Good Evening.
As we ponder the historic vote to create a new Governing body to oversee Scottish League football, I cannot help but wonder what brilliant minds will be employed in the drawing up of its constitution, rules, memorandum and articles of association?
Clearly, Messrs Doncaster, Longmuir and even Mr Regan as the CEO of the SFA will be spending many hours with those dreaded folk known simply as “ The Lawyers” in an attempt to get the whole thing up and running and written down in the course of a few short weeks.
In truth, that scares me.
It scares me because legal documentation written up in a hurry or in a rush is seldom perfect and often needs amendment—especially when the errors start to show! The old adage of beware of the busy fool sadly applies.
It also scares me because the existing rules under which the game is governed are not, in my humble opinion, particularly well written and seem to differ in certain material respects from those of UEFA. Even then, adopting the wording and the approach of other bodies is not necessarily the way to go.
I am all in favour of some original thought– and that most precious and unusual of commodities known as common sense and plain English.
Further, the various licensing and compliance rules are clearly in need of an overhaul as they have of late produced what can only be best described as a lack of clarity when studied for the purposes of interpretation. Either that or those doing the studying and interpreting are afflicted with what might be described as tortuous or even tortured legal and administrative minds.
If it is not by now clear that the notion of self-certification on financial and other essential disclosure criteria necessary to obtain a footballing licence (whether European or domestic) is a total non-starter — then those in charge of the game are truly bonkers.
Whilst no governing body can wholly control the actions of a member club, or those who run a club, surely provisions can be inserted into any constitution or set of rules that allows and brings about greater vigilance and scrutiny than we have at present—all of course designed to do nothing other than alert the authorities as early as possible if matters are not being conducted properly or fairly.
However, the main change that would make a difference to most of the folk involved in the Scottish game – namely the fans— would be to have the new rules incorporate a measure which allowed football fans themselves to be represented on any executive or committee.
Clearly, this would be a somewhat revolutionary step and would be fought against tooth and nail by some for no reason other than that it has simply not been done before—especially as the league body is there to regulate the affairs of a number of limited companies all of whom have shareholders to account to and the clubs themselves would presumably be the shareholders in the new SPFL Ltd.
Then again to my knowledge Neil Doncaster is not a shareholder in The SPL ltd– is he?
I can hear the argument that a fan representative on a league body might not be impartial, might be unprofessional, might be biased, might lack knowledge or experience, and have their own agenda and so on—just like many chairmen and chief executive officers who already sit on the committees of the existing league bodies.
Remember too that the SFA until relatively recently had disciplinary committees made up almost exclusively of referees. I don’t think anyone would argue that the widening of the make up of that committee has been a backward step.
However, we already have fan representation at clubs like St Mirren and Motherwell, and of course there has been an established Tartan Army body for some time now. Clubs other than the two mentioned above have mechanisms whereby they communicate and consult with fans, although they stop short of full fan participation– very often for supposedly insurmountable legal reasons.
As often as not, the fans want a say in the running of their club, but also want to be able to make representations to the governing bodies via their club.
So why not include the fans directly in the new set up for governing the league?
Any fan representative could be someone proposed by a properly registered fan body such as through official supporters clubs, or could be seconded by the clubs acting in concert with their supporters clubs.
Perhaps a committee of fan representatives could be created, with such a committee having a representative on the various committees of the new league body.
In this way, there would be a fan who could report back to the fan committee and who could represent the interests of the ordinary fan in the street in any of the committees. Equally such a committee of fans could ensure that any behind the scenes discussions on any issue were properly reported, openly discussed, and made public with no fear of hidden agendas, secret meetings, and secret collusive agreements and so forth.
Is any of that unreasonable? Surely many companies consider the views of their biggest customer? This idea is no different.
Surely such a situation would go some way towards establishing some badly needed trust between the governing bodies and the fans themselves?
If necessary, I would not even object to the fan representatives being excluded from having a right to vote on certain matters—as long as they had a full right of audience and a full right of access to all discussions and relative papers which affect the running of the game.
In this way at least there would be openness and transparency.
In short, it would be a move towards what is quaintly referred to as Democracy.
Perhaps, those who run the game at present should consider the life and times of the late great Alexander Hamilton- one of the founding fathers of the United States of America and who played a significant role in helping write the constitution of that country.
Hamilton was a decent and brilliant man in many ways—but he was dead set against Democracy and the liberation of rights for the masses. In fact, he stated that the best that can be hoped for the mass populace is that they be properly armed with a gun and so able to protect themselves against injustice!
Sadly, Hamilton became embroiled in a bitter dispute with the then Vice President of the nation Aaron Burr in July 1804. Hamilton had used his influence and ensured that Burr lost the election to become Governor of New York and had made some withering attacks on the Vice President’s character.
When he refused to apologise, the Vice President took a whacky notion and challenged him to a duel! Even more whacky is the fact that Hamilton accepted the challenge and so the contest took place at Weehawken New Jersey on the morning of 11th July 1804.
The night before, Hamilton wrote a letter which heavily suggested that he would contrive to miss Burr with his shot, and indeed when the pistols fired Hamilton’s bullet struck a branch immediately above Burr’s head.
However, he did not follow the proper procedure for duelling which required a warning from the duellist that they are going to throw their shot away. Hamilton gave no such indication despite the terms of his letter and despite his shot clearly missing his opponent.
Burr however fired and hit Hamilton in the lower abdomen with the result that the former secretary to the treasury and founding father of the constitution died at 2pm on the twelfth of July.
The incident ruined Burr’s career (whilst duelling was still technically legal in New jersey, it had already been outlawed in various other states).
In any event, in Hamilton’s time full and open democracy in the United States of America would have met with many cries of outrage and bitter opposition. Yet, today, the descendants of slaves and everyone from all social standings, all ethnic minorities and every social background has the constitutional right to vote and seek entry to corridors of power.
In that light, is it really asking too much to allow football fans to have a say and a presence in the running of a game they pay so much to support?
