The increasing attacks on social media by the main stream press, fuelled in some respect by David Murray’s vague threats of litigation against bloggers, has brought into sharp focus the challenges facing the Blogosphere. It also brings into even sharper focus the prescience of Stuart Cosgrove’s assertion that this summer’s ‘epistemological break’ had begun to marginalize the Scottish sporting wing of the MSM.
The reality of that assertion is embedded in the misreporting of the FTT decision as a victory for RFC, falsely alleging that those who operated the EBT scheme had been exonerated, that RFC had ‘done nothing wrong’, and consequently accusing ‘vindictive anti-Rangers bloggers’ of playing a part in the downfall of that once great Scottish institution. It is also evident in Tom English’s rather bitter and one-dimensional anti-RTC polemic today in the Scotland on Sunday. Had it been entitled “Self Preservation”, it may have rung a few more truth bells.
I am not of the belief that the MSM is an instinctively pro-Rangers estate, but I do think that their reportage of the FTT is more geared towards discrediting the newly emergent forces in the social media area than it is towards rehabilitating the public image of RFC or David Murray.
However despite the contempt in which many people here hold the MSM and Murray, English does have a point that we would be foolish to ignore. No-one can deny that we do have a duty to ensure that we are responsible in how we present ourselves to the public. Now that our (and others’) success as a real and creative alternative has spurred the MSM into action, we are subject to greater scrutiny than at any time in the past. Our view is that we have to be pro-actively engaged in setting a standard for ourselves that is above those that the MSM have set for themselves.
We have on TSFM an audience exponentially greater than the number of posts. That presents us with a great opportunity to get our message across, but it also burdens us with an increased responsibility not to fall into the trap which has besought the Succulent Lamb Brigade.
We are a very different animal from RTC. RTC him or herself had information and insight to bring to the table that the administrators of this site do not. The founder and former admin of TSFM had the idea that the talent available from posters on the RTC – not just RTC himself – should continue to have a forum in a post-RTC world, and that those talents could be used to challenge the myths regularly represented as facts by lazy journalists in the MSM.
We have at our disposal on this blog forensic analysis of legal, media and corporate matters. We have an abundance of creative minds, all passionate about the game of football AS WELL AS a partisan love for their chosen club. With all that talent and expertise, we can make an impact on the agenda by challenging the misinformation and substandard journalism of the MSM, and our finest moments are when we do that. We lose authority and influence when the debate is impeded by bald accusation or innuendo backed up with little more than an historical view of our country.
Our biggest impact (and largest audience) is to be found when when our experts have collectively torn apart those myths presented as truths by the MSM, and when we have asked the questions that the MSM either can’t or won’t ask or answer. Those are the things that have driven the traffic to this site, and many of the emails we get congratulate us on that.
Our credibility plummets though when we go down the partisan path. We also get literally hundreds of emails from fans who ask that we cut down on the comments of those who are merely venting outrage at how they see the game being mismanaged (mainly so they can access the important stuff more quickly), and from fans who are just fed up with the constant name-calling – almost exclusively aimed at Ally McCoist and other Rangers figures.
If we claim to be an intellectual and journalistic rung or two above the likes of the Red Tops (not to mention to be decent and respectful of others), we need to refrain from the name calling and accusatory culture. We can ask questions, put items for debate on the public agenda, point out apparent irregularities and anomalies. In rushing to judgement of others from the comfort of the glow of our own laptop screens, we are guilty of the same lazy journalism we see in others. Name calling (all good fun of course on a fan site) is just a lazy thought process and as English says, comes across as “nasty”.
We never saw RTC as a fan-site. The original administrator of this blog never saw TSFM as one either, and nor do we. In order to succeed properly, we need sensible fans of ALL clubs to be comfortable and feel secure in our midst. Of course we are not breaking any laws, but can anyone honestly say that we have evolved into a welcoming place for Rangers fans?
TSFM is not about hounding any one club out of existence or into shame or infamy. In the Rangers saga we have sought to ensure that the football authorities play fair with everyone and stick to their own rules. One well kent RTC contributor, and no friend of Rangers, often said that if the FTT found in favour of Rangers we should move along and accept it. Well they did find in favour of Rangers in the majority of cases. That may not suit many of us, but we are the Scottish Football Monitor, not a Judicial Watchdog. We can say why we disagree with the decision, but criticism of the process through which the decision was arrived at is beyond our purview.
Since the accusation is often made in the MSM, we should state, unequivocally and unreservedly, that we are NOT anti-Rangers. Their fans face the same issues as the rest of us and they are welcome here. We are however, equally unequivocally against the gravy train journalism of the Scottish Football Wing of the MSM (with one or two honourable exceptions).
If the Anti-Blogateers in the press are correct, the popularity of the TSFM will recede as the Rangers Tax case reverts to the back pages before disappearing for good. However I do not believe that they are correct. I don’t believe that Scottish football fans are only motivated by either hatred – or even dislike – of one club. I believe we are more concerned with the game itself than the pot-stirrers in the MSM would have us believe, because we understand the interdependence of football clubs.
But we also understand that the people who run football clubs do not always run their clubs for the benefit of the fans. In the business world, that may not be out of the ordinary, since businesses are run for the benefit of shareholders.
However football reserves for itself a special place in the hearts of people in this country. If the people who run football clubs want to retain that favourable status, they have to be accountable to the fans.
The difficulty in holding them to account though, is that the cosy relationship cultivated between club directors, managers and players and the press renders the access to information a closed shop, and the information itself is heavily filtered and spun.
