The Immortality Project

The Immortality Project – or – Death and Denial – Guest Post by Humble Pie

Death has a tendency to put everything else into perspective.

My family recently suffered a bereavement. It wasn’t a sudden death but it was still far too quick and far too soon for any of us to get our heads around. As our loved one’s illness progressed, each of us, in our own way, began to prepare for the inevitable. In the end, whilst it was not unexpected, it was nevertheless very traumatic, for everyone concerned.

Grief is a strange and often debilitating set of emotions. Even now, a few months on, when the intense sadness and tears have given way (mostly) to disbelief, we still find it hard to fully comprehend what has happened. We might never completely ‘come to terms’ with that fact, however, we do accept that it DID happen, much as we all wish that it hadn’t.

Many of you will be familiar with the Kubler-Ross model of the five stages of grief; Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance. Well, I am aware of having experienced each of these stages over the last year, as well as a couple of others which I wasn’t prepared for (a lot of personal reflection, a little guilt and a not insignificant amount of pain).

It seems to me that the Rangers supporters have been purposefully ensnared in an interminable cycle of the first two stages of KR; alternating between the denial of the death of Rangers and anger at what they feel has been done to their beloved club then back again to denial. This, as any first year psychology student will tell you, is a very unhealthy state of mind which, if not addressed, can quickly lead to physiological and behavioural problems.

At its lowest level, for example, people throughout the ages have continued to set places at the dinner table for their long-dead loved ones. They know in their hearts that the person has died but are comforted by the familiarity of doing the same things that they have always done. However, in extreme cases people have even kept and maintained the actual cadavers of the deceased, dressed them, talked to them and watched TV with them, in a state of absolute denial.

In archaeology, accepting and recognising the inevitability of death through conducting ceremonial burial services is considered to be one of the very first signs of a civilised people. You see, grief is a uniquely human and cathartic process i.e. it can produce ‘a feeling of being cleansed emotionally, spiritually, or psychologically as a result of an intense emotional experience’.

In short, grief is ultimately a good thing which leads you through a series of natural psychological steps towards acknowledgement of an unalterable situation, allowing you to take stock, re-evaluate and start to move on with your own life in a positive way.

That is what should have happened with the fans of the old Rangers.

Instead, this ‘never-ending cycle of the undead’ was positively encouraged by those many unscrupulous individuals who saw a way of making a fast buck from maintaining the ‘Then, Now and Forever’ illusion. Worse still, this resurrection fantasy is being facilitated by the very people whom we have entrusted to stop this kind of thing from happening in the first place. If only the SFA or the MSM had told them the truth, they might have had a chance to actually face up to the situation.

Unfortunately, these two bodies were so complicit in Rangers demise, so right up to their necks in the brown smelly stuff, that they were too afraid to face the inevitable anger which would have rightly come their way. So, they made up grim fairy tales to feed to the bereaved souls about non-existent ‘holding companies’, the ethereal ‘club’ which transcends death and by suggesting that it is ‘all a matter of opinion’.

Ernest Becker, in his 1973 Pulitzer Prize winning book ‘The Denial of Death’, posits that “human civilization is no more than an elaborate, symbolic defence mechanism against the knowledge of our own mortality”. This fear of death acts as an emotional and intellectual response to our basic survival instincts.

‘By embarking on what Becker refers to as an ‘immortality project’, in which a person creates or becomes part of something which they feel will last forever, the person feels they too have become part of something eternal; something that will never die, compared to their physical body that will die one day’. When this ‘immortality project’ is threatened it leads inevitably to fear, depression, loss of identity and sense of purpose.

In that case, the initial reaction of the fans to the imminent demise of Rangers was entirely predictable and understandable. “No way, this can’t happen to us, we are the people”. However, as soon as the full realisation of their club’s inexorable slide into liquidation began to sink in, came the expected anger. But towards whom should their righteous wrath be directed?

“Who did this to us, who are these people?” they cried. “Not I”, said Sir Murray of the Mint, “for I was duped”, “Nor I”, said President Ogilvie, “for it was never my role”. “Nor I”, said Mr Smith, “for I never knew nothing or nothing”. “Not us”, squealed the media monkeys in unison, “for that’s what we were told”, “Nor us”, said the SPL “it was nothing to do with us”.

“Who then?, we demand to know who these people are”, howled the horrified hordes. “T’was the Whyte knight”, they all concurred, “he alone caused this calamity”. “And the bampots”, sneered the slimy slug. “And the taxman”, puffed the pundits. “And the unseen hand of Mr Lawwell”, whispered the bilious bears from the safety of their den.

There were even those who tried to warn them, not least Hugh Adam, Phil Mac and RTC but they didn’t want to know. Even when their very own Messrs Green and Traynor spelt out, in no uncertain terms, that liquidation meant the death of their club, still they chose wilful ignorance. The MSM, with access to the same information, encouraged them to keep their heads firmly ensconced, ostrich stylee, on the banks of that ironically blue and white river in Egypt. Which just goes to show ‘you can lead a lamb to knowledge but you can’t make it think’

The point though is that the Rangers fans have heard the truth and once you have heard something you cannot unhear it. Even if you reject it, even if you deny it, it gnaws away at the back of your mind, infecting your subconscious.

Almost a year ago, I posted the following on TSFM. http://theinternetbampot.wordpress.com/2012/09/ in which I postulated that the SFA were too frightened to say anything which might imply that The Rangers were a new club.

Looking back at that post, I am amazed at how little the landscape has changed.

A year on and it has become apparent that the corporate cancer that destroyed Rangers has continued to metastasize in its new host. Charlotte’s revelations may have shown us that the rabbit hole goes much deeper than we first suspected. However, in my humble opinion, the information provided has only succeeded in ‘poisoning the well’ and deflecting attention from the main culprits in this disaster. Layer upon layer of complexity has been added to an already opaque story and the majority of her utterances appear designed to engage the more enquiring minds on this forum and consume their excess mental energy.

I know that some people are bored with this ‘debate’ but, to my mind, the single most important step for the redemption of Scottish football is the fan’s acceptance that The Rangers, who currently ply their trade in the SPFL First Division, are a new club. Once they have accepted that then everything else that they perceive has happened to them will begin to make sense. They will see that rather than everyone having a fly kick at them when they were down, most were actually trying to help them. It will also dawn on them that the very people who have been telling them that there is an anti-Rangers conspiracy against them are actually the same ones who are screwing them over.