If Celtic are due to pay a sell on fee if Wanyama moves on then they should do.
To the administrator of the club who they have the contract with, or to the liquidator if it has gone that far. That is money which will be owed and it should be paid, for the benefit of the creditors who will have lost out.
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 4m
How to unsettle a player and then claim he wanted away. Undercover agents for the club and big rewards #BlameJelavic
http://www.scribd.com/doc/149911611/Jelavic …
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
—————————————————————————
Kenny Moyes,any relation to David?
Celtic Paranoia says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:42 pm
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 1:06 pm
7 2 i Rate This
The trick about successful PR is to use words to achieve an objective but in such a way that there can always be deniability if questioned later or queried my a more alert journalist. I think your intervention reinforces my point much more ably that I ever could
As to the ‘massive profit’ I can see a deep PR thought that possibly this could create a link in the minds of some that Celtic were a part of the financial demise of the Belgian club by ‘stealing’ a star asset for a song and making an absolute fortune from it.
——————————————————————-
The ‘massive profit’ comment could also be used to imply a certain meanness of spirit if Celtic don’t pay this money to the new club regardless of whether they are entitled to it according to the rules
—————————————————————————
That’s a fair point I hadn’t thought of.
Robert Coyle says:
June 25, 2013 at 2:13 pm
“…So,was darrell king involved with CW before it become public knowledge that he was involved in the takeover of rangers.”
—————-
Robert, according to CharlotteFakeovers information, CW was being groomed for catastrophe back in August 2009 :
http://i.imgur.com/VwYGGmd.jpg
Project Charlotte first came to prominence in June 2010 :
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1285455/Andrew-Ellis-brink-33m-Rangers-buyout-Project-Charlotte-enters-end-game.html
In this context King’s entrance to the party was far from early.
Gaz says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:45 pm
If Celtic are due to pay a sell on fee if Wanyama moves on then they should do. To the administrator of the club who they have the contract with, or to the liquidator if it has gone that far. That is money which will be owed and it should be paid, for the benefit of the creditors who will have lost out.
———————————————————————————————————————————
I think firstly that Celtic needs to protect it’s financial position by checking the original contract and then ascertaining the manner in which the old club passed to the new club. The sell-on fee should be paid to either the administrator of the old club or to the new club depending on which one has legal title to it.
If there is no legal entitlement then I think it would be a magnificent gesture for Celtic to donate the cash to the new Belgian club and what a wonderful advert for Scottish Football that would be.
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:44 pm
I think a more correct term would have been ‘conditional full membership’.
—————————————————————————————————–
Thats not what they said though ecobhoy,you ,ve just strung some of the words together so that it fits with your opinion.
duplesis says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:39 pm
“I have to get on with some work, but will try to look back in tonight.”
—————-
Keeping up with the blog is a full time job for me. Some others appear to share a similar experience.
callumsson says:
June 25, 2013 at 1:01 pm
9 0 Rate This
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 1m
Darrell hurting badly and trying to suppress the truth – @Martin1Williams article.
1. http://i.imgur.com/Kayr6Wh.jpg
2. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/rangers-fail-to-pay-35k-law-firm-bill.15043292 …
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
——————————————————————————————————————————-
Poor Darrel wee Craigie disappointed with you.
Tongues and bums and newspaper chums.
There has been a dearth of TD numbers since last night. What time do the schools come out?
Duplesis says:
June 25, 2013 at 2:15 pm
========================================
To be honest, I had originally adopted a very similar line. It is, I think, a perfectly reasonable and “real world” common sense approach to say that when a club ceases to operate it ceases to be a club.
Indeed this is exactly the approach taken by Newco in relation to “Rangers FC” ceasing to be a Club (using the SPL definition) at the LNS commission. Newco insist that Rangers FC ceased to be a Club on 14th June.
However, the SPL maintained that the relevant date was 3rd August & LNS did not think it mattered much.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/143094729/SPL-Commission-Reasons-for-Decision-of-12-September-2012
– bottom of page 16
Of course, as we have discussed before, to be a Club (in SPL terms) one requirement is to be an association football club. The SPL say that Rangers FC remained a Club (and so presumably a club) until 3rd August. From all that has happened, it appears the SPL and SFA have approached this point in a very similar way.
No matter how we might speculate on what could or should have happened, the actuality appears (to me) to revolve around the SPL and the SFA placing the body of Oldco on life support until the organs could be transplanted into the Newco donor.
The simplest answer (which is usually the one that applies) is that the SFA considered Oldco to be a club until its membership was transferred to Newco on 3rd August.
As a slight aside…
In what seems a lifetime ago, Clydebank lost the use of Kilbowie – sold to Safeway if I recall correctly. They also, whilst negotiating the use of an alternative venue, released all of their playing squad. I think this happened several times.
So one could argue, that Clydebank FC, for short period(s) at least, ceased to operate as a football club. But even during the period(s) when they ceased to operate, Clydebank FC technically remained a football club & a full member of the SFA. Of course they have since recovered (sort of) and now play as Airdrie FC in the Excelsior Stadium.
One could also argue that every club ceases to “play Association Football” during the close season and that particular test may have been a difficult one to apply to Oldco in June or July. They were still members of the SPL and the new season (in that league) did not begin until 4th August. A technical failure on that point simply couldn’t have been recorded until after the date of transfer of membership.
Oh and on your analogy… surely the correct correlation with “club” would be the incapacitated person’s title as “solicitor”.
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:44 pm
However whatever membership was held by newco the oldco membership clearly ceased on 27 July and newco never held more that one class of membership at any time IMO from that point on.
++++++++++++++++++++
I fundamentally disagree.
The oldco membership never ceased- it was transferred to Sevco on 3 August under the terms of the 5 way agreement and exists to this day.. There is absolutely no basis in anything that has been published or said previously to support your theory that Sevco obtained the RFC membership on a conditional basis on 27 July. If I have missed anything relevant, please post a link.