As long as we keep asking questions in response to the fruit of that cosy relationship, we will be providing people with an alternative angle and viewpoint, allowing them to come to their own conclusions, and not the one the MSM post-presser huddle delivers to us wrapped up in a bow.
For the SFM specifically, we believe that to have any influence, we need to enable the expertise at our disposal to flourish. It is also vital to our project that Rangers fans are included in our dialogue. We just can’t call ourselves the Scottish Football Monitor if they are largely excluded from participation because they feel they are being treated disrespectfully.
We can’t tolerate the accusations and name calling. We need to stick to what we have done best; factual analysis, conjecture based on known facts and on-line discourse leading to searching questions being asked.
One of the things we are looking at for the near future is to set up some kind of formal and transparent channel of communication between the SFM and the football authorities. Being truly representative of fans will make that easier to achieve.
The MSM will continue to attack the social media outlets. In one way you can understand it. Their jobs are at stake. The business model of the print media in particular has changed massively over the last five years, manifesting itself mainly in increasingly under-resourced newsrooms. Consequently it is besought by increasingly unreliable and under-researched journalism, even to the point where much of it is no longer journalism at all.
By comparison the Blogosphere has access to greater human and time resources, is able to react to unfolding events in real time, and crucially (because it has been eschewed instead of embraced by print media proprietors) has been occupied by ordinary folk with little or no vested interest.
We are still in position to provide a service in our small niche of the on-line world. We have rights to publish and speak freely about our passion, but we also have to live up to the attendant responsibilities, and thus the appeal for discretion on posting comments.
Where Tom English got it completely wrong (in the uniquely ironic way the MSM have about them), is that his industry has mistaken the rights others have earned for them as entitlement, and ignored almost completely the responsibility they had to act on behalf of those who pay their wages.
A good piece that on the Bundesliga standing areas, it would certainly add to the atmosphere at the grounds. Judging by the TV revenue the German clubs receive, they can cut down the prices for the average fan to 10 Euros, whereas here the main income needs to come from the paying fan. The inclusion of standing areas at grounds would imho bring in more fans, as more friends could gather together and enjoy the banter whilst watching the match.
You’ve just got to cast your minds back before seating, the whole match day experience was a lot more enjoyable.
john clarke says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:28
1 0 Rate This
briggsbhoy says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 08:19
–
‘..These days! he and his son are season ticket holders at Dunfermline.-
—-
And, I have to say, he could have done worse than switch his allegiance to such a noble team!
Curious, though.
I lived and worked in Carlisle for a time and ‘adopted’ Carlisle United while I was there, and can understand how people can develop an affinity with a second, or third, club. But to completely abandon your first football love is maybe a wee bit unusual.
————————————————————————
I can add to the list
I know a chap from the west coast. Born and brought up a Celtic fan, held a seasons ticket for many years and even went to Seville. (but didn’t we ALL? hahahaha)
Anyway, moved to Edinburgh for a new job, work mates were all Jambos, started going to the games with them as a social thing and is now an out and out Jambo
Not sure if he takes a union flag to the games – or if that is just for Celtic games, but there is a transition that i’d never have expected.
No interest in Celtic now at all.
The return of Adam has brought back the discussion of ‘old Club or new Club’. I gave a reply to his guest post on Paul McConville’s blog (for a man who was claiming to be too unskilled in writing to produce a guest blog he’s not half got into it now 🙂 ) but very shortly after Paul posted a fresh blog of his own so the topic of conversation has changed, and I doubt I’ll have the pleasure of a reply from Adam to continue what I hoped would be a little debate between us on the subject 🙁
As a Hearts supporter I find it rather difficult to accept that liquidation could mean the end of my club, and it’s history. I’d love to find an argument to support the idea that a club’s history would continue, uninterupted, should the situation Hearts currently find themselves in lead to their liquidation. Unfortunately I can’t find that argument, other than the one that would run true for every supporter, of every club, that Hearts would forever remain in my heart, that I could never support another club, except the one that re-emerges, in the hope that it can conduct itself in a manner that deserves the right to call itself ‘The Hearts’ and strives to earn it’s own history to add to that of the club I love. I’ve written this to show any Rangers supporters, or anyone else who might question my motivation, that I am not using this argument as a form af Rangers bashing. On the contrary, I would warmly welcome any counter argument to convince me that Heart of Midlothian FC would continue, as the club founded in 1874, regardless of whatever happens to the PLC.
My post on PMc’s blog was as follows:
‘Adam, are you suggesting that Rangers Football Club PLC – owned the assets, owned the players, paid the players and staff, created massive debt in order to win trophies, but the only function of an undocumented entity called Rangers Football Club was to own the history and trophies won by the assets of the PLC? Wouldn’t that make Rangers Football Club a parasite? Living and thriving off the hard work of others, including unpaid creditors; and is it now the case, that like most other parasites, when it’s host dies, it finds itself another body to live and thrive off?
I don’t intend arguing re the Fiorentina and Leeds cases, what you say may indeed be true, but I would imagine that in both cases they got away with it because no one thought to question it, not because it was legally correct. I think too, that Lord Nimmo Smith’s assertion that ‘The Club’ was in fact the member of the SPL, and not the PLC, is a double edged sword for Rangers. I believe he has created a situation whereby, if the SPL Tribunal find old Rangers guilty of the mis-registering of players (cheating), then any penalties will be handed down, and attached, to the ‘Club’, and not to the PLC, leaving Green with the stark choice of either accepting the penalties, unconditionally, or accepting that Rangers Football Club died along with the Company and that The Rangers FC is, indeed, a new club. I wonder too, if Fiorentina or Leeds United Football Clubs had had similar penalties attached to the entity ‘Club’, would they still be claiming to be ‘the same club’?’