Rangers were not relegated to div 3, The Rangers applied as a new club and were granted entry into the bottom tier of Scottish football. They are not banned from European competition, merely ineligible as a new club without the requisite financial ‘history’. Any reference to ‘rulings’ from ECA, ASA, the BBC Trust and any internal or so-called ‘independent’ enquiries are completely irrelevant, as none of these bodies are the final arbiter in this case. Scots Law is clear that there is no distinction between club and company after incorporation, when the company dies the club dies with it. That is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact.

Sooner or later The Rangers fans are going to realise this fact and when they do, there will be hell to pay. Until they do, their new club can never become truly cleansed. Only then can they move on and only then can they join together with fans of other clubs to root out the real cancer at the heart of Scottish football.  That’s why the MSM and the SFA are still petrified to say anything. In the meantime the real creators of this disaster are sneakily positioning themselves further and further away from the scene of the crime.

I am sure the majority of us would happily accept a new Rangers, cleansed of its financial, emotional and supremacist baggage. A club that all decent Rangers fans could support without feeling any guilt about Rangers downfall or that they were being taken for mugs. The prospect of a new dawn in Scottish football, where sporting integrity took primacy and clubs lived within their means was very real. However, as usual the SFA couldn’t miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

The truth is that Scottish football is in the state it is in, not because Rangers died but because those with the power and mandate to effect the prognosis sat back and did nothing. I am sure that they believe that ‘time heals all wounds’ and that the longer this injustice is allowed to stand the more likely it will be accepted by the man in the street. No doubt the authorities feel it is in the national interest to ‘let sleeping dogs lie’. However I cannot accept this. I believe that it is vital that we are able to face up to reality so we can move on for the benefit of all football supporters.

Scottish football is at a crossroads right now, I think we all feel it. Rampant corruption has become so mainstream that many of our fellow supporters have began to accept this as the norm. However, it just doesn’t sit right with me and I suspect that many regular contributors and readers of this blog feel likewise.

We have quite lost our way and we live in a society which spends vast amounts of money paying people like Jack Irvine to ensure that we stay lost. The mainstream media treat us like little imbeciles and demand that we conform to their assumed ‘professional superiority’. The PR machine plays up to our stereotypes and feeds our fantasies while the poorest people pay to swallow their poisonous propaganda and relentless trivia.

So what can we do ? Clearly, battering out a few blog posts and strongly worded letters to the various authorities involved has been rewarded by the square root of FA.

How can we make this an opportunity for growth rather than contributing to the destruction of Scottish football ? It is not good enough to tear down a system unless we have a better system to replace it. However, I believe that it is not the system itself which is broken. It is that those charged with administering the system are hopelessly corrupted, hugely conflicted and unable to apply their rules without fear or favour.

By their incapacity and inaction (wilful or otherwise) the SFA have facilitated a motley crew of various spivs, chancers and con-artists to glean the last few meagre pickings from the bones of the emaciated loyal supporters of this new club purporting to be the once mighty Rangers. They have permitted these ne’er-do-wells to collectively appropriate many tens of millions of pounds from the Rangers fans, the creditors and the public purse. They have already allowed this corporate malignancy to spread to a new host, ‘The Rangers’, and the absence of ‘moral hazard’ makes it more likely that the disease will continue to spread.

Benjamin Franklin once said, “‘Nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”

Someone else once said, “The wages of sin are death, but by the time taxes are taken out, it’s just sort of a tired feeling.”

I sense that we are all beginning to get tired of this. It is time to stand together, all football fans, face the facts and direct our anger against the officers of the SFA who have allowed this sham to develop into a catastrophe.

I have no doubt that my humble opinions expressed here will raise the ire of many deluded souls. However, I am comfortable in the knowledge that the only people who get mad at you for speaking the truth are those that are living a lie.

RIP Big Man.

 

3,959 thoughts on “The Immortality Project


  1. Gonna have to come back on this one Zilch – don’t think you’re having a go at me by the way but I want to jump in. By the definitions above, I don’t believe I have continued any controversial argument, and neither have I gone off topic, my first post this evening was in response to a post from manandboy.

    I’m not trying to troll anyone, I would like to engage in the debate that takes place here. If my views are not welcome, I will regretfully take a leave of absence. I’ll wait to see if that is requested in response to this post.

    I’ll finish by saying that Neepheid said a few things to me earlier and a lot of the post put words in my mouth which I had never said, and unfortunately said that I had summed up the victim mentality around Ibrox. That is not what was intended by my comments, and all I can say is that if that is what you thought then I have been misinterpreted. I thought I was being quite clear when I said that there had been instances where I felt let down but I felt no anger towards anyone.


  2. @Scotzine
    Seems that Rangers are pretty busy behind the scenes as a proposal was issued that three internet bampots would receive life bans from Ibrox
    8:13pm – 21 Sep 13
    —————

    Someone on twitter quipped that Mr Graham was about to go on his own list of ‘enemies’.


  3. RyanGosling says:
    September 21, 2013 at 6:39 pm

    If the SFA had properly investigated and decided that Craig Whyte was not a fit and proper person before he ever got involved this whole story would have panned out very differently.

    —————————–

    In that point, I believe you are wrong Ryan. No matter who took over, the end game (planned) would have been the same and fans of other clubs would still have found it totally unacceptable that Rangers dumped millions worth of debt and felt they could take their rightful place at the top of the pile with nothing else changing.

    Craig White was not, is not and never will be the problem.


  4. I wouldn’t say Ryan was a troll. I’ve disagreed with 80 or 90% of his opinions but was glad to hear them anyway. At least he realised that he was hogging the blog and took a step back. Fair play to him for that.

    As a Celtic man, I would much rather welcome people like him and have reasoned debate than put up with
    everyone agreeing with each other or the backslapping that goes on in some ‘Celtic minded’ sites. Tin hat on!


  5. I’m not sure why @chrisgraham76 is known as a ‘tin foil head’ but I like the name nevertheless.

    True to form his current opinion is that McColl and/or King are the new men to take the Ibrox club forward.

    I admire his consistency. The new sugar daddy is better than the current one.


  6. Madbhoy24941 says:
    September 21, 2013 at 8:02 pm
    0 0 Rate This

    RyanGosling says:
    September 21, 2013 at 6:39 pm

    If the SFA had properly investigated and decided that Craig Whyte was not a fit and proper person before he ever got involved this whole story would have panned out very differently.