Matteo Galy says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:18 pm
==============================================================
I try not to take original sources from the SMSM but the SFA stated on Friday, 03 August 2012:
‘The Scottish FA can confirm that The Rangers Football Club Ltd have today received confirmation that full membership of the Association has been transferred.’
There is no actual date of the transfer which may or may not be pedantic and in the whole Rangers saga being pedantic tends to be the wise course in my experience.
In fact I would say that the wording of the statement is very interesting in that it doesn’t state when the transfer actually took place but only that Rangers received notification of it on 3 August 2102. What has that got to do with the price of a loaf I ask myself?
On 27 July 2012 the SFA stated: ‘agreement has been reached on all outstanding points relating to the transfer of the Scottish FA membership between Rangers FC (In Administration), and Sevco Scotland Ltd, who will be the new owners of The Rangers Football Club’.
‘Following the completion of all legal documentation, the Scottish Premier League will conduct the formal transfer of the league share between RFC (IA) and Dundee FC on no later than Friday 3rd August 2012. At this point, the transfer of Scottish FA membership will be complete.’
27 July which was a Friday when the decision was reached to transfer the full membership of Oldco to newco. A future date was given to complete the process because there would be legal documents to be drawn up, completed and signed between at the very least the SFA and newco. So it all had to be done by 3 August 2012 but may well have been done before then. I don’t think we actually know what the date is and I’m not sure that it actually matters.
I do believe that on Friday 27 July oldco no longer held its SFA share but whether that was defacto or de jure I don’t know and I don’t think anyone outside the SFA and possibly SFL knows the actual answer. There is also the very valid point as to whether Oldco, after administration and the sale of its assets, could be regarded as the owner and operator of an association football club or even as a club playing association football. I think it can’t for very obvious and commonsense reasons.
I am clear in my mind that two ‘live’ SFA memberships of Rangers did not exist at the same time and all that was left was to complete admin paperwork after the decision was made on 27 July to transfer the oldco membership. I have previously explained why I believe a delay was built into the procedure.
However, I have I have no quibble if other people think differently from me.
Robert Coyle says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:46 pm
Kenny Moyes,any relation to David?
——————————————
Yes, it is his wee brother
A few days ago I took issue with Newtz about a remark he made which I thought was in bad taste. He explained that I had misunderstood his reference, but nevertheless he accepted that my interpretation was plausible and apologised publicly in a post and followed that up with a personal apology in a PM. In addition he has kindly made a donation to a relevant charity. Newtz and I haven’t always agreed, and we will probably disagree again in future but I think his actions following his faux pas are exemplary. Well done sir, and thank you. You are a credit to this forum. Posters who are reluctant to admit when they cross the line of acceptable comment could do worse than take a leaf out of Newtz’s book.
neepheid says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:29 pm
I fundamentally disagree. The oldco membership never ceased – it was transferred to Sevco on 3 August under the terms of the 5 way agreement and exists to this day. There is absolutely no basis in anything that has been published or said previously to support your theory that Sevco obtained the RFC membership on a conditional basis on 27 July. If I have missed anything relevant, please post a link.
——————————————————————————-
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1961&newsCategoryID=3&newsID=10252
Agreement on transfer of membership
Friday, 27 July 2012
Joint statement on behalf of The Scottish FA, The Scottish Premier League, The Scottish Football League and Sevco Scotland Ltd.
We are pleased to confirm that agreement has been reached on all outstanding points relating to the transfer of the Scottish FA membership between Rangers FC (In Administration), and Sevco Scotland Ltd, who will be the new owners of The Rangers Football Club.
A conditional membership will be issued to Sevco Scotland Ltd today, allowing Sunday’s Ramsdens Cup tie against Brechin City to go ahead.
Following the completion of all legal documentation, the Scottish Premier League will conduct the formal transfer of the league share between RFC (IA) and Dundee FC on no later than Friday 3rd August 2012. At this point, the transfer of Scottish FA membership will be complete . . . .
Robert Coyle says:
Kenny Moyes, any relation to David?
I do believe it’s his brother
tomtom says:
June 25, 2013 at 10:13 am
nowoldandgrumpy says:
June 25, 2013 at 9:57 am
==================
Wouldn’t it be a wonderful gesture if Celtic paid this and didn’t try to hide behind any corporate legislation. They don’t have to admit that the new club is really a continuation of the old one, simply say that they are helping out a new club at the beginning of it’s new life, or something along those lines
……………………………………..
I’m afraid I disagree….If you were a creditor of the Belgian club and you became aware that the new club were receiving money that was owed to the previous club that owed you money…angry wouldn’t begin to describe how you would feel…
So no….they have no legal right to any of the funds from the sale of Victor. I would be inclined to pass that money onto the Liquidator…
I have a feeling the newspaper who has raised this point are looking for Celtic to make the payment to the new club to link the falsehood of continuation….
HirsutePursuit says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:24 pm
Indeed this is exactly the approach taken by Newco in relation to “Rangers FC” ceasing to be a Club (using the SPL definition) at the LNS commission. Newco insist that Rangers FC ceased to be a Club on 14th June.
However, the SPL maintained that the relevant date was 3rd August & LNS did not think it mattered much.
=============================================================
Worth remembering that it wasn’t so much that LNS didn’t think the actual dates didn’t matter but as the subject matter of his enquiry predated both dates then they weren’t relevant to the tribunal’s considerations.
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:43 pm
I posted that statement earlier.
The words tell me that the oldco membership could not be transferred that day, so a “conditional membership” was issued to allow a game to be played that weekend. I can’t read it any other way. Until all 5 parties signed the agreement, that membership stayed with Oldco.
Clearly you read the same words and take a different meaning from them. That could only be resolved by the SFA, and I doubt if they will ever want to reopen that shabby little chapter in their history.
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:50 pm
HirsutePursuit says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:24 pm
—————————————————————————-
Apoligies if this has been discussed and answered before i have’nt seen it,but why were “Rangers” (thats what they have been called since the name change from sevco) denied a vote in the reconstruction debate?It seems to me that a club with an 140 year old full membership would have the same rights as every other full member of the S.F.A.