Palacio67 says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:40
Does your ‘standing space’ not relate to your ticket number?
The football authorities like the control of knowing where everyone is, I can see this as an obstacle, they like to know where the customer is.
bawsman says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:38
Is it today BDO are meeting with RFC creditors?
My understanding is that BDO will make public the amounts owed, and to whom, including the tax man.
==================================================
Seems to be today or tomorrow,depending on who and where you read.
“My work here is done.”
Yes, James Traynor, and I thank the Lord that you are going and taking your malign influence with you.
I , too, have ‘memories’ – of the way you argued for and supported, and still support, the cheating mentality of the wickedest ‘business’ con man and his cohorts in the history of Scottish football.
Bad cess to you for the entirely negative contribution you have made to our game.
You will be no loss.
bawsman says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:46
You would think it would be difficult to find your standing space, especially after your team scored. In years gone by it was not unusual to find yourself 10 yards from where you once were.
I agree however, that the Police etc would be against any standing areas because of the reason you mention, it would make it more difficult to find out their names.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:42
—
‘..I can add to the list..’
—
I wonder if anyone has undertaken any kind of research into the phenomenon of football support allegiance-switching?
john clarke says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 11:03
0 0 Rate This
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:42
–
‘..I can add to the list..’
—
I wonder if anyone has undertaken any kind of research into the phenomenon of football support allegiance-switching?
—————————————————
there was a book/blog written by a Jambo,He became a Hibbee for a year
it was called Heartfelt – http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/features/aidan-smith-the-heartfelt-hibby-1-2302999
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Heartfelt-Aidan-Smith/dp/1841585106
btw, the Jambo I know who was previously a celtic fan…..he is quite a prominent Jambo poster on here – i’ll let him out himself 😉
Danish Pastry says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:17
5 0 i
Rate This
cosmichaggis says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 09:29
5 0 Rate This
Sorry if posted before, but this is what Scottish footbal needs desparately to aspire to:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2012/dec/02/ermany-bundesliga-noisy-fans
———
Terrific piece cosmic. Do they get The Guardian at Hampden? Here’s hoping.
==========================================================================
Well, not too certain that “The Garudian” would be one of their preferred subscriptions judging by the decisions from the SFA Kremlin.
I would hazard a guess of the following:
The Beano, The Victor (Roy of the Rovers a favourite), The Big Issue, and any publication that is to the right of Gengis Khan!
I don’t want to be controversial but I actually want to conmmend Jim Traynor today. Obviously there is a distinct lack of humility about his piece but what he is saying is that he can no longer work in ‘the business’ as it is now. This site in particular has proven (note the word James) that the old school ‘business’ was essentially summed up as “We have spoken, it is therefore now reality. FACT as the kids so love saying.” My take on S.Cosgrove’s piece a couple of weeks ago was to challenge that notion, that in fact t’internet in particular but other mediums as well CAN bring more to the party especially when the old school FACT actually turns out to be a conspicuously and consistently ‘directed’ version of the truth.
But, and its a huge but, I also take J.Traynor’s view on board. For every TSFM there’s a Leggat, for every RTC there’s a Mark Hately column. There is never a huge boundary between democracy and mob rule. (Personally I would argue the biggest boundary is well informed truth and transparency but that’s a whole new blog in itself). My point is that Jim has held his hands up and said “don’t like it, not playing any more.” I have no problem with a man standing up for his convictions although reading that back that’s possibly not the best term I could have chosen.
Chuckie Green (and its a shame Jim will always be linked to this story more than any other) is now calling it right. The Rangers brand are in Div 3. Apparently they want to be here. They are happy there etc etc. (I’ve previously written that I’m aware that technically they shouldn’t but my mercenary side looks at 48,000 league attendances and successfully argues the case but again I digress). Had the MSM followed, in fact driven such an outcome from day 1 then Jim and the likes would have had a lot more respect from the likes of me. That Campbell Ogilvie has not seen likewise is adisgrace, pure and simple. No sympathy for Jim whatsoever. But a degree of respect this morning certainly.
john clarke says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 02:04
——————————————————
Afraid you’re wrong there. Plenty of guys change football allegiance. I know personally three guys who were formerly Old Firm supporters as young men and changed allegiance to my club because they got fed up with a lot of the nonsense associated with their old teams.
People change their politics, religion, way of life all the time. Maybe not the majority of people but a lot all the same.
Lord Wobbly says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 07:48
———-
john clarke says:
———————-
But he might be a white whale. 🙂
smugas says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 11:23
what he (Traynor) is saying is that he can no longer work in ‘the business’ as it is now.
———————————————————————————————————–
I think you are pre-supposing he had any actual choice in the matter. I think most people thought he was getting hi P45 at the beginning of the year but clung-on. Perhaps a suitable deal to leave has now been thrashed out with management which has allowed him the fig-leaf of a final column.