    —————————–

    In that point, I believe you are wrong Ryan. No matter who took over, the end game (planned) would have been the same and fans of other clubs would still have found it totally unacceptable that Rangers dumped millions worth of debt and felt they could take their rightful place at the top of the pile with nothing else changing.

    Craig White was not, is not and never will be the problem

    ————————————————————

    The idea that e ery thing was rosy till the panto villain of Craig Whyte duped Murray should be shot down once and for all. The MSM peddle this line relentlessly, Paul Murray was at it again last week, Chris graham et al parrot this myth …the truth is quite simple…….if Rangers were heading in the right direction on and off the pitch, why was it sold to an insolvency expert for £1? the SFA may well have a case to answer regarding Whyte, but that in no way reduces the culpability of David Murray and his BOD.


  7. Danish Pastry while I can’t see why people are sceptical based on my own actions, from another’s point of view then I can empathise with that view. Please just believe me when I say that I didn’t think I was discussing anything off topic and have absolutely never tried to distract from any other conversation. Plus, I clearly said earlier that I was gonna step back from tonight because I wanted to know about the comings and goings at Hampden. I’ve obviously broken that promise twice now, so I’m not an outstanding man of my word, but I’ve only come back in when I felt it necessary not to let the conversation proceed in an unhelpful direction.

    I’ve taken and will continue to take less than friendly remarks here, but I feel that is necessary to contribute to the blog and play my part in getting the blog to fulfil its best purpose.


  8. And on another note the ‘bus tycoons’ ™ appear to have amassed a very large shareholding, very quietly, yet, yet they’re only ‘bus tycoons’ and a quick look at their balance sheet would make any half-competent SFA official and/or journalist wonder how on earth they might be able to afford to pump big bucks into TRFC.

    It will be interesting to see how ‘attendance’ figures are effected. My sixth sense suggests a bunch of new world records…


  9. arabest1 says:
    September 21, 2013 at 8:17 pm

    Very true.

    PM was waxing lyrical about paying down the debt. Of course without mentioning that the Op-Ex was £10m/yr more than they earned without UCL cash.


  10. RyanGosling says:
    September 21, 2013 at 7:40 pm
    I’ll finish by saying that Neepheid said a few things to me earlier and a lot of the post put words in my mouth which I had never said, and unfortunately said that I had summed up the victim mentality around Ibrox. That is not what was intended by my comments, and all I can say is that if that is what you thought then I have been misinterpreted. I thought I was being quite clear when I said that there had been instances where I felt let down but I felt no anger towards anyone.
    +++++++++++++
    First let me say that I don’t agree with you being labelled a troll. Your contributions to this forum go back a long way now, and you always express yourself in a polite and logical (if misguided) manner.

    If I put words in your mouth, I apologise. I picked you up on two points.

    First, your assertion that the SFA were wrong to fine RFC. I asked you for your own view as to what, if any, the correct punishment should have been. You haven’t replied, I believe.So with a fine unavailable, what punishment should have been issued?

    Secondly, you assert that the SFA failed in some imagined duty to police the ownership of its 42 member clubs. I don’t believe that the SFA has any such duty. I cannot find any such duty in the rules. It is up to the clubs to obey the rules, yet you seem to attribute no blame whatsoever to a club that, in my opinion, deliberately lied to the SFA regarding Craig Whyte’s credentials. It is totally unreasonable to expect the SFA to fully investigate every statement made to it by every one of its members regarding its owners. That is not the role of the SFA.

    It’s not your anger or lack of it that I have an issue with. It’s your state of total denial regarding what has happened to your club and who is to blame. By blaming the SFA you are simply blaming your saviours. Can’t you see how ridiculous that is? If the SFA had applied its rules properly, Rangers would be playing on Glasgow Green or Cardonald right now. That is the hard fact that you refuse to accept. As for who to blame? Try SDM.


  11. So, Messers Leggat, Dingwall and Graham about to receive bans from Ibrox? Just when I think things cannot get any more bizarre….


  12. Neepheid, great response, thank you.

    Your two questions. Firstly, I didn’t actually say the SFA were wrong to fine Rangers. I said I felt let down about that whole situation. Allow me to explain. If the SFA had a rule that a person had to be fit and proper to hold a position, they should, in my view, have enforced it before the person held the role. I do dispute the fact that the SFA can fine a club for allowing such a person to hold office when doing nothing to enforce such a rule in the first place, that hurt us. But if they had no obligation under the rules to conduct such an investigation, then fair enough I take your point.

    And I’ve just scrolled back up and realised that that addressed most of the second point also. So to go back to the first one – should Rangers have been fined? I’ll address that in the simplest terms. I’m disappointed that Craig Whyte gained control of the club and stopped paying PAYE. Disappointed obviously being the polite version of what I feel. And I don’t dispute that Rangers should have been punished for that. We gained an advantage over all other clubs by effectively increasing our income by 20%, and that was wrong. I wish it hadn’t happened. I wish, if we were that broke, we’d gone into admin much earlier, because the right thing should have been done. I don’t know how much more I can say on the subject – those are my thoughts.

    I am not in any state of denial about what has happened to my club – I’m trying desperately not to take a tone with you because I think this is a worthwhile discussion. I’m not blaming the SFA. I think they should have done more, that is all I was saying in the context of the previous conversation.

    Let me be clear; the responsibility for Rangers being liquidated lay with Rangers. I know this as well as anyone else does. All I said earlier was that we could have had more help dealing with, and trying to find the best outcome from, the previous misdemeanours.


  13. Ryan

    My first foray onto this site was followed by an accusation of being either a troll or Jack himself. So I have some personal experience to call on here.

    A troll is revealed by patterns of behaviour over a period of time.

    It took a number of posts before the accusation against me was withdrawn, with considerable good grace I should add.

    You might be trolling, you might not – only you know. The quality of your posts will tell in due course.

    I think it is fair to say that continued repetition of the standard line coming out of Ibrox, which the vast majority on here regard as both manifestly incorrect and to varying degrees adding insult to injury, is going to be seen by a fair number of posters as troll-like. Others will disagree and say it is fine – they want the debate. Plenty of room for all sorts here. One of the great things about TSFM.