CrazyHorse says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:43 pm
I do believe it’s his brother
————————————————-
Jelavic has been a big success in the premiership,looks like everton got a real bargain 😉
Drew Peacock says:
June 25, 2013 at 1:18 pm
————————————-
The point which you conveniently miss, Drew, is that the comment from Lawwell was in response to a mischevious question asked of him.
Lawwell didn’t volunteer it but someone – Darrell King if I recall correctly (whatever happened to him?) – wanted to draw him out on Jelavic and whether Celtic had had any “offers” that could match that unbelieveable, Gordon Smith-inspired/Jim White-publicised phantom, non-existent bid.
Same old same old, except Lawwell gave him an immediate, off the cuff answer. Had he had time to consider it, Lawwell probably wouldn’t have been so ridiculing but with spontaneity human nature often leads us to say something we might otherwise have tempered.
“Motherwell-born billionaire” anyone?
Anyway Lawwell achieved his objective because since that day we’ve heard no more about those off-the-radar bids for Rangers’ players and I doubt if we will ever again, at least in my lifetime.
£54 Million (bid) to 0 (transfer activity)
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:54 pm
3 3 i
Rate This
Gaz says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:45 pm
If Celtic are due to pay a sell on fee if Wanyama moves on then they should do. To the administrator of the club who they have the contract with, or to the liquidator if it has gone that far. That is money which will be owed and it should be paid, for the benefit of the creditors who will have lost out.
———————————————————————————————————————————
I think firstly that Celtic needs to protect it’s financial position by checking the original contract and then ascertaining the manner in which the old club passed to the new club. The sell-on fee should be paid to either the administrator of the old club or to the new club depending on which one has legal title to it.
============================================================================
The club needs to pay the money to whoever they made the deal with. If that is now being controlled by an administrator or liquidator then they will decide what should then happen to it. Celtic should not become embroiled in old club / new club who owns what situations. It is not for Celtic to look into what happened and what assets were or were not passed on.
If they owe money to A then they should pay it to A. If A wants to then give it to B, or instructs Celtic to pass the money directly to B then that is absolutely fine.
However Celtic’s first and only port of call should be to whoever they had the deal with, albeit it is now an administrator or liquidator who is controlling that entity.
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:36 pm
I am clear in my mind that two ‘live’ SFA memberships of Rangers did not exist at the same time and all that was left was to complete admin paperwork after the decision was made on 27 July to transfer the oldco membership. I have previously explained why I believe a delay was built into the procedure.
However, I have I have no quibble if other people think differently from me.
================================================================================
No worries, you are entitled to your opinion [] and I have no problem with that.
I think when it comes to the old club/new club thing, your mind is already made up and nothing will ever change that.
neepheid says:
June 25, 2013 at 5:00 pm
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:43 pm
Agreement on transfer of membership
Friday, 27 July 2012
Joint statement on behalf of The Scottish FA, The Scottish Premier League, The Scottish Football League and Sevco Scotland Ltd.
We are pleased to confirm that agreement has been reached on all outstanding points relating to the transfer of the Scottish FA membership between Rangers FC (In Administration), and Sevco Scotland Ltd, who will be the new owners of The Rangers Football Club.
——-
I posted that statement earlier.
The words tell me that the oldco membership could not be transferred that day, so a “conditional membership” was issued to allow a game to be played that weekend. I can’t read it any other way. Until all 5 parties signed the agreement, that membership stayed with Oldco.
Clearly you read the same words and take a different meaning from them. That could only be resolved by the SFA, and I doubt if they will ever want to reopen that shabby little chapter in their history.
_______________
NOPE
The Statement cobbled before the Olympics opening caused by brinkmanship – is only a `Statement`
FACTS
SFA membership was automatically conferred by SPL Membership – SPL Membership was rejected
A new `conditional` membership was conferred on conditions that included no CW – that too fell out
A new full membership fell out for the same reasons
We don`t even know if any other conditions fell out
They need to resolve this – but they`ve just wasted time since CW `left`
The point of the Peter Lawwell thing was that the scenario was so ridiculous it was laughable. Rangers finances were the way they were and there was the tax case hanging over them. Anyone who thinks Celtic were not very much aware of Rangers financial position at that time is kidding themselves. Celtic are well connected and have several chartered accountants on board.
Rangers claimed to have received a £9m offer from an unnamed club, and an unnamed agent but had rejected that offer. They had refused a £9m cash injection when the business was floundering for cash and struggling to stay afloat. Not paying outstanding tax debts and in hock to Ticketus.
If people feel that Peter Lawwell’s jibe was out of order (and it clearly was one) then fair enough. But in all honesty the claim was laughable. He wasn’t wrong.
slimshady61 says:
June 25, 2013 at 5:18 pm
Drew Peacock says:
June 25, 2013 at 1:18 pm
————————————-
The point which you conveniently miss, Drew, is that the comment from Lawwell was in response to a mischevious question asked of him.
Lawwell didn’t volunteer it but someone – Darrell King if I recall correctly (whatever happened to him?) – wanted to draw him out on Jelavic and whether Celtic had had any “offers” that could match that unbelieveable, Gordon Smith-inspired/Jim White-publicised phantom, non-existent bid.
Same old same old, except Lawwell gave him an immediate, off the cuff answer. Had he had time to consider it, Lawwell probably wouldn’t have been so ridiculing but with spontaneity human nature often leads us to say something we might otherwise have tempered.
“Motherwell-born billionaire” anyone?
Anyway Lawwell achieved his objective because since that day we’ve heard no more about those off-the-radar bids for Rangers’ players and I doubt if we will ever again, at least in my lifetime.
£54 Million (bid) to 0 (transfer activity)
____________________________________________________
I don’t know what you are saying about me “conveniently” forgetting Dawells question but as you agree Lawell didn’t handle it well and why his objective was to silence the press on future ridiculous and made up bids for Rangers players is something I don’t understand. Why should he care?
