The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !


So, SPFL when can we expect clarification on who holds what …

Comment on The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies ! by Not The Huddle Malcontent.

so, SPFL

when can we expect clarification on who holds what job? Surely we can’t have 2 Chairs, CEO’s etc? seems a lot of duplication can be wiped out overnight – when will it be clear

when will new rule book be published?

Not The Huddle Malcontent Also Commented

The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !
valentinesclown says:
July 12, 2013 at 2:19 pm

Heard Craig Burley on BBC Scotland earlier today. He was asked if Wanyama was worth the fee to which Burley replied “not really” Then he was asked if NL would get some of the money to spend? Burley “No as there is no rangers and therefore no need and the chances of Celtic getting into CL groups stage are very slim”


why are chances of Celtic getting into CL group slim? managed it last year and did well there too.

whether Rangers exist or not is of no concern to Celtic, their are trying to win both the SPL and, probably more importantly, qualify for CL groups.

So, if we have sold Wanyama – then surely makes sense to re-invest that money, at least partially, in bringing players to strengthen the team so that they DO qualify for the CL


Celtic are badly needing a left back, they have signed a centre half and a striker, we have options in midfield, but I reckon we need a creative wide/central midfielder.

so, Celtic pocket half the fee – in case they DON’T make the CL groups and spend half on a left back and creative midfielder

job done.

The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !
Exiled Celt says:
July 12, 2013 at 10:46 am
0 0 Rate This

More expenses being loaded onto the ever growing payroll………..headline is a bit weird………


actually, as well as lumsden, there were 2 other youth coaches and a GK coach added to the backroom

The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !
seems topical right now

Football clubs can easily be used as stealing machines. Here is an instruction manual. The stories are real, but most details are concealed

A NEW football season approaches, and with it new players, overpriced replica kits and unsavoury club owners. If you are one of them, most observers will wrongly assume that you are laundering only your reputation, and that you are willing to lose millions on a philanthropic sporting folly to do so. That is too kind. Your new asset will not just help you wash your dirty money. It will make more of it too.

It is a good time to enter the football racket. Banks are less generous and sentimental about loans. Tax officials are less lenient, too, as Rangers, a big Glasgow club, discovered: it was forced into liquidation by tax arrears, afterwards being reconstituted under new ownership. But hard times mean clubs are desperate and going cheap. Set up a holding company (or a nest of them) in a discreet jurisdiction, as many owners do, and you have a money-laundering and embezzlement machine at your disposal. The authorities are unlikely to bother you (see article).

Start with ticket revenues. Exaggerating the attendance at matches lets you run some of the dirty takings from your previous career through the turnstiles, turning them into legitimate income (this particular ruse works best if you buy a middling club, where games are not routinely sold out). Conversely, if you need some petty cash you can siphon off the gate receipts—a tactic that some of Brazil’s football kingpins, the cartolas (“top hats”), are rumoured to have employed in the past.

The market in players, between clubs and across national borders, is another golden opportunity. Time was when the scams were simple: bent coaches would take “bungs” (backhanders) to buy a player with the chairman’s wallet. Now the tricks are more complex—and some owners are in on them. One aim is money-laundering. Transfers involve huge and largely subjective sums (since a player is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for him). With agents or other intermediaries involved, payments pass through multiple hands and jurisdictions: perfect for concealing the origin and direction of the cash. Sell a player to a friendly club that publicly overstates the true price, and you can supplement the real fee with a couple of million ill-gotten euros of your own: that money is now clean and in your club’s accounts. Pull the trick in reverse—inflating the value of a player you are buying—and you gain a usefully overvalued asset on your balance-sheet, which will help your club to borrow.

Transfers can also help you privatise club revenues and defraud minority shareholders. With the help of a co-operative agent, the fees, commissions and even parts of players’ salaries can find their way back to you (and away from the taxman). Agents who are personal friends may be safest. The regulations which govern transfer deals are easy to circumvent.

Another wheeze—annoyingly banned by some national football associations—is third-party ownership, where the rights in a player are owned (or part-owned) not by his club but by an outside consortium. So you can secretly invest in players whom you then rent to your club, trousering the proceeds. Or sell your club’s star man to your front company for a depressed fee, then sell him on at full price. Naturally you will award the club’s construction and catering contracts to your own firms.

Matches made in heaven

Most outsiders reckon that, when games are rigged, infiltrators are to blame: Asian criminal gangs and Balkan gangsters are the usual suspects. But the surest fixes are inside jobs. After all, you pay the players’ salaries, so you are in the best position to suborn them. You can decide who is picked or dropped, or who goes on the transfer list (or doesn’t). That gives dodgy owners plenty of scope to influence players’ behaviour. Footballers who are paid badly or erratically, as they often are in eastern Europe or the former Soviet Union (see chart), tend to be most susceptible.