    TSFM mentioned today that the site was being swamped by suspicious registration attempts. There appear to be fairly significant goings-on happening that we want to see exposed to the light of day. Now is probably not a good time to get bogged down in old arguments that you can see have been gone over in the past so many times…

    So I am now going to take my own advice and not respond to this anymore. Please don’t take offense by further silence. I see from a later comment of yours that you plan to do something similar. Sounds like a good plan.


  14. scapaflow says:
    September 21, 2013 at 8:26 pm
    7 0 Rate This

    So, Messers Leggat, Dingwall and Graham about to receive bans from Ibrox? Just when I think things cannot get any more bizarre….
    …………………………………………………….
    There stuff has been fed to them anyway this last while especially…I have a feeling they are pretty thick-skinned….not just thick 😛


  15. The rumoured banning of Sevco’s own internet bampots, the continuing denial of reality by fans/’club’/PM et al, the poisonous input by JI, alleged financial shenanigans, multi-million warchests to win the first/second division, dodgy board members, intimidation, etc….

    “Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad”. Spoken by Prometheus in Longfellow’s poem The Masque of Pandora.

    Scottish football needs a second opportunity to deal with these unwelcome guests in our house. Coming soon? If so don’t fluff it……


  16. Can anyone elaborate on who was “coming and going” , with what frequency, and how this is known?


  17. scapaflow says:
    September 21, 2013 at 8:26 pm

    So, Messers Leggat, Dingwall and Graham about to receive bans from Ibrox? Just when I think things cannot get any more bizarre….
    ——————————————————————-
    If so, which of them will be the first to say “hang on, this isn’t the same club after all”


  18. policeandthieves says:
    September 21, 2013 at 8:55 pm

    Can anyone elaborate on who was “coming and going” , with what frequency, and how this is known?
    ———————————————————————-
    If we’re doing a sweepstake, can my guess be vans from “Shred-Ur-Docs” or something similar?


  19. policeandthieves says:
    September 21, 2013 at 8:55 pm
    1 2 Rate This

    Can anyone elaborate on who was “coming and going” , with what frequency, and how this is known?
    ————-

    Brenda mentioned it earlier at 1.43. Maybe she lives nearby? Perhaps she can elaborate?

    More from @scotzine_editor regarding the bans:
    “From what I have been informed it is Mark Dingwall, David Leggat and Chris Graham.
    9:29pm – 21 Sep 13”

    Seems surreal if true.


  20. Interesting article here

    http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/sep/20/monaco-money-ambition-not-many-supporters?CMP=twt_gu

    Apart it being the place where CW and SDM hide out, I thought it topical for here due to the interesting comparison with LNS in the French FA view of sporting advantages gained by being able to pay players more due to tax shelter….legal ones!!

    Competing clubs in the Ligue de Football Professionel have not, though, viewed Monaco’s sudden riches so philosophically. Under its treaty with France in 1963, Monaco agreed its French residents would pay tax at French rates, but those from overseas, the majority now including millionaire footballers, would pay no tax. As France’s top tax rate is 49%, the league has calculated Monaco are saving €50m a year on the salaries of the overseas stars in PAYE that the other clubs have to pay.

    In March the league acted, ruling that from next season all its clubs must be registered in France for tax purposes, a move clearly aimed at Monaco. A meeting in Rybolovlev’s Monaco penthouse with the French football federation president, Noël Le Graët, did not go well, and Rybolovlev took the league to court, where the case remains unresolved.

    Nobody at Monaco would discuss the tax issue, given its sensitivities, but the league remains insistent. Its president, Frédéric Thiriez, told Le Parisien last week: “Everybody is very happy that Monaco have returned to Ligue 1. But I am sorry, there is a problem of fairness. I have calculated the differential at €50m, a precise calculation, €50m is the budget of Montpellier, this is not a negligible advantage. We are not hounding them; we have given them a year to conform.”


  21. Tif Finn says:
    September 21, 2013 at 6:19 pm

    If the SFA or anyone else had tried to stop the Motherwell Born Billionaire buying Rangers from Sir David Murray, and then going on to give Ally McCoist a £25m (front loaded) war chest to dominate Scottish football then there would have been carnage
    ==============================
    That is the bottom line. A lot of Rangers fans forget Craig Whyte was applauded into the club. His business history was freely available, but still they treated him as a Messiah. There was absolutely NO opposition to Craig Whyte taking over Rangers. Sometimes in life you get the leaders you deserve, and Rangers fans certainly did in the case of Whyte.


  22. RyanGosling says:
    September 21, 2013 at 8:42 pm

    If the SFA had a rule that a person had to be fit and proper to hold a position, they should, in my view, have enforced it before the person held the role. I do dispute the fact that the SFA can fine a club for allowing such a person to hold office when doing nothing to enforce such a rule in the first place, that hurt us

    Ryan

    the SFA and UEFA have rules about clubs gaining access to UEFA competitions. If the SFA had enforced those rules, another club would have had a shot at the lucrative CL – and/or Europa league – or at the very least 2 home crowds in 2 european ties. Quite probably cost Celtic £10-15M

    What do you say about the SFA applying the rules in this regard?

    Also, you think the SFA have no right to impose a fine for breaking a rule while doing nothing to enforce that rule

    Well, the fine is them enforcing their rule. The rule states the CLUB (board) must vouch for any new director/owner being fit and proper. That the club failed in it’s duty and that CW failed to disclose his disqualification is not something the SFA can enforce in advance – so they can only retrospectively act after it comes to light. It would be beyond the laws of the game for the SFA to prevent CW being a director of the club – so there is actually little they can do other than fine or ban the club. What would you prefer?


  23. Madbhoy24941 says:
    September 21, 2013 at 8:02 pm

    The plan was clearly to shed Rangers of rightful debt and have them continue playing in the SPL (as was).

    Who owned the cub at the time was largely irrelevant, Whyte was only ever there short term to do what was needed. Be the pantomime villain who placed the club into administration. Someone else was supposed to come along and achieve a CVA, ensuring a debt free Rangers was still playing in the top division of Scottish football.

    The CVA was rejected, that was a seminal moment in the whole story. Rangers and their fans’ own hubris could not have predicted that. How could anyone actually put the club into liquidation.

    Unthinkable.


  24. NTHM – You’ve expressed it well I think. I guess I just think that if they have the power to fine someone, I think they should also protect clubs from being taken over by morons. But I take your points, which are all legitimate. And as I’ve said previously, we were architects of our own downfall.