IMHO it would take a rain forest and he certainly isn’t worth anything as valuable as that 🙂
I would imagine James Traynor has had a month or more, at least, to write his farewell piece. I’d expect he’s written much that has been screwed up and thrown in the bin, or rather deleted to the recycle bin 😉 , but with the deadline approaching I suspect he decided he was going out with a bang, wrote what was, in effect, an attack on his nemisis (RTC) and others, and has instead gone out like a wet squib (or should that be wet squid?). I’d suggest, before he ever writes another farewell word again, he gets himself online and digs out Mike Aitken’s (of the Scotsman) farewell, and also his parting piece when he moved from football coverage to golf in the Scotsman, to see how a proper journalist, and indeed any man of integrity, would do it. Traynor may well be right that RTC got the FTTT result wrong, but that piece he’s just had published shows, that RTC’s, and all our, assessment of Traynor was 100% correct. I find it strange, too, that he has failled to thank any of his collegues or mentors from his many years in the business, not even the tea lady! In fact, other than the few greats he’s had the pleasure of meeting, most of whom won’t remember him, he doesn’t have a good word to say about anybody, well perhaps he did say something good about the Rangers fans. Would that be the ones who didn’t spit on his back?
angus1983 says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:37
OT
… its girly puerility …
——
Apologies to the Latin scholars amongst us who will no doubt have spotted the oxymoronic quality of that phrase. 🙂
Glad to see the back of Traynor. He’ll be remembered by me for his championing of Craig Whyte and his desire to see Newco jump into the First Division for the good of Scottish football. Two massive failures which won’t have gone down well his bosses. Jumped before he was pushed IMO.
One issue of course. Here was us believeing that Jim could see inside the minds of the SPL chairmen for their meeting today. Remember his source told him that Stephen Thomson had left to prove that he was absolutely not the source on all matters anti rangers – sorry – SPL reconstruction. Is it not slightly odd Jim chose to leave today, the day of the SPL reconstruction meeting rather than say tomorrow where he could have left with a “this is what they really said” exclusive? Or did that require him actually standing outside Hampden and asking questions, probing or otherwise?
Andy M @ Scotzine @scotzine
So news comes to us from a reliable source that the rumours are true. James Traynor is taking up a post with.Rangers as Head of Marketing/PR
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
corsicacharity says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 08:45
Willmacufree & John Clarke
Ex Celtic Supporters:
Could we add Morris (Judas) Johnston to that list 🙂
When you look at what has gone on at Rangers, money was his driver and the lure of winning medals etc and playing with a team of stars put together at great expensive, which I’m sure even back then Rangers couldn’t afford. It was all about stuffing Celtic and in the end the onlyTurkey stuffed here was SDM & Rnagers, Karma !
angus1983 says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 11:42
‘..scholars amongst us who will no doubt have spotted the oxymoronic quality of that phrase. 🙂
—–
No, you’re all right, angus1983: the basic meaning of ‘puer’ is ‘child’, so nothing wrong with ‘girly childishness’.
My favourite paragraph from the Traynor farewell?
‘I could name managers, players, club directors and administrators who, because the truth can hurt, have wished me all kinds of harm and misfortune. But neither they nor their words mattered. They damaged and shamed only themselves.’
Oh wad some power, the gift tae gie us etc…..
It’s difficult not to have sympathy for him. He’s simply been left behind, and it must be frustrating to find that after years of being unchallenged and sailing through his career, all of a sudden the mat has been pulled from under him. LIke I said, difficult……. but his assertion that RTC was worth nothing is the bit that kills that sympathy. Again, he’s completely missed the point – The tax case very quickly became almost a trivial side issue. It was HIS refusal to report honestly on what was happening (£25 million warchests, anyone?) that changed the whole course of the blog.
Jim, it was YOU who created RTC.
I’ll be honest, when I first read it (in it’s VERY early days), I thought it was yet another Celtic-as-victims blog, and was ready to dismiss it. Had Jimbo and friends actually reported what was going on honestly, then it would have stayed that way – a perception of yet another Celtic fan claiming to have inside knowledge of all things Rangers.
Yet, it very quickly became much more than that.because it was as plain as the nose on your face that we were being lied to left, right and centre. It became a rallying point for fans who were in search of more than the usual nonsense being served up.
Enjoy your journalistic retirement Jim, but the dignified way to go would have been to avoid the Stalinist revision. James Sanderson must be turning in his grave.
I think the following quote from the start of Jim Trayn-orc’s parting shot reveals a lot more than the rest of the diatribe does “let the best of those memories rush from every corner of your mind and keep the worst of them locked away.” Now I’m no psychologist but given the rant he then descends into, this sounds like someone who just ignores any opposing opinion, suppressing it into the recesses of his bitter mind from where it subconsciously drives his ignorant, loathsome agenda.
What follows in the rest of Jim final piece is bizarre, he says at the start that “it’s important to end by talking about good things” but barring a list of his sporting heroes, virtually the entire article is negative. He talks about how the truth hurts in reference to how his “reporting” has affected other people but it is the truth that he is hiding from. He says that banging on about insults he’s received would demean everything but then goes on to launch into an attack filled with petty insults which demean everything he says. Each and every criticism he aims at others is an almost perfect description of himself! It’s as if he’s taken all that bottled up anger, every negative description that’s been directed at him, every journalistic sin that he’s been accused of and directed it back at his accusers. And in perhaps the most comically ironic phrase of the whole piece he describes the blogs as some of the “most infantile drivel ever written”.
Well done Jim, it sums you up in a nutshell. Maybe you’ve had an epiphany as a result of the “Rangers crisis” and all the enlightening journalism and insight that these blogs have shined on the issue and this final piece is in fact an ingenious self parody. Or maybe it’s the sad and twisted rantings of someone who’s been hiding from the truth for so long and has now realised that there’s nowhere left to hide in the world of internet bloggers and social media.