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:36 pm
I
I am clear in my mind that two ‘live’ SFA memberships of Rangers did not exist at the same time and all that was left was to complete admin paperwork after the decision was made on 27 July to transfer the oldco membership. I have previously explained why I believe a delay was built into the procedure.
However, I have I have no quibble if other people think differently from me.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I agree with you there were not two live SFA memberships – only one, The Oldco Rangers one That is because the legal documents/agreements were not signed off and confirmed until after Newco played Brechin and at that point they had no SFA membership.
Castofthousands says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:49 pm
Robert Coyle says: June 25, 2013 at 2:13 pm
http://i.imgur.com/VwYGGmd.jpg
And what “journalist” said Whyte had paid to have his internet history removed?
I like the direction of this particular bar-to-bar enquiry, boys. We’ve got a new line here and I think it leads to (-S)DM via Jack Irvine.
HP 4:24pm
If Ragers lawyers were insisting that Ragers ceased to be a club on 14th june then it must have suited some agenda that they had .
Any ideas as to what it might have been
If they were the same club why would they have to transfer any membership .
Did they transfer the membership when CW coughed up a quid ?
did they have to transfer the membership when CG coughed up a quid ?
Does anyone believe, for one moment, that if the suits at the SFA believed, for one moment, that RFC and TRFC are the same club, that they’d avoid shouting it from the rooftops of Hampden Park? As in so much, their silence on this is deafening; and telling.
Someone wrote earlier (sorry too lazy to check back) about the difference between ‘fudged’ and ‘fixed’, and made quite a good point, in my opinion. I think if the SFA, SPL or SFL could ‘fix’ this much debated matter, they would have by now; instead, they have only been able to ‘fudge’ it, like so much in this fiasco, in the hope that one day they find another Brysonism to produce the result they crave, or that we will all just give up and forget about it. They really don’t have a clue, do they?
IMO all the peepil involved in this debacle are crooks and if HMRC are serious about stopping taxpayers getting ripped off then they could do worse than start with this whole bunch of shysters .
Then again if it’s only lip service to the peasants then they will do what all the other peepil in this saga have done so far .
LIFT THE CARPET HIGHER AND SWEEP LIKE A CURLER ON SPEED
Allyjambo
Spot on .
In fact I think Doncaster was asked in a TV interview if Sevco were the same club and he said it was up to the fans .
At the time I thought the same as you ,that if they were the same he would have been shouting that they were at the top of his voice .
Was it not Regan that said that when asked the question?
STV’s attempts at keeping “Rangers” relevant must surely have plumbed new depths tonight. Their lead sports story was the “return” of Richard Foster (who?) to Ibrox. The “former favourite” claimed that he didn’t realise how big a club Rangers were until he had left them, and the interviewer predictably missed the opportunity to ask him if he’d notice any differences since he’d come back to Ibrox. And as if the Richard Foster item wasn’t pathetic enough they topped it by trailing tomorrow’s exclusive interview with Steven Smith.
Jack Jarvis says:
June 25, 2013 at 6:55 pm
Seems he was not very popular in Bristol.
dan @DanielBcfc1993 4h
Party now foster have left bristol city worst right back I have seen down the gate #goodbye
NOAG
To be honest I’m not sure which one of the dopey duo it was
Drew Peacock
I think what Lawell probably meant to say was that Celtic had bid a fiver and someone else had bid a tenner for jellyfish ,well along those lines, well I am sure someone else said something similar and was allowed to feast on it,where they not!!!
At least the FAW now what you are supposed to do with liquidated clubs.
http://www.faw.org.uk/news/FAW91380.ink
Drew Peacock says:
June 25, 2013 at 6:03 pm
I agree with you there were not two live SFA memberships – only one, The Oldco Rangers one That is because the legal documents/agreements were not signed off and confirmed until after Newco played Brechin and at that point they had no SFA membership.
______
Contradiction there 😉
It is difficult when the SFA issues a `Statement` regurgitated megaphonic by MSM. Ditto CG `Cleared` / CG `Vindicated` / LNS `Victory` – etc etc – It melts into the public conscious and subconscious
Still doesn’t make it true.
The deal with the SPL formation was the SPL came first. The SFA was a conduit to Uefa Participation.
No SPL – no SFA. There wasn`t a stand-alone position after the SPL. They knew that and that`s why they were upset nay angry. They cobbled a `deal` in the five-way nonsense to paper over the faultline.
Had they thought about it before June 2012 they could have formalised a solution to `hibernate` the SFA membership – but they didn`t. There was no tactic – no strategy – just a ramrod approach bludgeoning to the very last minute that resulted in a lash-up. Just a stupid nay unthinking mess
Neil Alexander going as well ,no income from him ,but a saving on his wage,is this the start.
What if a club was barred from registering players except free agents
What if they wanted a player with 1yr left on his deal
What if the player would then be off limits as paying a fee would be breaking the embargo rule
What if the said club agreed to play a friendly match with said players current club
What if only 200 peepil turned up for said friendly
Would the players club be wise to ensure a minimum attendance figure before the friendly went ahead
If not could they be looking for the shortfall to be made up from somewhere or someone else
They wouldn’t would they ? and if they did would anyone think to find out
On an entirely different subject ,is CO still in his post
ecobhoy says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:43 pm
“Agreement on transfer of membership
Friday, 27 July 2012
…A conditional membership will be issued to Sevco Scotland Ltd today, allowing Sunday’s Ramsdens Cup tie against Brechin City to go ahead.
Following the completion of all legal documentation, the Scottish Premier League will conduct the formal transfer of the league share between RFC (IA) and Dundee FC on no later than Friday 3rd August 2012.”
———————–
That reads like two simultaneous SFA memberships to me. If the paperwork wasn’t complete then it wasn’t a done deal. The finalisation may have occured before 3rd August but I think it is stretching credibility to postulate that it was done later the same day (27th July).