    As for costing Celtic revenue, and / or being banned rather than allowing things to continue – personally, I’d have liked to have seen the rules applied. In full, from day one. As in (a) has been done because the rules state (b). And I would not have been happy to see the consequences of that, but that is what I would have liked to have seen happen. And for the anti “Sevco” people out there, I know that that is not what happened.

    If Rangers didn’t meet the criteria for entering European competition in 2011/12, it would have been good for both Rangers and Scottish football if they had been banned. I wish that had happened. It didn’t. And there is nothing I can do about it.


  25. Sorry guys no further info, I have relatives who live at the hampden car park entrance and they told me that there were a lot of cars coming and going today?? ( very unusual on a Saturday if there’s not a game on ) if you look at my post at 1.43pm I was asking if anyone knew if anything was going on 😯


  26. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 21, 2013 at 10:17 pm
    ‘…That the club failed in it’s duty and that CW failed to disclose his disqualification is not something the SFA can enforce in advance – so they can only retrospectively act after it comes to light. It would be beyond the laws of the game for the SFA to prevent CW being a director of the club – so there is actually little they can do other than fine or ban the club..’
    ——–
    Strictly speaking, you’re right.

    Mind you, one could argue that the SFA had/has a duty to do more than simply accept what a member club or would-be director says.

    The days of accepting anyone’s ‘word’ (sworn on their ‘honour’!) without some independent checking are long gone!

    It would not have cost the earth for some SFA minion to have done some minimal research into CW’s status as a businessman, enough at least to allow the SFA to have asked a few hard questions.

    The link about Monaco posted a wee while ago by Exiled Celt is not unrelated to this matter, in so far as it points up the fact that a ‘motherwellskigrad’ (Russian) -born billionaire is spending huge amounts of money on a club with little hope of recouping costs from attendances, merchandising, etc etc., hoping instead to cash in on the CL in a season or two!

    The French FA would be off their heads not to be asking questions about that billionaire and his sources of wealth, and the reasons for his involvement in football, no matter what the directors of the club told them about his fitness and probity.

    Personally, and without letting lying CW and sundry other characters associated with the dead club off the hook, I would assert that the SFA carry a fair measure of blame for their negligence ( at least) or complicity ( at worst) in the scandalous sale of a club- with pretensions of dignity- for a most undignified and measly pound, to a shyster.


  27. Brenda says:
    September 21, 2013 at 10:43 pm
    0 0 Rate This

    Sorry guys no further info, I have relatives who live at the hampden car park entrance and they told me that there were a lot of cars coming and going today?? ( very unusual on a Saturday if there’s not a game on ) if you look at my post at 1.43pm I was asking if anyone knew if anything was going on 😯
    —————————————–
    Brenda, can you ask your relatives when was the last time they seen any of the 3 amigos and have any carpet vans went in recently… 🙂


  28. Ryan

    the problem with many fans of Sevco (now TRFC ltd – as history is so important, i will always refer to Sevco by their founding name – i hope that is acceptable) is that they can’t see that the rules were followed

    When the CVA was rejected RFC PLC were in liquidation – a process that takes sometime, but which there is no return from once started. Footballs rules then mean that RFC PLC were no longer a football club – they therefore lost all entitlement to play in the SPL and be members of the SFA.

    It is that simple. No one kicked them out, it was not cruel and unusual punishment, it was just what happens when a club dies. Ask Gretna and Third Lanark fans. There were no sly kicks, there was no unseen fenian hand agenda.

    RULES WERE APPLIED which saw RFC PLC out of Scottish football. What happened next was shameful in the extreme – rules were bent and outright ignored to allow a new club to enter the league.

    Until the creditors are paid in full and other football clubs recompensed for Sevco’s queue jumping (i.e. Spartans or Cove) then I will refuse to allow Sevconians to pretend they are the same club. And even when the creditors ARE repaid in full – you won’t actually BE the same club, but at least you tried to do the right thing by the old club and I’ll allow you to pretend to be the same club (until you play Celtic and we’ll remind you what a shower of cheating B’s you are and that you have no history whatsoever!!! – but that will just be banter!)

    Until there is acceptance of what Rangers did – BY RANGERS/EVCO FANS and then there are signs of contrition/apology, then the ongoing myth that Sevco are rangers is simply harming Scottish football. We cannot move on until the fans and club admit they did wrong.


  29. Brenda says:
    September 21, 2013 at 10:43 pm
    ‘… I have relatives who live at the hampden car park entrance.’
    ——-
    Love it!

    There can’t be anyone working in the SFA,or SPFL who is not aware that there are literally thousands of pairs of eyes and ears taking note of anything happening that might bear on the foul mess these bodies have made on their own doorstep.

    Eyes and ears of people who are not content simply to accept a PR statement at face value.

    People who are determined not to ‘move on’, until things are acknowledged, truth prevails, some heads roll, decks are cleared, and a proper road for ‘moving on’ with real dignity and integrity is laid down.

    People who want honourable , not compromised, men (and women) in charge of the administration of football, and honourable men and women owning and directing not only the majority, but ALL of our football clubs.

    That day will come, inevitably.

    The baddies cannot for much longer outface us all.


  30. Brenda says:
    September 21, 2013 at 10:43 pm

    There was a game on at Hampden today, Queens Park were at home to Elgin.


  31. Matteo Galy says:
    September 21, 2013 at 11:30 pm
    ‘..There was a game on at Hampden today, Queens Park were at home to Elgin.’
    ———–
    Thanks for that, Matteo.
    I may be wrong, but I think that game wasn’t mentioned on Sportsound.
    Either that or I never heard it above the noise of the liquidiser (ha!) when I was making my celery soup!


  32. Matteo Galy @ 11.30pm

    Apologies I should have said a big game!!! The ‘movement’ started about 10am …………… 🙂


  33. Palacio, I can confirm that no carpet vans have been seen entering Hampden recently, but a vast amount of handbrooms have been requisitioned to replace worn out stock. The hampden carpets have an unusually deep pile but will wear out eventually and will need replaced. They can only hold so much dirt, you see. Sweep sweep, as you were.


  34. At my age, the memory is not as sharp as it once was but I have a dim recollection of angry protests by fans of Rangers 1872 (Deceased) against the BBC when a reporter called Mark Daly exposed the Motherwell-born billionaire owner of Rangers 1872 (Deceased) as being a bit on the frugal side with veracity, and somewhat leaning towards the potless side of the wealth spectrum.