But match-fixing happens in big and supposedly reputable European leagues, too—and because bookies assume the games are clean, you can lay big bets inconspicuously. If you or the players balk at losing on purpose, you can still arrange—and bet on—in-game details, such as the timing of the first corner kick. When the fix is in, consider emulating the Macedonian chairman who sold on the details of a thrown game to mafiosi. Betting syndicates will even buy intelligence on players’ injuries, nervous breakdowns and so on. Happily for you, match-fixing is hard to prove, and most police forces aren’t interested.

These are only the basics: after a season or two you can go in for more extravagant scams. Be inspired by Arkan, the deceased Serbian paramilitary who is said to have used his football club to traffic arms and drugs. It might be best, however, to stay clear of Russia, where the game has an alarming death rate, and where warlords from the North Caucasus (sinister even by football’s standards) have recently started buying into the business. Caution is also advisable in Bulgaria: 15 football club bosses have been murdered in the top football league just over a decade. An American diplomatic cable written in January 2010, and published by WikiLeaks, said “allegations of illegal gambling, match fixing, money laundering, and tax evasion” plague the Bulgarian game.

Some national associations do a spot of due diligence on new owners, but this is unlikely to interfere with your plans. Having a criminal record can be a bar to acquiring a club—but if you made your money in a place where the law was flexible and the courts accommodating, such inconvenient details can be scrubbed from your record. Enjoy the beautiful game!

Recent Comments by Not The Huddle Malcontent

Why We Need to Change
This one AmFearLiathMòr?

Beadie v Aberdeen

(By outside the D, do you mean inside the penalty box?!! )

Why We Need to Change
I see the subject of Gate Sharing raised it’s head again in the last few days….great topic.

I seem to remember one of the Jambo boys doing a great analysis of this back in RTC days

I think we need to establish what we are hoping to achieve by going down a “gate sharing” route.

It’s easy to say we are spreading/equalising the income for clubs and levelling the playing field, but it’s not that straight forward

Some clubs like St J, Hibs, Celtic (and increasingly many others in the modern scottish game) are run responsibly and will pay off debts, balance the books, improve infrastructure whilst some other clubs are absolute basket cases and will blow it on buying any passing player who will prop them up for a few months (yes Sevco, you!!!)

So, guidance needs to be put in place

I suggest we want clubs to target the following criteria (for example only – i haven’t thought this through entirely)

1. Financial stability – adopting some form of FFP model where clubs must, on the whole, break even – something like break even over a 3 season period – allowing an overspend one year to be balanced out in subsequent years, strict controls on wage to turnover ratios, maybe even a wage cap based on turnover

2. Player development – clubs should be encouraged to develop their own youth players…ideally scottish players, but in reality it doesn’t matter, if they can scout, sign and develop a 14-17 year old Bulgarian who comes through into the 1st team, then fine. But, the pathway should be for youngsters coming through the ranks and into the 1st team rather than the previously flawed models of trying to buy players in (which is a much rarer event outwith Celtic these days) or paying over the jobs for journeymen players looking for a payday.

Following on from that though, for the benefit of the domestic game, i think clubs should also be rewarded for playing domestic reared players – i.e. keeping talent developed in scotland in scotland.

3. Finally, clubs should be rewarded based on their on field performance.

now that we have established some loose criteria for what we need clubs to do to be successful and therefore rewarded with real cash money, we need to find that money.

The subject of gate sharing is a hard one for fans to swallow, but it is undeniable that the scottish game was mush more competitive when gates were shared.

So, lets not start there, lets start with UEFA money!

Celtic get approx £20M for reaching the CL group stages. Alone, that far outstrips the income of many clubs, so why not “tax” it.

Lets take 50% of all UEFA monies and through it into a “prie pot” (Europa monies will go into the prize pot too, i’m not suggesting just Celtic fund this)

Then, lets put a “tax” on transfers – say 10% of all transfer fees received goes into the prize pot.

Then onto the subject of “gate sharing” Instead of splitting the gate 50/50 with the opponent on the day, I suggest we start more modestly. in the 1st year, lets take 10% of the ticket income for the year (ST’s or walk up) and throw that into the prize pot as well. it can be ramped up to 50% over a number of seasons.

Into the prize pot goes all the other commercial income generated by the league – TV, sponsorship deals etc.

that then gives us a big pot of cash

That can then be divided up based on the earlier criteria – run a tight financial ship, bring through a lot of youngsters and play a lot of scottish players and do well in the league and you could get more than the team that wins the league but had huge debts, no youth players and full of foreigners.