Whichever it is I can’t think of a more fitting way to end your career. Thank you.
campsiejoe says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 12:40
0 0 Rate This
Should the rumour regarding traynor’s future employers be true, then I fear that we will all be subjected to more of his nonsense, and and it will be much worse than anything that we have seen from him to date
In some ways, being regarded as a member of the MSM kept him in check
Freed from this restraint, it will be open season on anyone, or any organisation that is perceived to be anti Sevco or anti Charlie
Having said that, it would be a strange move for Sevco, given that they have the immense and utterly brilliant PR machine that is Jack at their beck and call
———————————————————————————–
part of the process, a “neutral” and accepted face. Someone who has been around teh block, see it all and calling it “as he sees is”
given his history and profile, people won’t make the immediate connection that he, like fat DJ and mark Hately, were in the employ of RFC while writing their newspaper columns.
Now, Jabba will be viewed as a knowledgable and experienced old hack giving his views on the sevconians plight
they need a well kent face to be accepted and well, jabba is a kent! 😉
angus1983 says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:37
The second part of his piece doesn’t warrant comment – its girly puerility speaks for itself.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wonderfully non-pc and pithy summing up of JTs farewell. Rather sad to sign off from 37 years work in that way. His writing wasn’t always skewed by a need to be provocative and by mis-judgement of SDM and the morals of his business practice. The editor should done him a favour and cut the second half of the article.
Farewell Jim, its been a blast.
I would be surprised if he went to Rangers. I also don’t buy the move to Media house line, the only way that would work is if he worked on the Rangers account, and Ramsay is already on it. Whatever your view of Jack and Ramsay, they both have a great deal of experience as journalists. far more than say a former glorified football gossip columnist.
I agree with the poster above, it is likely that Jim will return in the new year, but I could be wrong, (have been before), I suspect that depends on the fortunes of a former SPL club, and maybe he will retire, perhaps a wee house in Legoland would suit….
Taysider says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 12:55
From a PR perspective though, Rangers should ask themselves if appointing Jim Traynor would reflect a club that is in tune with a fast changing modern world or with the age of the dinosaur?
=============================
maybe the answer will tell you WHY they approached him?
Adam is making Paul’s blog unreadable, just like old times.
He claims never to have heard of TSFM.
I pointed out that i believe he is talking 99% crap, but one of his fleet of typists quickly shot me down.
Thats the sevco supporters talking about giving the dundee utd scottish cup game a body swerve .Absolute idiots
Jim Traynors decision to quit is less about his disillusionment with journalsim per se,and more about his inability to embrace modern day social media.The emergence of Twitter,Facebook,and blog sites such as The Rangers Tax Case and The Scottish Football Monitor, had clearly left him way off the pace.Traynor was obviously uncomfortable with the fact that his views would be challenged and that he would be answerable.In todays journalistic world he was a dinosaur and he knew it.He will be happily missed.
I wonder if Chuckles the Bears will keep their promise to get back at teams that didn’t show them respect by boycotting Tannadice in the next round of the cup.
One interesting little niggly point about the Scottish cup draw:
the teams are given their proper registered names- eg, Hamilton Academical, Inverness Caledonian Thistle, Forfar Athletic…..
One of them is not.
What a little bit of perversity in corridors of Hampden.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 13:03
maybe the answer will tell you WHY they approached him?
========================================
Indeed, but another development that would underline how an opportunity for Sevco to move on from and be better than the past is being lost. Would love to know the truth about the offers that Duff & Phelps were alleged to have turned down (by Corsica I think?)
john clarke says: Monday, December 3, 2012 at 13:35
Re the name : from the United website
“United have been drawn at home to The Rangers in the Fifth Round of the William Hill Scottish Cup. The tie is to be played on 2 or 3 February 2013”
Be fair now. CO’s been on the golf course for the last eight months. How could he know?
Just read Adam the troll’s drivel….Wow, just wow!!!! Same nonsense, different blog..yawwwn. Sad individual really.
If Traynor is going to work for Rangers can he be allowed to continue working for Radio Shortbread?
easyJambo says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 13:40
john clarke says: Monday, December 3, 2012 at 13:35
Re the name : from the United website
“United have been drawn at home to The Rangers in the Fifth Round of the William Hill Scottish Cup. The tie is to be played on 2 or 3 February 2013″
=======================
Looks like someone changed it. How ridiculous is this becoming?
Grant Russell@STVGrant
Early trolling by Dundee United ahead of Rangers cup tie? “The Rangers”. http://bit.ly/VqsPFV
———————————
Rachel Lynch@Rachel_Lynchx
Dundee United they no THE situation. #Respect pic.twitter.com/hCi8vH5r
So here is the opportunity the Rangers fans have been waiting for. Boycott Tannadice. After all, Dundee United were one of the first teams to have a ‘sly kick’ on the way down when they asked for their cup tie money. How dare they!
Presumably, if they do boycott it, Dundee United will still have to share the gate money. I wonder if they will get to deduct any monies still owed?
scottc says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 14:08
Interesting conundrum, especially if its televised as well. Oh what a tangled web…
Robert Coyle says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 12:08
9 0 Rate This
Andy M @ Scotzine @scotzine
So news comes to us from a reliable source that the rumours are true. James Traynor is taking up a post with.Rangers as Head of Marketing/PR
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
_______________________________________________
Haven’t they been punished enough? So glad to hear his work is done. Can anyone who read his piece confirm what targets he feels he met and how he feels he’s made a positive contribution to Scottish sports journalism?