    But since I can’t remember what I had for brekkie this morning, I must be wrong. Sorry. 🙁


  35. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 21, 2013 at 10:17 pm

    the SFA and UEFA have rules about clubs gaining access to UEFA competitions. If the SFA had enforced those rules, another club would have had a shot at the lucrative CL – and/or Europa league – or at the very least 2 home crowds in 2 european ties. Quite probably cost Celtic £10-15M
    =================================================================
    The Charlotte Fakes account alleged there was e-mail correspondence between the SFA which could easily be interpreted as ‘we have submitted the application to UEFA – doesn’t look like they will be asking any more questions, so we won’t say any more if you don’t’.

    In my humble opinion the SFA simply didn’t fancy the carnage that would ensue if they refused RFC a Euro licence. When will we ever be in a position in Scottish football where a decision can be made without a thought ever being given to what the deranged blue bag brigade will think? These people shouldn’t matter, but it appears they rule with an iron fist.


  36. Torquemada says:
    September 22, 2013 at 12:32 am
    40 0 Rate This

    At my age, the memory is not as sharp as it once was but I have a dim recollection of angry protests by fans of Rangers 1872 (Deceased) against the BBC when a reporter called Mark Daly exposed the Motherwell-born billionaire owner of Rangers 1872 (Deceased) as being a bit on the frugal side with veracity, and somewhat leaning towards the potless side of the wealth spectrum.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
    And has anyone heard even one word of regret or contrition from any of the organisers or participants in that march- the aim of which was to silence the media and cost Daly his job? No? But of course that’s not the “Rangers Way”. Their so-called “dignity” doesn’t allow for apologies, does it?


  37. SFA Club Licencing rules

    8.12
    Financial Information
    Clubs are required to provide a summary of financial information drawn from the Audited Accounts submitted at 8.1.1.
    Clubs should be aware that this information will be made freely available via the Scottish FA Website.

    Can anyone see where this information is on the website? Are they too busy investigating accusations of widespread betting? Have the SFA mistaken transparency for invisibility?

    The SFA – Secreting Football Accounts?


  38. I remember before the deid club died and we all enjoyed our football. I also remember that even then the SFA were not running our game fairly. The SFA have now taken the word fairness out of Scottish football completely.
    Time for them to be reunited with deid club.


  39. john clarke says:
    September 21, 2013 at 10:46 pm

    Mind you, one could argue that the SFA had/has a duty to do more than simply accept what a member club or would-be director says. The days of accepting anyone’s ‘word’ (sworn on their ‘honour’!) without some independent checking are long gone!

    It would not have cost the earth for some SFA minion to have done some minimal research into CW’s status as a businessman, enough at least to allow the SFA to have asked a few hard questions.
    =====================================================================
    There is an obvious limit in terms of cost and expertise that the SFA can apply to checking ‘financial’ info of clubs. So when we have scarce resources they have to be allocated where they will do most good and that IMO means the vast bulk of resources should be concentrated on the SPL.

    As a major critic of the SFA I will throw them a bone in that I believe they were well enough informed about the ‘facts’ of Craig Whyte from the day he arrived on the Scottish football scene. It wasn’t a failure of ‘intelligence’ in either sense of the word but a lack of intergrity and backbone.

    I have no intention of wandering into the debate on the rights and wrongs of whether the SFA decisions or inaction was solely predicated in favour of Rangers. I personally think that it was and I have my thoughts on why that was and I have previously posted on this.

    However, in a sense, I don’t think the reasons are as important as the SFA being open and transparent about their decisions and explaining why they had been made. This has been their great failing and is a collective failing of their officers, officials and members.

    IMO there are structural flaws in the organisation but I think the main fault is in the total lack of clear, principled leadership which has left a huge percentage of Scottish Football fans sickened by what they perceive as the rotteness, corruption and total lack of democratic accountability at the heart of football.

    We now know that football rule books cannot be taken as tablets of stone but are merely there to provide ‘guidance’ to the administrators on an ad-hoc basis to solve ‘problems’ and we have continually seen that precedents that don’t fit with the required solution are ignored. This is madness and will increasingly lead to ‘football’ decisions being appealed through the courts and recent ‘shenanigans’ well-deserve to be removed from secret cabals and their opaque decisions supposedly made for the ‘good of the game’.

    Going back to the SFA and what it could be doing: Why doesn’t it start by actually determining who owns Scottish Football Clubs. I don’t think the SFA have a clue as to the beneficial holders of many major Rangers shareholders. All they have is a list of the names of offshore shell companies and secret trusts and nominee names.

    But they don’t know have a clue who actually owns the anonymous shares. It doesn’t take a lot of money or expertise to ensure that the operating company of a football club meets its legal requirements to provide a list of shareholders and also supply the financial info required by the SFA.

    There is a deeper question that has to be asked because to me it goes to the heart of how football is run. Is it acceptable to the authorities that unknown investors can buy a Scottish Football club? I know it isn’t acceptable to the fans no matter what team is involved.

    The big problem afaik is that all the SFA gets is a list of names of trusts etc and hasn’t a clue who the individuals behind them are. I don’t think that’s good enough but what, to me, is worse is that it allows the likes of Charles Green to publicly trumpet that the identity of investors is a matter of public knowledge and the SFA knows who they are.

    I have no doubt that the SFA have been given the names of the likes of: Margarita Holdings and Blue Pitch Holdings and a host of similar names. But do they have a clue who the individuals actually are behind these ‘fronts’.

    Does it matter? Possibly not to the SFA but Scottish football fans and, in particular, Rangers fans are interested and concerned because a major battle for control of Rangers is underway and the Easdale camp is claiming they have the share proxies of some of these hidden companies/trusts.

    McCoist on this issue is strangely quiet because it seems tailor-made for his: ‘We want the names. We demand to know who these people are’.

    I actually wonder if the Easdale operation actually knows the names and somehow I doubt it 🙄


  40. If officialy no [Fully Audited] accounts have been submitted ,to anyone,is the 3 year clock not started ticking down for entry into Euro competitions,although as it seems the clock will need quite a few battery changes before this was to happen.


  41. From today’s football gossip on the BBC site

    But Ibrox manager Ally McCoist believes it will take a lot of money for Rangers to be able to challenge Celtic in the long term.

