Good Afternoon.
As virtually anyone on the internet who follows Scottish Football has come to realise, there is a reasoned and determined attempt at ignoring the content of the Charlotte Fakeovers files on the part of the mainstream print media— and indeed by the broadcast journo’s to an extent.
There is widespread speculation that the accessing of the information provided by Charlotte the Harlot was not all above board and the reluctance of the journalists to mention or comment on the documents, so far published on the internet, is often explained away by the lawyers allegedly advising that the content is tainted and so on.
That indeed might or might not be the case, and only the editors, lawyers, journalists and so on will truly know what their stance is on the revelations. Some will want the whole thing suppressed and others will be desperate to get into print, but thus far are frustrated in any attempt to do so.
However, as the documents do appear on the net only to be quickly followed by file disappearances and so on, there is an ever burning question which must be asked and thrown open to debate and argument.
The issue is not just how independent are the Sports Press in Scotland, but whether or not the relationship between certain sections of the press and Rangers or The Rangers is in fact lawful and deserving of football sanctions.
There is no doubt that many big businesses, local authorities and Governments use the services of PR firms and the likes to get information out to the public and to put their slant on any given situation. That is fair enough.
However, in recent days we have seen the release of documentation which, if accurate and true, shows that a leading Scottish PR company were specifically employed to place stories with the press which were designed to damage the reputation of, to embarrass or cause problems for certain other teams and personnel involved in Scottish Football.
Again I stress that all of this is subject to the caveat that what Charlotte is publishing may or may not be real and accurate. However, if what has been produced is in fact the genuine correspondence between the club and its professional advisers then that correspondence needs to be looked at.
The SFA and indeed the SPFL are the bodies that lay down rules which govern the conduct of clubs and their officers and employees.
So looking at these regulations let me just repeat some of them here:
Fisrt the rules of what was the SPL and which I presume are the rules of the SPFL:
A3.1 In all matters and transactions relating to the League and Company each Club shall behave towards each other Club and the Company with the utmost good faith.
A3.2 No Club, either by itself or its Club Officials, shall by any means whatsoever unfairly criticise, disparage, belittle or discredit any other Club, the Company or the League or in either case any such other Cub or the Company’s directors, officers, employees or agents (which shall, for the avoidance of doubt, exclude supporters).
The SFA handbook at article 5 places obligations on members to observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play, and to refrain from engaging in any activity which would constitute a breach of sections 1, 2 and 6 the Bribery Act 2010.
The details of the Bribery act can be found here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/23/section/2
Basically, I think these rules mean that you cannot criticise belittle or try to damage the reputation of a club outwith the rules of the games and must at all times behave with integrity, in a sporting manner and with THE UTMOST GOOD FAITH!
The details,as released by Charlotte, show that there is at best a conflict of interests at times with various parties being both employed by the club and paid by radio stations or newspapers to comment on matters relating to all aspects of Scottish Football. As a member of the PR staff at Ibrox presumably such employees are paid to tow a certain party line when commenting in the media and so throw a spin on any given set of facts and circumstances that suits whoever is in control of Ibrox.
Further, it has been suggested that certain individuals acting in this way can also represent the views of for example Walter Smith — and so act as their mouthpiece if necessary.
Such practices may be unpleasant and undesirable but not necessarily against the laws of the game. It would just mean that the newspapers and broadcasters concerned cannot be regarded as independent or objective in their comments or views — they are merely towing an employers line. In short they are HMV— His Masters Voice!
Equally, we have seen supposedly independent journalists and editors referred to in such a way that it is clear they are being asked to spin news a certain way for whatever reason — including the suggestion that if they do not comply then some kind of action will be taken which the parties concerned would rather avoid — such as private matters becoming public.
However, of far greater interest is the suggestion that where necessary the newspapers or whoever will be used to spread negative stories about another club, its employees, directors or whoever.
Such a position may well amount to a breach of articles 3.1 and 3,2 of the SPL ( now SPFL rules) and against the principals set out in the SFA handbook.
Both the SFA and the SPL ( SPFL) has a press office and legal officers.
Both grant rights to broadcasters and journalists, and allow members of the press access to their officers and officials.
Both bodies are free to set out what is acceptable conduct on the part of clubs in this area…… and what is not!
Without even alluding to the detail of the Charlotte revelations, or needing to enquire into the details of the Charlotte documents, I would have thought that the governing bodies would be capable of issuing a formal reminder, to all clubs currently playing at any level in Scottish football, of the content of these rules and that any breach of the rules will not be tolerated.
Of course the matter becomes more convoluted if any officers of the SFA or SPL were involved in the employment of any PR companies or agencies on behalf of a member club and engaged in briefing any such agency about what to say when it comes to the affairs of other clubs. Surely you cannot have an executive officer of a governing body who is in any way linked to the employment of an agency which breaks rules on behalf of a member club?