Statement from Union Bears
After drawing Dundee United away in the Scottish Cup we have decided to throw our weight behind a full boycott of this match.
Dundee United are one of the enemies of Rangers and one of the main driving forces behind attempting to steal trophies from us.
Of course it will be hard for some people not to follow Rangers wherever they play but in this instance we must urge the full Rangers support to get behind a boycott of this fixture.
We urge Rangers Football Club and Charles Green to fully back the boycott of this match and refuse our allocation of tickets. Now is the time for the support to prove our unity and make sure that the enemies of the club don’t see a penny of our money.
Union Bears
No Surrender
Don’t they (Sevco) get half the gate money for a cup tie?………….Pretty sure that will be a hard call for the Yorkshire lad. You know them and their attraction to coin.
It is clear that Jim Traynor still does not “get it.”
Rangers did wrong morally to a large extent, legally to the extent of the final tax bill (oh yes there still is one that will not be paid along with other debts because, well because they avoid that kind of thing.)
What he does not get is that the stripping of titles is not the objective, the objective is to make wrong doing have consequences that will persuade the wrong doer not to go that way again. This is especially important when those now responsible for trying to replace Rangers with an entity that the former clubs supporters can support (and earn money from) seem to be be making unawareness of wrong doing a marketing factor. Who seem intent of carrying on in the same self harming way as before.
It was self harm that killed Rangers not RTC, not bloggers, they only reported the manifestations of the self harm, huge debt, unpaid taxes.
All it would take to change the footballing public mood in Scotland is an admission from the heart from those representing Rangers (Sir David Murray and Walter Smith) that they pursued policies that they were warned would have serious consequences but chose to ignore the warnings and in failing to follow registration rules designed to stop clubs seeking unfair financial advantage they were WRONG.
Why on earth should supporters of other clubs wish to compete against a club where wrongdoing in terms of seeking unfair sporting advantage seems to be their way, where sporting integrity is a stranger in a strange land? What is to stop them doing it again?
But Traynor now wishes those footballing consequences of wrong to be put aside as if no wrong doing took place?
No wonder he is heading off in another direction, his moral compass takes him the wrong way and he sails on oblivious into oblivion.
the rangers are away to dundee utd
http://twitter.com/Rachel_Lynchx/status/275593973643493376/photo/1
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 14:27
Statement from Union Bears
…
We urge Rangers Football Club and Charles Green to fully back the boycott of this match and refuse our allocation of tickets.
…
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well, if they are going to boycott, I hope they do refuse their ticket allocation. That would allow Dundee United to sell them to football supporters
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 14:27
This could be a litmus test for the decent right thinking Rangers support to come out and say why the VBs have got it all wrong and encourage a big turn out.
What a dilema for CG if his truculent marketing policy were to result in reduced income.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 11:17
john clarke says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 11:03
0 0 Rate This
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 10:42
–
‘..I can add to the list..’
—
I wonder if anyone has undertaken any kind of research into the phenomenon of football support allegiance-switching?
_____________________________________________________
I’m in a fine mess here.
First ever game I remember being at was Albion Rovers v Queen’s Park, where my friend for some strange reason was shouting “mon the spiders”. Within walking distance, bus fares being in short supply, the Rovers and Airdrieonians (Texaco cup days!) got a lot of my support. A union flag flourished by an Airdrie supporter at McDermott Park finished me with Airdrie. Later years took me to Parkhead in the 60s and 70s, but then a spell in England and NI parted me from fitba for a dozen years.
Moving to the NE, a few seasons followed as a regular at Pittodrie, sometimes with mixed loyalties and I followed Aberdeen away from home too. Regular at Tannadice for a couple of years when a family member was playing. The odd Hibs match if I was in Edinburgh.
This year my first match was Dundee Utd v Dynamo Moscow, then the historic Aberdeen v Ross County. Now Saturday for me means Montrose, Brechin or Forfar, especially if the Rovers or Beanos (I sponsor a player’s kit) are here. We really lack a Div 1 team up in the north.
Funny enough, the only Scotland match I was at was v Brazil 1966 (1-1, Chalmers scored, wee boy ran out at half time and got Pele’s autograph, that the two things I remember).
It’s just one person’s story of allegiance.
re – Jim Traynor’s last ever column.
the irony here is – traynor himself is doing what he criticised rtc for.
jt has made up his mind that titles will be stripped and that will be wrong to do so.
what if LNS and his panel go for the more apt punishment, should they find [old]rangers guilty
and recommend an expulsion or ban [new]rangers from all league matches for a period of time ?
perhaps traynor is following the sevco line, and would actually prefer the titles stripped. as that actually has not consequence what so ever to anybody really.
malcontent, thanks for this
Statement from Union Bears
After drawing Dundee United away in the Scottish Cup we have decided to throw our weight behind a full boycott of this match.
Dundee United are one of the enemies of Rangers and one of the main driving forces behind attempting to steal trophies from us.
Of course it will be hard for some people not to follow Rangers wherever they play but in this instance we must urge the full Rangers support to get behind a boycott of this fixture.
We urge Rangers Football Club and Charles Green to fully back the boycott of this match and refuse our allocation of tickets. Now is the time for the support to prove our unity and make sure that the enemies of the club don’t see a penny of our money.
Union Bears
No Surrender
====================================================================
i guess they will tell dundee utd to “shove” the money [tv and ticket] as well. didn’t think so !
37 years and the words ‘succulent lamb’ will be on his gravestone………..that’d hurt anyone.