    Full story: Sunday Express (print edition)

    Where do yuo begin with this? Ally, have you any idea what is going on at your club?
    It’s going to take a lot of money for Rangers to survive never mind challenge Celtic. Have you learned nothing from the last couple of years


  42. I just heard a Scottish SSN “reporter/presenter” say that this was the 1st meeting between Rangers and Forfar in their 140 year history!!!! Should someone buy him a calculator seeing as Forfar are approximately 128 years old having formed in 1885? 🙄 Sickening.

    Scottish Football needs this sorting out.


  43. At least EAsports are on the ball 😆 no sevco on FIFA14 ……… Do they know something we don’t 😛


  44. September 22, 2013 at 11:43 am

    1

    0

    Rate This

    Quantcast

    Yet another boycott in the offing?

    http://www.sundaypost.com/sport/football/rangers-fans-boycott-to-hit-final-plans-1.133604
    ————————————————————————————————————————–
    FFS arrogant WATP mental b******* . And they wonder why we do not want them back.
    The day they come back and the SFA have not stood up against them wil be a very dark place for Scottish football. I would rather scottish football die than them thinking or not being told THEY are deid.


  45. Lamp Post Sannies says:
    September 22, 2013 at 10:46 am
    21 0 Rate This

    From today’s football gossip on the BBC site

    But Ibrox manager Ally McCoist believes it will take a lot of money for Rangers to be able to challenge Celtic in the long term.

    Full story: Sunday Express (print edition)
    ————————————–
    Where do yuo begin with this? Ally, have you any idea what is going on at your club?
    It’s going to take a lot of money for Rangers to survive never mind challenge Celtic. Have you learned nothing from the last couple of years

    ========================

    I take it it is actually meaning Sevco (and ‘other people’s money) to challenge celtic
    (…since rangers are in Liquidation)


  46. Whilst welcoming supporters of the Ibrox club onto this forum they are going to have to do a lot better than Ryan if they expect any sort of support. If Ryan is accusing the SFA of being culpable in the demise of RFC for not stopping CW then it’s no wonder the new club are in such a mess, he’s right of course but for completely the wrong reasons.
    Let’s just summarise the actions the SFA could and should have taken;

    With CO on board they would have been aware of the DOS and EBT schemes – no action.

    They were aware of RFC’s ineligibility for Europe in the 2011 season – no action

    If they were aware of CW’s lack of financial backing they could have gotten David Murray to justify his sale (this would have saved a lot of the ‘we were duped’ nonsense) – no action

    They were aware of the impending financial meltdown (cozy dinner for 3 in November) which could have been partially offset by a fire sale of players in the January 2012 window – no action

    When it was mooted that CG was taking over they could have said he was not fit and proper – no action

    When Bomber gave his speech he could have been invited to Hampden and told that they would take on his concerns – no action

    When the CVA was rejected they could have applied the rules and invited RFC into the lowest rung of the ladder – ACTION Dear SPL would it be ok if this new club starts at the top debt free?

    When the new club started in the fourth tier they could have stated that this was a new company/club with no titles to their name and hence no stars on their shirts – no action

    They could have ensured that with an ounce of competency from their representative at the LNS enquiry, the old club had their titles stripped for what was agreed on all 10 other charges to be clear violation of the rules – ACTION to miss the easiest open goal in legal history

    When it became clear that they had broken the terms of the (illegal/unconstitutional?) 5 Way Agreement they could have annulled their membership – ACTION SFA ” was CG acting on behalf of CW? TRFC “No” SFA “OK carry on”

    So to Ryan and all the other apologists, the SFA ARE responsible for the mess you’re in but only because they have acted completely outwith their remit to ensure that any version of a Rangers still exists.

    Put any of this to a supporter of the Ibrox club and their answer will be ……WATP

    You will never be tolerated by fans of any club in Scotland until you accept COMPLETE responsibility and contrition for your Downfall


  47. ecobhoy says:
    September 22, 2013 at 10:01 am

    I have no doubt that the SFA have been given the names of the likes of: Margarita Holdings and Blue Pitch Holdings and a host of similar names. But do they have a clue who the individuals actually are behind these ‘fronts’.

    Does it matter? Possibly not to the SFA but Scottish football fans and, in particular, Rangers fans are interested and concerned because a major battle for control of Rangers is underway and the Easdale camp is claiming they have the share proxies of some of these hidden companies/trusts.
    ——————————————————————————————————————————————

    Great post.

    So there is an AGM in the offing (apparently, though is it possible without audited accounts?), at which there will be voting on board membership.

    Shareholders turn up (or don’t) and demand voting rights weighted according to their fraction of the overall shareholding.

    Simple question: who determines those voting rights? And if I turn up saying that I have been given authority to vote on behalf of a group of shareholders – what evidence do I need to supply to confirm this proxy vote?


  48. Just a thought. How many MSM hacks look at this site. Anyone know of any?


  49. upthehoops @ 12.43 pm

    Quite a few 😆 by the number of TD’s there are 😆 no seriously I think they have a look just to see what they’ve missed 😉


  50. Danish Pastry says:
    September 22, 2013 at 11:43 am
    2 0 Rate This

    Yet another boycott in the offing?

    http://www.sundaypost.com/sport/football/rangers-fans-boycott-to-hit-final-plans-1.133604

    ====================================================================

    I’m sick of this 5hite…feck them, so what if they boycott it? let them…who does it affect? If they want to continue to play the victim card, then let them – all they are doing is further alienating themselves and making everyone wish their death comes all the sooner.

    Of course, all the DECENT Sevconians will be right along to condemn such nonsense….won’t they? eh? Come on Ryan…..surely you’ll be 1st to say this is pathetic in the extreme? no?


  51. Yeah that’s ridiculous. If Hampden is out of commission it should be played at Celtic Park, due to the large capacity. It can’t be played at Ibrox obviously because why should Rangers be allowed a home tie in a final? And any fans boycotting it are just being stupid.

    I must say though that I find your tone in some of these posts to be less than respectful.


  52. RyanGosling says:
    September 22, 2013 at 12:58 pm
    1 0 Rate This – that 1st thumbs up was me! Well said

    credit where it’s due


  53. Has anyone asked Celtc, or Hearts, or Hibs, or any of the other clubs if they would be willing to have the Ramsden’s Cup final at their ground.