Castofthousands says:
June 25, 2013 at 8:26 pm
There wasn`t a `Transfer of Membership` – because a `Transfer` wasn`t possible – `nowt` to transfer
TallBoy Poppy (@TallBoyPoppy) says:
June 25, 2013 at 6:15 pm
“And what “journalist” said Whyte had paid to have his internet history removed?”
——————-
You better remind us TallBoy. I should know the answer but it eludes me presently.
Robert Coyle says:
June 25, 2013 at 5:10 pm
————————————–
Simple answer to that one, they did have the same rights as every other member. But…. The SFA don’t control the leagues so the reconstruction has nothing to do with them, they could be involved but membership of that organisation does not give you a right to vote on leaugue matters, only membership of one of those leagues gives you that right. I think…..
@Castofthousands… It was Roger Hannah on Clyde the night Alex Thomson was on.
valentinesclown says:
June 25, 2013 at 4:12 pm
callumsson says:
June 25, 2013 at 1:01 pm
9 0 Rate This
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 1m
Darrell hurting badly and trying to suppress the truth – @Martin1Williams article.
1. http://i.imgur.com/Kayr6Wh.jpg
2. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/rangers-fail-to-pay-35k-law-firm-bill.15043292 …
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
——————————————————————————————————————————-
Poor Darrel wee Craigie disappointed with you.
Tongues and bums and newspaper chums.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The core of this message – to try and stop a story being published and, stepping all the way back, the ignoring by smsm of CF leaks (regardless of the legal arguments) reminds me of a part of a plot in Debt Of Honour by Tom Clancy.
In brief a revengeful Japanese industrialists wipes out the value of the stock market and the back up databases . Trying to find a solution The President remembers a saying by his eye surgeon wife “if you do not write it down, it never happenned”. So using written records of business by floor traders before the wipeout the Americans with European and Asian help, reconstruct the market back to the point before the wipeout, tell a story to cover the close down when the market plummetted, and open up for business as if nothing had happened.
Carrying on as if nothing had happened has been the strategy of football and their smsm cohorts.
It is just a pity for them that as in the book a floor trader (CF) has the written records and the idea that nothing happened is becoming harder and harder to sustain- especially when the record of what happened is so jaw droppingly immense.
I’m thinking of writing to R Clyde to ask them
1 In view of what is in the public mind on pundits being bought and paid for, if they will review their pundit recruitment policy to try to ensure that when a pundit is giving an opnion, it is his own and not one he was paid or pressured into giving. (I used to admire in a way Derek Johnstone’s blind loyalty to Rangers until it became absurd, but now we suspect it was not necessarily solely down to his love for Ranger it has lost even its loyalty value. )
2. If a caller mentions Charlotte Fakeover material when SSB goes back on the air what will SSB’s policy be in terms of answering?
SSB prides itself on “its all about opinions”, but what subjects will they allow an opinion on and do they appreciate that an opinion bought and paid for is not necessarily the honest view of the pundit expressing it after loyalty is discounted.
Seems like more detail has come out about Darrell King’s alleged connivance with the Govan club : happy to be proved wrong – again.
Wrt the Brechin game and membership(s) of TRFC etc., one thing that I was always curious about was what was the actual team name entered on the team sheet. IIRC, there was a gap between membership and company name change around the game, [29/07/12] ?
Might not be significant in the great scheme of things, but I believed that team sheets had to be 100% accurate, so the team name would need to be accurate ?
Anyway, I had earlier sent off a query to the SFL, and will share any response, if I get one…
==============
“Dear Sir / Madam,
as a Scottish football fan, I am having a recurring debate with supporters of other clubs about The Ramsdens Cup, and I would appreciate it if you could provide some transparency / clarity.
For the first round game played on 29/07/12, between Brechin City and Rangers;
could you please confirm the team name as submitted / written at the top of the Rangers team sheet for this game ?
Thanks in advance for your assistance.
Regards,”
Madbhoy24941 says:
June 25, 2013 at 8:43 pm
You’re correct. To be able to vote on reconstruction, a club has to be a full member of either the SPL or SFL.
Since Sevco are not members of the SPL and only have associate membership of the SFL, they are not entitled to vote on anything.
Next season associate membership is being scrapped, along with the current rules on over 21 players, both of which are entirely coincidental and have nothing whatsoever to do with Sevco’s current predicament.
YOURHAVINGALAUGH says:
June 25, 2013 at 7:54 pm
Neil Alexander going as well ,no income from him ,but a saving on his wage,is this the start.
——————————————————————————————————————————-
Will his wages cover Fozzy bear and Craig Gordon if they both sign?
The internet bampots have already tracked down Darrell in the US of A, where he is working for a florists. I guess pretty much anything beats Clyde SSB.
Alex Tomo on Twitter – still trying to break the @CharlotteFakes story
Jane Lewis @JaneLewisSport 1h
Here is more on the #Hearts story and why club administrators fear #sfa fine http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23053828 …?
Bartinho Bartinho @BartinhoBaroldo 1h
@JaneLewisSport Jane, how is your intrepid investigations into the Charlotte material going? Tweeted you the other day, but no response.
Jane Lewis Jane Lewis @JaneLewisSport 1h
@BartinhoBaroldo Ask yourself this – how did CF get the material?? That may answer a lot of your questions?!
czm czm @czm3 1h
@MTHForum @BartinhoBaroldo @JaneLewisSport – @alextomo tweet (yesterday) suggests he is still trying to find a way through to tell story
alex thomson alex thomson @alextomo 10m
@czm3 he is
Castofthousands says:
June 25, 2013 at 8:37 pm
It was Roger Hannah on Clyde. I wonder if he was one of the thirty journalists reported by the NUJ to have had threats made against them by shady figures associated with a certain, now infamous, Glasgow Club?
What’s more likely is that “PR People” with contacts in newsrooms got pages pulled. If anybody thinks it doesn’t happen then may I refer them back to the bold Dazza’s email to wee Craigie:
http://i.imgur.com/Kayr6Wh.jpg
On an entirely separate matter, I note from another PR Person’s twitter that Levy & McCrae now act for the Easdales. Small world.
jonnyod says:
June 25, 2013 at 6:17 pm
You asked why the lawyers were in court saying that the RFC ceased to exist in June 2012 and wondering why that was the case.