As my wise auld granny was fond of saying “you fly wi the craws son, ye get shot wi the craws”
Bawsman, in a nutshell. Brilliant!
Scottish Premier League clubs have “unanimously” agreed to pursue their plan to expand the top flight to two divisions of 12 teams.
Chief executive Neil Doncaster says the present 12 clubs were united at their meeting at Hampden Park.
They will now propose what they describe as their 24-18 model to the Scottish Football League and Scottish Football Association on Thursday.
The 18 refers to the remaining SFL clubs not included in the top leagues
Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 14:43
“This could be a litmus test for the decent right thinking Rangers support to come out and say why the VBs have got it all wrong and encourage a big turn out.”
================================
This is where the failure of the MSM to spell out the facts and the football authorities efforts to squeeze Newco straight back into a top flight by sophistry and sleight of hand have led to. The facts should have been set out clearly. Rangers demise was self inflicted. They went bust. Clubs that go bust normally have to start again a la Gretna. Efforts were made by the authorities to help them out, motivated by financial self interest. They blurred the rules so now the club can cling to a myth that they were victims. Fear and a perception in the MSM that there was no great readership for the truth allowed the myths to fester.
Charles Green has fed the monster. What irresponsible nonsense can we expect next?
No formal vote was expected to be taken by the SPL, but a show of hands was needed to allow Doncaster to progress the plan.
Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson’s resignation from the SPL board last week had placed some doubt on the ability of the 12 clubs to produce a consensus.
However, after a three-hour meeting at Hampden, Doncaster emerged to say that agreement had been reached.
The SFL’s 30 clubs had previously agreed to support its proposal for leagues of 16, 10 and 16.
However, the SPL has been speaking informally to SFL clubs and sources believe they have the numbers necessary to gather sufficient support.
The SPL would invite clubs to enter the league, determined by their league positions prior to the start of any re-organised season.
It hopes that this would head off criticism from those who might argue that re-organisation is being used as a vehicle to accelerate Rangers’ return to the top division.
schottie59 says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:10
1 0 Rate This
Scottish Premier League clubs have “unanimously” agreed to pursue their plan to expand the top flight to two divisions of 12 teams.
Chief executive Neil Doncaster says the present 12 clubs were united at their meeting at Hampden Park.
They will now propose what they describe as their 24-18 model to the Scottish Football League and Scottish Football Association on Thursday.
The 18 refers to the remaining SFL clubs not included in the top leagues
=============================================================
it’s what happens BENEATH the 18 that really matters….all this tinkering at the top is window dressing.
I welcome the even number of home and away games, I like the sound of the split form 2 to 3 leagues – it will give us an opportunity to see more teams come up (and down) each year and a greater variety of games/opponents
I don’t see how it’ll attract more sponsorship/tv revenue in itself – but should lead to more meaningful games later in the season and more teams with something to play for (if they reset the points totals for everyone to zero after the split)
But it’s what happens below the SPL2 that matters.
Will the SFL still exist? (wll the SPL/SFL merge? – surely it must)
Will there be regional leagues? Will non league/junior league teams be able to win promotion to the new league structure? what controls are to be put in place to ensure financial fair play and sound business management? what about provisions to increase number of youth players featuring in the team? max squad sizes (excluding domestic/youth reared players), wage caps? spending caps?
is there any reference to any of it?
taken from the good old BBC …..
john clarke says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 12:32
No, you’re all right, angus1983: the basic meaning of ‘puer’ is ‘child’, so nothing wrong with ‘girly childishness’.
——
OK. Latin “half-scholars” like me, then. I was thinking of “Marcus est puer” and “Cornelia est puella” from “Ecce Romani” … 🙂
Still not out the woods but at least we know a certain club is at least making efforts to help pay for our nurses, teachers, solidiers etc.
Well done to all the Jambos and supporters of other clubs who did their bit.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20582746
Does this mean that the SPL are going to change their rules on stadium criteria? e.g. 6,000 seats under cover, pitch protection (undersoil heating), a veto on artificial surfaces, quality of floodlights etc.
I’d be extremely surprised if the top 24 in the league standings made up the two leagues of 12 going forward.
yakutsuki says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:07
Bawsman, in a nutshell. Brilliant!
___________________________
Agreed, and who’s TD’ing him so promptly I wonder?
No comments permitted on the DR website Traynor swansong. Maybe a good call, not everything in the press is a good advert for press freedom!
easyJambo says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:42
1 0 Rate This
The SPL would invite clubs to enter the league, determined by their league positions prior to the start of any re-organised season.
It hopes that this would head off criticism from those who might argue that re-organisation is being used as a vehicle to accelerate Rangers’ return to the top division.
Does this mean that the SPL are going to change their rules on stadium criteria? e.g. 6,000 seats under cover, pitch protection (undersoil heating), a veto on artificial surfaces, quality of floodlights etc.
I’d be extremely surprised if the top 24 in the league standings made up the two leagues of 12 going forward.
…….