However, few of these people ever appear on the airwaves to answer questions on a personal basis, and very few expose themselves to questions from the public.
However, many of the commentators and journalists named in the Charlotte documents are regulars on the airwaves and could, in theory, be asked whether or not they are no more than “Their master’s voice” as would appear to be the case if the Charlotte documents are in fact genuine.
If the Scottish Footballing Public are to be entrusted with the truth — and why shouldn’t they in this era of open and transparent football governance– then I think they are entitled to enquire direct whether or not the journalists, players, ex players,managers directors, broadcasters and governing body officials believe in articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the SPFL rules and article 5 of the SFA handbook?
Oh– and maybe the same people could provide some practical examples of what they would consider to be breaches of these rules and what the appropriate sanctions might be?
Specifically– do the actions mentioned in the Charlotte documents ( if true ) fall within the football rules or not?
Or do the SFA and SPFL just ignore placed press releases and comments?
It would be interesting to know.
wildwood says:
July 28, 2013 at 11:09 am
Long term follower of this and RTC.
While we need to keep positively chipping away until the dam bursts, we need to be mindful that we don’t lose the plot and become some sort of kangaroo court.
based on material discussed here and elsewhere following Charlottes latest revelation Pat Nevin got a bit of a hounding on twitter. we just simply can’t have that. We become no better than those we are trying to expose.
—————————-
What’s your game plan then ? How do we fight against the corruption ?
From the minute that Rob McLean and Nevin went into their pre- planned execution of the Celtic Support I knew there were underlying political, probably financial, motives behind it.
So Pat Nevin got reminded of his misdemeanours – So what.
I have submitted an FOI request to the BBC concerning some of the topics discussed on here of late. I will post details from any responses I may receive.
Richard Wilson says:
July 28, 2013 at 9:51 am
Thanks, a good read I thought.
In addition to everything else it seems that Messrs McLean and Nevin have breached their employers’ own “custom and practice”
====================================
“ It is not and has never been custom and practice for our commentators to offer opinions on chants from the crowd. They are there to describe the game. Also, whilst commentating they are wearing headphones and listening to the director’s voice in their ear, so I would be surprised if they could accurately make out crowd chants in any case”
===================================
So, based on hearsay and against the broadcasters own practice Mr Mclean attacked a set of fans live on television, at halftime in a match which would have had a substantial audience. That would be bad enough. However if it was as a result of how Rangers had “briefed” the national broadcaster that really would be beyond the pail.
As TSFM said, we really do seem to be getting desensitized to this stuff. The more we hear the less astonished we become.
It’s like Rangers “winning the EBT case”. If the story had been millions of pounds of tax unpaid because of 5 players getting tax free payments it would be a scandal. However that is perceived as being a victory because it could have been so much worse.
Or Rangers being found guilty by LNS, but that was a victory because of the derisory penalty.
It really is worth stepping back sometimes and just looking at things again. Charles Green told Craig Whyte “You are Sevco”, it’s there on tape. So either he meant it, in which case he was fronting for him, or he didn’t in which case he was attempting a fraud. There is no other realistic interpretation. However there was no evidence that Green and Whyte were associated. An internal enquiry found that, and the SFA have accepted that finding.
It is worth the exercise sometimes, forget all of the overwhelming stuff and just look at the bare facts. Rangers paid media house to plant negative stories about other clubs in the press. That is not only unethical it is actually in breach of the SFA rules. I expect nothing to be done about it. That’s the saddest part, I think most of us will just think nothing will be done about it.
Ally says the SPFL’s rules about playing trialists are ‘madness’ …. Madness is signing new players during a registration ban and expecting to play them before the ban has expired…it was a punishment, after all….#pleasetakeyourmedicinewithhumility
TSFM
Re kangaroo court – Couldn’t agree more, especially when the ‘source’ of all such information has an unidentified agenda (before you start, everyone has an agenda, not necessarily good, bad or indifferent, or even, god forbid in the glasgow football bubble, for us or against us) and still questionable method. The very point I was trying, badly, to make to Phil the other day. There is no question the monitor has gone down a route these last few days, progressed? on balance yes, we must just ensure it is not a one way street. We are after all dealing with an experienced, if not very good, PR company here.
All that said…Loving it!
Tif Finn says:
July 28, 2013 at 11:58 am
Richard Wilson says:
July 28, 2013 at 9:51 am
In addition to everything else it seems that Messrs McLean and Nevin have breached their employers’ own “custom and practice”
====================================
“ It is not and has never been custom and practice for our commentators to offer opinions on chants from the crowd. They are there to describe the game. Also, whilst commentating they are wearing headphones and listening to the director’s voice in their ear, so I would be surprised if they could accurately make out crowd chants in any case”
====================================
So, based on hearsay and against the broadcasters own practice Mr Mclean attacked a set of fans live on television, at halftime in a match which would have had a substantial audience. That would be bad enough. However if it was as a result of how Rangers had “briefed” the national broadcaster that really would be beyond the pale.