It was about this time that they went to court to break the contract with JJB to enable them to appoint Sports Direct as their new sponsor. The only way they could do this would be to argue that the club JJB had the deal with no longer existed.
It was one of he lesser reported aspects of this debacle; the ‘same club’ going to court to argue that it was a different club to shaft a company which subsequently went into administration itself.
Auldheid says:
June 25, 2013 at 9:03 pm
=================================================
I used to listen to SSB regularly but eventually gave up early last season after threatening to do so many times. There are many serious issues to be addressed in Scottish football, but somehow SSB always managed to find some Celtic fans to call in and tell us if Sevco were put in the SPL the world will be at one. The fact it is well nigh impossible to find a Celtic fan anywhere willing to express that view makes this all the more incredible. Given what we’ve witnessed through the Charlotte releases, including the latest offering re-Darrell King, It makes nothing impossible to believe in terms of how far the media have been willing to assist in promoting the Sevco cause.
For those of us who prefer to see reward achieved only by efforts ON the field of play, we should forever be thankful to the fans of all clubs who stood up to the bullies. SSB and their like became an irrelevance after that.
Madbhoy24941 says:
June 25, 2013 at 8:43 pm
Matteo Galy says:
June 25, 2013 at 9:16 pm
————————————
Thanks..I did know about the associate membership but was thinking that being given an alleged transfer of membership may have trumped this.
Well it looks as though things got very messy at Beerschot and there’s a good article in English at: http://www.benefoot.net/football-in-antwerpen-deserves-better/ which is worth a read.
Club appears to have gone into liquidation in May owing £14.5 million. From what I’ve seen I don’t have a clue where Wanyama’s fee would end-up going.
A later entry at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beerschot_AC states:
In June 2013 K.FC.O.Wilrijk unofficially merged with Beerschot AC into K.FC.O. Beerschot-Wilrijk.[2] This new club will play in the first division of the Belgian Provincial leagues.
All players’ contracts were annulled and they were allowed to look for a new club as a free agent player.
SSB and its all about opinions,well my opinion ,for what its worth ,they should not be allowed back on the air,it wont affect any of the pundits in the pocket ,nudge, nudge,oh apologies ,I forgot the gravy train seems to be shunting some of the carriages into a siding,hope Daryl has some vacancies on his Bluebell stall as there wont be much work for these guys on this side of the big pond,what goes around.
upthehoops says:
June 25, 2013 at 9:46 pm
Auldheid says:
June 25, 2013 at 9:03 pm
=================================================
For those of us who prefer to see reward achieved only by efforts ON the field of play, we should forever be thankful to the fans of all clubs who stood up to the bullies. SSB and their like became an irrelevance after that.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Indeed but the aim in writing is not to change that, it is to make the public more aware that they are avoiding a serious issue (if they reply of course) and from there what the issue is.
Just how far was Sir David Murray prepared to go in his win at all costs mentality? It is reasonable to surmise that Rangers owner was on the face of it weak when Walter came calling for transfer monies or could it be at that stage that Sir David believed he could do no wrong ; ego utterly out if control.
If we assume that he pushed money around to non-Rangers employees then some of the pieces are easy to fit. So Souey at Newcastle and Blacburn buying Rangers players at inflated prices ; Sir Walter promoting Rangers players to the national team ; allowing Rangers players not to turn up for friendlies; whilst picking Celts and playing them in friendlies; the press being bought and paid for ; where does it end!
Charlotte has reveal some formal financial arrangements with the press and their deference to all things blue; whilst the Rangers PR machine either believe or play up to their paymasters by proclaiming ‘Tim’ conspiracies just about everywhere.
The more that is revealed , the obvious wider conclusion is that Rangers would stop at nothing to win ; they seem to have forgotten it is a sport with the option that you may not always win.
I would doubt that Charlotte can reveal anything that will force any resignations amongst the brotherhood of Scottish football; so whilst enormously entertaining and embarassing for all the individuals , it’s time will pass – we are back to ‘stop at nothing’ , the sort of dog whistle which brings all of the Scottish football fraternity to heel – no emails required – I am no longer certain where Sir David Murray drew the line, I suspect that the boardroom of his biggest rival will harbour huge question marks about the omni Shambles and will take the opportunity to reshape the game in Scotland , in order for an exit in 10 years or so ; when some future event busts the Sky bubble and football is re-shaped.
Short term each supporter should back any proposal which sidelines the SFA in running organised professional (full-time) football – campaign for community investment in modern 4/ 5 G pitches , and protest about the style of reffin in Scitland which is stuck somewhere in the late 1970s , our so called style is doing us collectively no favours in 2013.
Looking forward to the new season and maybe someone in the near future who needs the cash will fess up where Sir David drew the line.
I fear this forum is in danger of losing it’s way…
It is absolutely obsessed with Rangers…..Almost every post now is into Rangers minutae…..I am as guilty as anyone on being highly ( perhaps too ) critical of what has transpired and how it is being covered up …and I 100% agree this subject should not be passed over until we get to the bottom of it…BUT
There are many other significant issues for Scottish football…
I listened the other evening to a very high quality discussion on 5 Live about what the damage the premiership has done to young English talent …and as part of that the range of very interesting options of what they need to do to respond given their desperate recent under 21 performance …
we are not doing this!
We are down with the Cape Verde ‘s of the world.in rankings …CO and Co should be fired for this alone!
We need to get a range of quality conversations going on about other subjects which need critiqued
There are so many magnificent minds on this forum…
Let ‘s stop obsessing and let’s mix up the agenda.
In order to save a lot of time and debate can we just decide now, should the next club be called
The Sevco
New Sevco
The New Sevco.
I don’t know if I could go through the same level of sophistry again. So if we just decide on the name now it will save people coming up with more and more tortuous “arguments”.