    The arrogance of the Rangers’ support really is stunning at times. They are talking about boycotting a final before they play the semi-final, at grounds whose owners presumably haven’t even been asked to host the event yet.

    Fire in lads, boycott away, people really don’t want or need you anyway. The rest of us are fine with Armageddon.


  54. Zilch, shareholders will be sent a proxy voting form with their agm notification . They can use this to either vote by post or nominate someone to vote on their behalf. As long as this is sent back before a stated deadline then the registrars/nomad (can’t remember who deals with it) will know how many proxy votes someone can cast. Guessing this is what’s already happened with the Easdales hence why he can say he controls 24% of the shares in any agm vote


  55. Is there something significant about 24%.

    If I remember correctly when Lloyds did the equity swap with MIH they went from holding 11% of the holding company to 24%, which I think meant they were guaranteed a seat on the MIH board.

    Is it a straight vote for people to be allowed onto the board, i.e. 50.1% (of those who cast a vote) gets you a seat or are there more complex rules than that.


  56. Brenda says:
    September 22, 2013 at 12:47 pm
    ================================
    Brenda, my reasoning may of course be misguided, but it’s the TD’s to certain posts that make me think there are some hacks lurking about on here.


  57. Regarding Sevco and the Ramsden cup final – should they get there.

    There is every chance Ibrox will have been sold to another party by the time of the final, so technically, it won’t be a home game at their own stadium

    just saying! 🙄


  58. FIFA says:

    September 22, 2013 at 10:19 am

    If officialy no [Fully Audited] accounts have been submitted ,to anyone,is the 3 year clock not started ticking down for entry into Euro competitions,although as it seems the clock will need quite a few battery changes before this was to happen.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    NO NO NO Three times no! 🙂

    The three years relates to length of time as a member of the national association. That began in August 2012 and is up in August 2015. It is fixed and not dependent on accounts.

    At whatever point they become eligible for a UEFA competition they will have to have submitted to the national association a set of AGM ratified accounts for the period prior to the upcoming UEFA season. Only the most recent years NOT three years.

    So if they qualify for Europe in 2016 UEFA will expect a set of ratified accounts for a year just preceding according to a clubs accounting cycle. There’s a bit more on interim accounts but the foregoing basically covers the nitty gritty.


  59. The Sunday Posts states “But it is understood a number of Rangers supporters have already intimated to the SPFL that they won’t follow their favourites to the home of their greatest rivals.”

    “understood” from whom?

    No quotes from anyone associated with Rangers supporters, no source and not the slightest bit of evidence.

    That’s not the arrogance of the Rangers support, that’s some made up story in newspaper.


  60. The Glen says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    —————————

    i take it you haven’t read the threads on this subject on Follow Follow or Rangers Media?

    Have a look and let us know how you got on.


  61. I understand the required number of signatories has been gathered to enable the resolution asking Celtic to ask UEFA to investigate the UEFA 2011 licence to get to the next stage.

    See https://www.celtictrust.net/?func=d_home_article&id=433 for a link to the document.

    There are further hurdles before it reaches the agenda but it seems to have got onto the track.


  62. The Glen @ 2:10pm

    “….. Rangers supporters have already intimated to the SPFL that they won’t follow their favourites to the home of their greatest rivals.”

    I think I can see the root of this misunderstanding.
    They were only saying that they aren’t going to attend the semi-final at Stenhousemuir.


  63. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:14 pm
    ————————-
    I haven’t read the one on Follow Follow, no.

    From the thread I read on Rangers Media, I don’t get the impression that the support is about to “boycott ANY top-flight ground” as stated in that article.


  64. Kilgore Trout says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:19 pm
    ———————————
    That did make me smile. And possibly true.


  65. Auldheid says:
    September 22, 2013 at 1:47 pm

    ========================

    Are you sure about this … 🙄


  66. The Glen says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    =====================

    They have a poll on follow follow.

    63% said they would not go and 10% said maybe with 27% saying they would.

    About 640 people voted on it so it’s a significant number.

    Put it another way, over 400 have said they would not go, with another 60 saying maybe.

    I don’t think it’s just a made up story.


  67. The Glen says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    That’s not the arrogance of the Rangers support, that’s some made up story in newspaper.
    =============================================
    My dear old Mother still buys the Sunday Post, like many of her era. When I visited this morning and saw this headline my first thought was it is a complete non-story, undeserving of the headline it was given, and as you say there is a lack of substance as to where the story came from.

    Personally I think the Ramsdens Cup should be kept in the context it is intended, which is a lesser competition for lower league clubs, with the final played at a neutral lower league ground. So what if that means many Rangers fans can’t get tickets – that happens all the time in football. As for the potential of playing the game at Celtic Park, I just wish Celtic would put a lid on that now by stating the stadium is not available.


  68. upthehoops says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:32 pm
    ———————-
    I agree with everything there uth.

    If the Sunday Post story had a headline “Rangers fans to bring sellout crowd to Celtic Park” and the evidence to back it up was a poll on a Rangers website, then people would be all over it like a rash – quire rightly, might I add.


  69. upthehoops says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:32 pm
    3 0 Rate This
    ….
    Personally I think the Ramsdens Cup should be kept in the context it is intended, which is a lesser competition for lower league clubs, with the final played at a neutral lower league ground.
    ….

    Indeed, and that does not rule out Ibrox at this time 🙂


  70. nostarsandbarred says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:53 pm
    =================================
    If Rangers reach the final and the authorities consider Ibrox as a venue then Scottish football’s tag wrestling status will be further enhanced.


  71. upthehoops says:
    September 22, 2013 at 3:10 pm

    ………………………………………………………………..

    You would think they would want the money to go to a lower league club.

    Oh right …


  72. Ramsden Cup Final

    Lesser Hampden (capacity 12,000)

    OR

    Why not bring it forward to March or February 2014 ……… Simples ! ! !


  73. Auldheid says:
    September 22, 2013 at 2:16 pm
    ‘…I understand the required number of signatories has been gathered to enable the resolution asking Celtic to ask UEFA to investigate the UEFA 2011 licence ..’
    —–
    Without getting too much into Celtic’s internal affairs, can you say whether the Board has already been resistant to, or has knocked back, any informal requests from the Celtic Trust that it should take such action?
    And if it has done, what reasons were given?

Leave a Reply