Tom English @TomEnglishSport 21m
Legally untouchable as @CharlotteFakes knows well.
@CharlotteFakes
@TomEnglishSport @colinjordan3 @GarryCarmody Hold on a moment Tom, are you making this up? Who said it’s legally untouchable and why so?
Charlotte is turning the screws tonight, Tom English is floundering, creditability having received a bit of a shredding. Spiers survived round one.
STV just got speared as well and the night is young.
Colin Jordan18 @colinjordan3 1h
@TomEnglishSport @GarryCarmody Thanx Tom, have u listened to the tapes or are u unable to comment due to legal?
Tom English @ Legally untouchable as @CharlotteFakes knows well.
Details
Charlotte Fakeovers Hold on a moment Tom, are you making this up? Who said it’s legally untouchable and why so?
Tom English
Who says it? I think you know the answer to that already.
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 3m
So wrong Tom, discuss away openly if you wish. I’ll call you on everything.
greenockjack says:
June 10, 2013 at 7:50 pm
=================================
One phrase Tom English wrote about Craig Whyte always sticks in my mind. At the start of the 2011/2012 season he wrote (on Rangers transfer market predictions) “Craig Whyte has money to spend and he will spend it”
It was of course complete rubbish and shows just how easily English was conned by Whyte.
nickmcguinness says:
June 10, 2013 at 5:51 pm
Perhaps Hay McKerron, as a company, had not reached the VAT threshold as regards annual turnover.
==============================================
They are registered for VAT and their VAT number is shown at:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/146878014/Hay-McKerron-Invoice-1-Original
Gaz says: June 10, 2013 at 8:32 pm
I still don’t see how this relates to Craig Whyte and why they would be paying bills for him.
I know he had a company called Tixway UK, is that what the relationship is supposed to be. I thought his Tixway UK was being wound up.
==================================
This may be the link you are missing.
Barcabhoy @Barcabhoy1 4h
@CharlotteFakes Belbios who Whyte told Hay Mckerron to invoice has a parent co called Korissa Capital in Panama . Sound familiar ?
greenockjack says:
June 10, 2013 at 8:30 pm
gj, I think we are agreeing, or at least not disagreeing 🙂 In my original post my reference to Rangers/Whyte was of no real importance to the point I was making, ie English could have denied ever having said the things claimed in the email. It makes no difference whether he accepts the email as genuine or not if he never said anything to anyone in the Whyte camp, why not just say so? (rhetorical question 🙂 ) I notice he’s made a number of tweets on charlotte’s twitter account but has made no further comment on the contents of the email. I know it merely confirms what we already knew about those in the MSM/PR/lobbyist circus, but it is nice to see one of their number trying to cover themselves, but not making a very good job of it, while others’ tawdry schemings are uncovered for all to see.
Tom seems to be defending himself by inferring that (i) he is being misrepresented in the emails and (ii) those who take the emails at face value are being misled, perhaps willingly, because it fits in with their bias. To be honest, it all makes uncomfortable reading:
@TomEnglishSport
@GarryCarmody @CharlotteFakes It’s quite a phenomenon. They are treating as gospel the word of people they simultaneously deride as chancers
8:02pm – 10 Jun 13
Walter Smith…How did he handle Mather?
Do we have Murray Vs Green all over again?
Somewhat off topic i know in view of the ongoing Charlotte fandango..but let’s not allow yet another very important issue to slip past unnoticed..
A week ago I posted that Mr Smith faced his first serious public test by Mr Mather’s stunning remarks……
Any Chairman worth his salt would have had a terrified/ very humble CEO in his office by 0800am the following morning to sort him out big style…
So a perfect big chance for him to show real leadership ..all teed up for him!!
Did that happen ?
Doesn’t look like it..
So amid the many permutations…there are 4 main possible conclusions we can draw about the new Rangers chairman and his handling of this really key issue ….none of them flattering !
1 He was actually complicit in, condones and supports the highly choreographed Media blitz aimed at driving season book sales …of which this garbage was part ( he is in with the spivs and is actually part of the problem despite his public utterances)
2 He wasn’t in the know / didn’t know and shrugs his shoulders ..ie so what ? he doesn’t understand or if he does he doesn’t care about the implications ( he is out of his depth !..he can’t even work out the implications for his and the club’s image!)