(The above post was sponsored by irony and facetiousness)
ToB
Absolutely.
The old new debate was stale even in RTCs time.
However the CF non publication to me is the hot topic. I await PE, on Thursday
Agree we new more on Hearts, Dunfermline, Dundee. But whs posting?
tailothebank says:
June 25, 2013 at 10:15 pm
A range of quality discussions would only really have worked with a forum, and threads dedicated to different things. That would have allowed people to start threads on what they wanted to discuss, people to respond, debate to happen, and moderators to delete any off topic posts or spamming.
I was very much an advocate of that. Basically because I am a members on a few forums like that and have moderated some. it really was the only way to go to achieve what you are suggesting.
Unfortunately people didn’t want to go that way and every discussion is now in the same “thread”. Blogs with comments are an entirely different beast from forums. People have what they voted for.
Gaz
Burke and Hare would have had a job on their hands to kill of this club
Robert Coyle says:
June 25, 2013 at 3:46 pm
———-
Yet more myth shattering too…
“The Glasgow Rangers Football Club PLC.. .blah blah blah (‘the Club’) ”
Its in black and white once again – the PLC is the club.
YOURHAVINGALAUGH says:
June 25, 2013 at 10:27 pm
Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs managed it.
Tailothebank
From my last post
Short term each supporter should back any proposal which sidelines the SFA in running organised professional (full-time) football – campaign for community investment in modern 4/ 5 G pitches , and protest about the style of reffin in Scitland which is stuck somewhere in the late 1970s , our so called style is doing us collectively no favours in 2013
….. it requires clubs to work around the SFA as they are a busted flush, my reference to them as the administrative wing of Rangers could be argued as a cheap shot , however to the casual observer the glove (unlike OJ) actually does fit.
The SFA are the stumbling block , Dallas email gate just about summed them up , imagine any organisation giving them any sizeable cash injection – brothers rubbing their hands. sounds like a familiar problem!
I suspect that there will be many SFA coaches doing a decent job but collectively their bosses are negating their efforts … improving Scottish football must start at the top and a total clear out of the SFA is required. I would move the organisation to an office block in Aberdeen and invite applications for every single job, encumbents not welcome. Perhaps not a realistic option but it will take drastic action – I suspect that it will take clear evidence of corruption which cannot be obfuscated to permit a clear out … so the odds are on a progressive deterioration in the game relative to the rest of Europe.
Actonsheep says:
June 25, 2013 at 10:30 pm
————————————————
Think my eyes must have been squinting,had’nt noticed that,another nail in the coffin for the its the same club theorists :).Dissappointing that there was no signatures at the end.
ianagain says:
June 25, 2013 at 10:25 pm
………Agree we new more on Hearts, Dunfermline, Dundee. But whs posting?
===============
Bomber’s blown the budget and he hasn’t signed a keeper.
Nothing has really changed at Dens, investment on hold while the fans owned idea burns to the ground.
Never a dull off-season 😉
tailothebank says:
June 25, 2013 at 10:15 pm
I fear this forum is in danger of losing it’s way…
———————————————————————
Sorry to disagree pal, but I don’t.
jean7brodie says:
June 25, 2013 at 11:28 pm
—————————————-
I’m with you, Jean. The strapline on this blog is “asking the questions the media won’t ask” and that’s never been more necessary than now, particularly with the revelations of past days.
The media in Scotland is now so hopelessly compromised it cannot own up to the fact and actually deal with it.
Look at the cast of players –
STV – entered into an infamous “joint venture” with the now deceased RFC at the instigation of one of its senior management
BBC – its flagship football programmes were hosted by and generally taken over by RFC supporters – many of them still on the RFC books though that was shamefully hidden from public knowledge – whilst the programmes were trumpeted as independent ;
Radio Clyde – where do we begin? Much as for the BBC but at an even more downmarket level; tat masquerading as populism, the level only raised when Terry and co called in
Real Radio – such an omnishambles it shut down its football phone in once RFC had breathed its last
The Record – its football coverage led by Jim Traynor for many years, need I say more?
Even the national broadcasters view things through a blue prism – Jim White at Skysports and Talksport with Richard Keays & Andy Gray
And so it goes on. Back at the ranch, it’s like the guest list at the local lodge – Mark Hateley, Andy Goram, Gary Ralston, Derek Johnstone, Roger Hannah, Fraser Wishart, Chick Young, Billy Dodds, Gordon Smith, Mark Guidi, Gordon Waddell, Darrell King, Daryl Broadfoot, Graham Speirs, Richard Wilson, Hugh Keevins (how the f*** did he slip in?), Michael Grant (token Don), David Friel….
The only probing questions you are likely to hear in the company of this bunch are “is it a free bar?” and “how do I get on the Ibrox payroll?”
This forum is not in danger of losing its way, it can never be in danger of losing its way so long as we
carry on calling these people to account.
If the print media is collapsing in Scotland, there is only one group of people to blame and that is those responsible for producing those newspapers.
I suspect it is now too late to do anything about it but on the sports front, they will be no loss to the game in Scotland.
54 (seconds to midnight)
jean7brodie says:
June 25, 2013 at 11:28 pm
‘Sorry to disagree pal, but I don’t.’
—-
jean7brodie, you’ve said in 7 words what I would have needed 29 paragraphs to say.
I’ll say one of them.
Essentially, this blog is not about a particular football club, whether a dead one or an illicit new one.
It is about the fact that the Footballing Authorities , in particular the SFA, under the presidency of a former board member of a particular club, breached their own rules in order to save that particular club from the consequences of its absolutely insulting-to-the-rest-of-scottish-football behaviour.
That that club was what was then RFC is, essentially, neither her nor there. The ‘obsession’ is not with ‘Rangers’.,
It is with the ( ok, the ‘alleged’ ) corrupting influence of that club’s very longstanding, malignant association with the Footballing Authorities that is the point.
That, and, as we have seen, the wholly rotten collusion of the MSM in that corruption.