Over a period of 10 years, this would hugely level the playing field in Scotland, we’d see much more competition, we should see more stability at clubs as they manage finances better and we should hopefully see a lot more youngsters come through – and reach the quality that is needed to improve the quality of the game overall.

Anyway, that is my thoughts on the subject (and i guess that is why my name was not mentioned in the list of posters that were missed!!)

Why We Need to Change
“He latest post suggests that 30,000 STs will bring in a modest £5.4M after deduction of VAT. That would mean an average £180 per ST.”

naw, 30k tickets at £225, less 20% VAT = 5.4M

I guess you have to factor in the number of concession tickets into that equation….that will severely hamper the ave ticket price.

Pretty sure from last accounts the ave st price was about £225 – so, i’d expect it to be 5% higher this year as they stated (4% after VAT!)

Why We Need to Change
Hola SFM community

1st off, I applaud and welcome moves by Big Pink to grow the blog/forum and it’s influence. You have to keep moving forward or die.

Having said that, i think you may be over reaching with such a broad remit.

Football is the worlds biggest sport and you will have a huge potential audience sticking to it.

it’s what all the current contributors know and love and talk about, and it would be easier to expand the forum to capture similar fans and fans concerns about the game by reaching out with a English FM, Welsh FM, Irish FM and Northern Irish FM.

From there, the topics of UEFA, FIFA and comps like WCs, Euro championships, qualifiers and even global rules changes can be discussed and moaned over….such as the controversial “tv evidence” debate and the more controversial “UEFA CL” money/allocation of places/seedings debates.

Then you could look to going truly international on football – sticking to the sport we all know and love

Or you could look to go into other UK & Ireland based sports – sticking to the “domestic” audience (i am expecting a few complaints from Irish for being lumped in with the UK there!)

Either way, once you had proven that you could 1st of all expand the remit from Scottish to UK/Irish football, you could then push to expand and repeat the process again.

Small, organic steps, learning as you go. I am sure this would bring in reasonable income through sponsorship/subscriptions/advertisement.

(buy hey, it’s your ball, your vision, i am just giving you my thoughts and you can take them on board or push on with your own plans)

Eventually, i think you could reach your aims of international/independent sports fair play watch dog/sounding board/rallying point for action.

As for going forward, I think your radio show should do a daily/weekly round up of “what the papers said”

Basically taking the main stories from the MSM and tearing it to shreds….invite the writers of the articles in to defend themselves, contact the clubs/players/agents/authorities involved and ask them for a comment on the article and on TSFM’s analysis of the puff piece and set up weekly polls asking fans of all clubs to give their feedback on the story/analysis to show how fans are displeased with the sports coverage we are getting.

you could also have (less frequent) analysis of punishments handed out by the authorities – and compare/contrast the punishments/circumstances handed out by the same and other governing bodies. This could be sent onto the national associations and uefa/fifa for their comment.

Also, if you really want to move forward, i honestly believe the format of the forum needs to change into a more traditional forum format with a thread for each topic/blog and comments related to the blog compartmentalised within it – it would allow a greater number of threads to be discussed simultaneously and interested parties to follow the blog/topic of their interest.

Lastly, apologies for being a random reader/contributor the past 16 months, the arrival of number 2 child has brought it’s own challenges on my free time and i find twitter makes it easier for me to keep up to date on the latest shenanigans, even if it does mean i miss out on the great detailed analysis/opinion this site carries on the subject matter.

Whatever way you go, good luck.

(EDIT to add – only 4 comments? WTF? I assume my history has been wiped due to inactivity at some point!! oh well.)

Did Stewart Regan Ken Then Wit We Ken Noo?
scarecrow666 says:
April 19, 2015 at 3:10 pm
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
April 19, 2015 at 11:24 am
Then, there would be the ability to see all 90 mins of every game on delayed transmission for something like £30 a month.
Sorry, but unless you were covering all of scottish sport not just football that would be utter s@#t value for money. Sky sports packages range from £20-30 per month giving you lots of channels with different sports. Setanta struggled at £10 per month and that included Dutch league football. How could you possibly justify £30 per month for delayed streaming twice a week for only scottish matches ?

Quick look at the sky website tells me the cost of sky sports will be £47 a month

Ok, maybe £30 a month is too steep for just the Scottish game – but for that price, there is no reason why they could not also buy rights for other countries games/sports too. Or even still, reduce it to say £20 a month.

As the only outlet to watch Scottish games, i’m sure it’ll be OK7

As for Setanta, i believe they were doing fine until they went toe to toe with Sky and started buying up EPL rights and games for England internationals. It was that overspend and the comparative lack of subscribers that done for them.

About the author