3 He is upset and shocked ..and bravely raises it with Mather .but a la MM is slapped down Imran style. ( didn’t realise how little power he has ..is out of his depth and should walk away but is Murrays eyes and ears and to be fair the fans’ too and he just can’t )
4 He is upset ( perhaps knows/ believes Mather is a clown ) but just grins and bears it as he knows his real place in the Rangers heirarchy ..and it sure isn’t the leader….( as per 3 above but knows how little power he has )
Dearie dearie me.. Whichever one you pick …5 minutes in and we know already …….well we knew it anyway …
I am I probably missing something here.. but I don’t think so!
PS for all the criticism aimed at him from what i could see …only TE had the guts to raise this subject in the MSM albeit in a somewhat feeble manner…as for the rest of them Spiers included…right over ther collective heads.
Gaz says:
June 10, 2013 at 8:32 pm
It could be a VAT- efficient way of invoicing (example: Snowcast?) or even just to send bampots or other interested parties on a merry goose-chase. Craig has also been known to call his companies similar names to better-known companies
Andy says:
June 10, 2013 at 8:29 pm
”….as Darrell King seems to have done ?
Would that be the lowest point for a supposed Scottish sports journalist: having a chancer like Craig Whyte approve your copy ? …”
——–
I thought two things when I’d read CF’s stuff up until about 10 minutes ago:
1. I need a shower, feeling as though the dirt of the pseudo-journalistic SMSM had rubbed off on me through my screen. Journalists being afraid to write the truth is one thing: being complicit in furthering the lies and deceit of really wicked men is quite another.
2. It seems as if most of those grubbing about in the whole MSM/RFC/SFA nexus are like fish in a barrel. CF can seemingly pick them off individually at will.More power to her elbow!
and now a third, more disquieting, thought springs to mind: the guilty men, like Nazi leaders and their hateful propagandists, will take comfort in what they will undoubtedly perceive to be their invincibility, as they nod and wink and give each other the thumbs up.
They expect to be protected now as before.
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 51s
RFC Annual Report 2011 (Draft as at 10/11/2011) – Don’t think it ever saw the light of day? http://www.scribd.com/doc/146963855/Draft-RFC-Annual-Report-2011-10-11-2011 …
easyJambo says:
June 10, 2013 at 9:03 pm
I see there is a scribd document about Korissa
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142959503/Intrinsically-Linked
Are you saying that Whyte told McKerron to invoice Belbios, and that Belbios are owned by Korissa. Further that Korissa were going to invest £2.5m in Sevco 5088.
I do realise that Panama and Costa Rica are next door neighbours btw.
greenockjack says:
June 10, 2013 at 7:42 pm
———————————–
McKerron inferred that he was being ‘sympathetic’ to CW, not Rangers.
———————————–
Stop your nonsense, Jack, at the time of the article, CW and Rangers were one and the same thing.
Come to think of it, today they are still the same thing – ex-participants in Scottish football, heading down skid row
DP
What TE says isn´t quite true and shows the weakness of his position.
We are reading the e-mails and other leaks which Charlotte is tweeting.
He goes on to infer that spin is what makes the MSM tick and not deny that the e-mails are bona-fide. Instead he points to McKerron as lying to his client re. “cráp” word.
So whilst Charlotte may be saying whatever on her tweets, I´m only going by the e-mails.
They lay bare how the support are spun any old yarn disguised as the “expert opinion” from an experienced and upstanding journalist.
Tom, if that´s how it works then be honest about it.
easyJambo says:
June 10, 2013 at 9:03 pm
———————————-
Thks … was looking for links elsewhere …. missed that one …. ! onto de map it goes !
can you post link to connection so can capture it ….
The most objectionable aspect of English (the welching Irishman who writes in the Scotsman) and Speirs (“I’m the man who stood up to Murray”) is that they like to project this image of disinterested footballing intellectuals who can see both sides of the story. They view themselves as a class apart from the Kings, Guidis and Waddells of this world – wordsmiths without an ounce of bias to Celtic or Rangers.