That’s what they are counting on.
ordinaryfan says: Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:44
That’s what they are counting on
==========================
Of the current top 24, Airdrie and Alloa have artificial surfaces. Cowdenbeath, Morton, Dumbarton, Queen of the South and Alloa don’t have 6.000 seats. I don’t know the situation with undersoil heating but I’d suspect that list would be even longer.
easyJambo says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:53
0 0 Rate This
ordinaryfan says: Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:44
That’s what they are counting on
==========================
Of the current top 24, Airdrie and Alloa have artificial surfaces. Cowdenbeath, Morton, Dumbarton, Queen of the South and Alloa don’t have 6.000 seats. I don’t know the situation with undersoil heating but I’d suspect that list would be even longer.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
With that being the case then you either scrap reconstruction until such times as enough clubs meet the criteria…or you allow reconstruction on the basis all clubs must meet that given criteria within a given time span…
easyJambo says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:53
0 0 Rate This
ordinaryfan says: Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:44
That’s what they are counting on
==========================
Of the current top 24, Airdrie and Alloa have artificial surfaces. Cowdenbeath, Morton, Dumbarton, Queen of the South and Alloa don’t have 6.000 seats. I don’t know the situation with undersoil heating but I’d suspect that list would be even longer.
……….
It has probably all been added up already. The Top 24 Clubs will be reduced for the reasons you have given, the Clubs below that will also struggle to meet requirements, thus leaving the door wide open to Tribute Act. And it will leave the Scottish Football authorities and the MSM with their ready made excuses, and they WILL say, “this is what fans and Clubs wanted”.
Somehow, somewhere, the new structure of 24 will include Tribute Act.
aw naw, they dinnae aw meet yon criteria thingiemabobs – whit will we dae noo, neil ???
when we asked for transparency ….
I’m not sure they could insist on the current SPL criteria for an extended SPL format. After all, it’s still Division 2 in old money, whether they try to dress it up as SPL or not.
Re Mr Traynor, I’m not at all sure that he has ‘chosen’ to go, as he claims. His piece is so full of bitterness and direct vindictiveness that it sounds much more like someone who has been forced to give up something he wants to keep doing. Do I believe he has been big enough to leave because he recognises the rush of progress – and doesn’t like/can’t cope with it , or do I believe he has been forced out by his superiors recognising that he is a man out of his time?
Between this and the cup draw will they won’t they boycott shenanigans suddenly not printing the 5 way agreement doesn’t seem like such a hot idea Neil does it! And yet, on a day with a free rein to say anything he liked this minor detail seemed to slip someone’s notice completely. Funny that.
There is absolutely no need to impose those criteria on the clubs who would make up SPL2
As is the case now, clubs who have ambitions to be in SPL1 can modernise in stages, so that when the time comes they are ready to move up
If they try to impose these criteria as a condition of entry to SPL2, then there would only be a handful of clubs who could comply, and it would leave the league well short of a full complement
Membership has to be on merit, with everyone working to improve facilities
If it becomes apparent that it will not be on merit, then only one conclusion can be drawn, and I don’t think rank and file supporters would put up with that
easyJambo says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:53
0 0 Rate This
ordinaryfan says: Monday, December 3, 2012 at 15:44
That’s what they are counting on
==========================
Of the current top 24, Airdrie and Alloa have artificial surfaces. Cowdenbeath, Morton, Dumbarton, Queen of the South and Alloa don’t have 6.000 seats. I don’t know the situation with undersoil heating but I’d suspect that list would be even longer.
———————————————————–
1. Would the SPL 2 requirements be the same as SPL1?
it’s hard to justify that – at least in terms of seats. undersoil heating/artifical pitches could be sorted in close season.
2. Ross county didn’t have 6000 seats until after the end of the season – they managed to throw up a stand in time. I’m sure other clubs could repeat the process.
3. Will the financial rewards of being in SPL2 be enough to warrant new stands/pitches/heating? Can’t see the SFL clubs agreeing to it if it is going to cost them money. Basically, if the SPL demand it, the SPL will have to show income to justify it. (not gonna happen is it)
4. So, SPL needs 12 clubs, if only 8 can actually afford it (8 clubs in SFL, not 8 out of the next top 12 clubs) then it’s not going to happen – even if they include Sevco. They would need 11 clubs to meet the criteria and only then could they get away with letting Sevco in ahead of another – otherwise they would need to reduce the entry requirements (which they could then meet and that would preclude Sevco)
campsiejoe: So will reduce the criteria slightly, conveniently just enough for Tribute Act to sneak in at…………no. 24.
Anyone trying to work out how Tribute Act will be shoehorned into the top 24, don’t bother, just be prepared that they absolutely will be shoehorned in.
Easy to fix the stadium criteria issue. If at the end of the season a club has qualified for the top 12 for the next season (i.e. they are in top 4 of middle 8) then they have to bring their facilities up to standard, if they are not already, for the next season. That would be consistent with the current approach.
My concern is the use of the word “invite”. That suggests to me that the top 24 in the league standings will be “invited” to join the SPL, subject to them meeting certain entry criteria.
There is no way that the likes of Cowdenbeath would be able to raise the money to be able to comply with the current criteria, therefore the net will be opened wider, until you know who will be offered a place.
Even Turnbull Hutton stated as much in his last radio interview.
ordinaryfan says:
Monday, December 3, 2012 at 16:16
Or, you decide your criteria for SPL 2 entry and simply defer its formal start until 2014-15 thus avoiding the problem as regards unnecessary newco advancement completely. If they’re then legitimately one of the 24 that makes it slightly easier, as you just need to find 4 or 5 other clubs currently not meeting the criteria whilst upholding the said levels of excellence that you supposedly dictated in the first place. Simples.
In fact, whilst you’re at it, why not take a complete gamble that the top 4 of the 1st next season will have suitable facilities and bring in the three8 split using the existing SPL and 1st Division structures as a trial?
Editors note, this also might require someone with an ounce of commerciality about them to negotiate with Sky for next season. Anyone spring to mind? Or rather, anyone patently and demonstrably incapable and/ or not up for it for whatever reason?