Their very worst nightmare is to be shown to be no better than the worst RFC lackey journalist and that’s precisely what is being exposed to the world at present.
Today English, tomorrow Speirs – is there any journalist in the MSM over the past 30 years, other than Glen Gibbons, who didn’t first submit their copy to the RFC sub-editors of the day for approval?
I think by the end of this exercise we will have our answer and the football print world in Scotland can kiss its *ss goodbye.
That just leaves the phone records of CW’s conversations with David Murray to round things off nicely
Gaz says:
June 10, 2013 at 5:30 pm
‘On the Ticketus deal. The High Court ruling gives details of the arrangement.’
——
Many thanks for that link, Gaz.
I missed that judgment at the time, and I didn’t see any reference to it in my hurried catch ups on blog activity in the time since I got back from Oz.
Just had a very brief look at the draft accounts, as I was particularly interested in the expenses (excluding salaries).
The figure is £15.6m
A question which has been asked for quite a long time, how much has that been cut since then.
newtz says: June 10, 2013 at 9:32 pm
I don’t have a link. I only posted Barca’s tweet. The source info may be posted on CQN or elsewhere
Castofthousands says:
June 10, 2013 at 7:45 pm
john clarke says:
June 10, 2013 at 9:37 pm
Absolutely no problem
One point from the “unpublished” annual report was that £347,000 was put into EBT’s in 2010/11. That is the first time we have seen that number to my recollection.
I’m sure that RTC also had a draft copy of the 2010/11 accounts, but his was devoid of the notes to the accounts that provide more detailed information.
Slim @ 09:29
Stop your nonsense, Jack, at the time of the article, CW and Rangers were one and the same thing.
Come to think of it, today they are still the same thing – ex-participants in Scottish football, heading down skid row
——————————————————————————
My reply
When considering the matter of spin, it is best to be precise as to the identity of the supposed benefactors whether they be a legal entity on their own or representing another.
In this case the spin is to be used for CW so as to mislead the Rangers support and others.
The spin-management that has been paid for by the club has in the main been hijacked for the individual interests of the custodians of the day. This line-up of mainly dodgy geezers have used the club for their own ends with little or no consideration for the support and the long-term future of the club.
It could be argued that long-term use of spin has been in part responsible for the blind loyalty that supporters have too often shown to the custodians instead of looking more deeply and seeing that the clubs interests were not being best served.
It´s not nonsense, it´s how it is.
Take an objective day off.
greenockjack says:
June 10, 2013 at 9:30 pm
1 0 Rate This
DP
What TE says isn´t quite true and shows the weakness of his position.
We are reading the e-mails and other leaks which Charlotte is tweeting.
He goes on to infer that spin is what makes the MSM tick and not deny that the e-mails are bona-fide. Instead he points to McKerron as lying to his client re. “cráp” word.
So whilst Charlotte may be saying whatever on her tweets, I´m only going by the e-mails.
They lay bare how the support are spun any old yarn disguised as the “expert opinion” from an experienced and upstanding journalist.
Tom, if that´s how it works then be honest about it.
————
Tom does have a valid point about taking the emails as absolute truth, when, on the other hand, those communicating are otherwise believed to be totally untrustworthy. Of course, these emails were never meant to be in the oublic domain, so chances are those writing are, in fact, being candid. I feel a bit sorry for Tom, I just wish he’d be a bit more upfront about whether or not he felt obliged to do sports journalism ‘the Scottish way’.
DP
Spin-management isn´t confined to Scottish football.
It is used extensively when deemed necessary so as to keep the truth from the little people, from the Whitehouse to Downing Street, Ibrox to Parkhead.
The MSM have in the main surrendered their souls and are complicit in a game of control that politicans play on the behalf of others.
Noteable exception has been The Guardian (in bursts).
Interesting letter from the auditors, the day after RFC went into administration.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/146968036/Grant-Thornton-Letter-15-Feb-2012
Highlights the going concern issue, a £10M trading shortfall, and issues around the deal to buy the club possibly being determined as “Financial Assistance”
From the auditors:
” …..I remain uncomfortable about the lack of clarity on the financing of the acquisition.”
—–
You and me both, sunshine!
( see CF scribd.com/doc/146968036/Grant-Thornton-Letter-15-Feb-2012 …)
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 20m
The auditors have spoken, deadlines were never going to be met, going concern issues, etc. Grant Thornton 15 Feb 2012 http://www.scribd.com/doc/146968036/Grant-Thornton-Letter-15-Feb-2012 …
======================
Para 4. looks like it can be applied to TRFC now, [admin creditors excepted].
Shirley, the directors of TRFC will face the same issues re: cash flow / headroom at the first set of interims ?
greenockjack says:
June 10, 2013 at 9:58 pm
2 1 Rate This
DP
Spin-management isn´t confined to Scottish football.
It is used extensively when deemed necessary so as to keep the truth from the little people, from the Whitehouse to Downing Street, Ibrox to Parkhead.
The MSM have in the main surrendered their souls and are complicit in a game of control that politicans play on the behalf of others.
Noteable exception has been The Guardian (in bursts).
————
No, of course not. The Guardian has indeed been a light in the darkness. Scotland needs a new independent newspaper, but I reckon that will one day be an online rag drawing on the best of the bloggers and men and women of integrity. In the meantime, the more that secret deals, secret societies, and the favours of the old-boy network can be revealed, the better.
Blessed are the whistleblowers.
Correction: not TRFC but RIFC plc
OT sortish…….
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—The National Security Agency moved swiftly and forcefully today to remind its employees of its longstanding zero-tolerance policy on conscience, warning that any violation of that policy would result in immediate termination.
“When you sign on to work at the N.S.A. you swear to uphold the standards of amorality and soullessness that this agency was founded upon,” said N.S.A. director General Keith B. Alexander. “Any evidence of ethics, decency, or a sense of right and wrong will not be tolerated. These things have no place in the intelligence community.”
The N.S.A. director attempted to reassure the American people that despite “unfortunate recent events,” the agency remains “one of the most heartless and cold-blooded organizations on the face of the earth.” He added, “We refuse to let one good apple spoil the whole bunch.”
He said that going forward, the N.S.A. would try to recruit people who had already demonstrated “a commitment to invading people’s privacy” by working at Google or Facebook.
easyJambo says:
June 10, 2013 at 10:01 pm
Now that really is “wow, just wow”.
Personally, I would be mortified if I, as a director or administrator, received that letter from an auditor.
The Grant Thornton letter was quite something, and to me sounded like the author was trying hard not to call some folk fibbers. Did the SFA get sight of this during their likely frequent association with RFC?
greenockjack says:
June 10, 2013 at 9:58 pm
—
“…from the Whitehouse to Downing Street, Ibrox to Parkhead..”
—–
Well OT, but I like the Kipling resonances. MacAndrew’s Hymn ” fra’ Maryhill tae Pollokshaws, fra’ Govan tae Parkhead”.
Well done, that man!
That was my late brother-in-law’s favourite poem, and thank you for putting me in mind of it.
We recited alternate verses one night in his home in Blackpool ( but he was fae Brigton X), as we swallied a dram, when our kids were young, and driving to Blackpool was an adventure.
Happy days.
The Grant Thornton letter was dated 15th February, there is no way anyone reading that would see a CVA and continuation of the existing club as being even remotely possible.
No matter what they thought before they read it.
They would have been as well just writing “The business is fecked, start a new one”.
Southern Exile
Whilst you are slightly OT. I´ll add a link for “Breaking Through Mainstream Media Lies”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/breaking-through-mainstream-media-lies/5335352
A real whistleblower gives an interview to The Guardian,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/10/white-house-nsa-leaks-edward-snowden
easyJambo says:
June 10, 2013 at 9:40 pm
——————————–
thks ….. will contact him …… anyone else got a link to connection …. dutch registrar closed at mo ….. and no obvious english version …. arg …. but I have ways ….
——————————–
Auditors letter is extrmely terse ….. not seen one so …… ! …… very telling ….
Financial Assistance ! …… Oh, but a QC says its OK though … honest !
Wonder if they ever produced it ?