=================================================
Does any TV coverage of the first-half remain of the game? I find it impossible to believe that BBC can defend McLean comments which are allegedly based on hearsay of unidentified individuals who supposedly heard sectarian singing. The BBC have a responsibility to state who these people were – were they fans or BBC employees or what. And how exactly did they contact McLean? Where did they do it and when? Did McLean know their identity and did anyone else witness this information being passed and, if so, who witnessed it.
And why didn’t Nevin state that he hadn’t heard anything on the day instead of going into a wooly back-uyp of the McLean position?
It all stinks and I think we need to get as many facts together as possible on this and make complaints to BBC Scotland and if they don’t actually provide reasonable answers then we have to take it all the way. A lot can be learnt from the recent campaign by the two Rangers supporters in cutting through the BBC obstacles to complaints.
Obviously the Irvine briefing of Rangers is a disgrace – we need to know who at BBC was briefed and who accompanied Irvine and whether Celtic were given any opportunity to respond. We also require a note of the meeting, any action agreed at it and any instructions, written verbal or in any other way, passed to BBC staff whether full or part-time or or on a conbtract or freelance basis.
We also need to know what BBC are playing at in such a sensitive situation being briefed about Celtic by Rangers – have they gone mad?
upthehoops says:
July 28, 2013 at 7:58 am
“Is it okay for me to refer to this material given that the MSM slant seems to be not to touch it unless they know how it was obtained?”
————————
My gut feeling is that you should put the onus on the BBC. They will be keen to uphold their own integrity. If credible sources imply that this integrity is undermined then such an august body may feel it necessary to take steps to protect such a hard won reputation.
Charlotte’s information has not been authenticated but it displays every characteristic of being authentic. To maintain a reputation it would not just be necessary to counter authentic questionability but also at least consider credible criticism of your actions. You can’t say to the BBC you know for sure but you might give them good reason to go and take a look for themselves. I’d be surprised if they were not already doing this since we know journalistic interest is taken in both Charlotte and TSFM. However I would be surprised if the BBC would comment publicly on an unauthenticated complaint even if they took some in house action.
The danger for the BBC is that it has a Murdoch press and right wing agenda snapping at its heels at every turn. We know the MSM won’t acknowledge Charlotte’s material except through self preservation. If the BBC breaks ranks and starts the discussion then they may become a target for criticism. If the BBC don’t recognise the potential distortion of their output then the same MSM may mock them for being no better than they themselves. The BBC seems to be one of the few places where a measure of independence can be maintained by their jopurnalists so I would be mindful of putting them under the cosh. However they do have a dilemma here I suspect and a carefully worded piece of correspondence to them may provide food for thought.
redetin on July 28, 2013 at 9:45 am
23 0 Rate This
redlichtie says:
July 28, 2013 at 8:44 am
Nuclear Sheep says:
July 28, 2013 at 12:43 am
And @ smugas
Re Durrant tackle
I’m quoting from memory here so may not be 100% on the ball but I seem to remember watching this on TV and feeling nauseous from the commentator. I can’t remember who the commentator was but he was giving it big style about the camaraderie at rangers nowadays as Durrant was carried off by two members of rangers back room staff rather than being stretchered off. It was up there with Hollywood man down in ‘nam brat pack guff as I recollect. Anyhoos did it not transpire that Souness had hired his mate as physio? Was it not suggested later that Durrant being carried off in this way by the physio with his lower leg left dangling like a bawbag in the wind actually made his rehabilitation longer or possibly even may have exasperated the injury?
I’m not defending the tackle here, it was a rash shocker but the medias guff about the glorious gers was sickening, even as far back as this incident. And guff without any foundation too.
fara1968 says:
July 28, 2013 at 12:29 pm
I have read somewhere that him being carried off the park like that made the effects of the injury much worse than they would have been if the player had been taken off properly.
Is this the one
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/13/article-1161748-0580E9CF0000044D-48_468x549.jpg
Well said Castofthousands…..for all is imperfections the BBC remains the best we’ve got, and compared to the murodchised media infinitely superior. I would also defend Pat Nevin, he was asked a question and answered it honestly, I doubt he was aware of Jack Irvine’s/rob McLean’s grubby agenda to ‘re-categorise’ the Fields of Athenry as ‘sectarian’, his crime may have been naivety, but no more than that. I had the pleasure of spending an afternoon in Pat’s company last year, he told me since that day he has been subject to a vilification from certain Celtic fans (always with the expletive c*nt) in restaurants, shops and other public arenas often with his family. Is anyone on here really telling me he was lying to assist Rangers campaign to deflect attention from the behaviour of the bears? I have found over the years a reluctance from both sets of fans of the Glasgow clubs to discuss their own issues, particularly this issue…..the first point of reference is always ‘wit aboot them?’
Tif Finn on July 28, 2013 at 12:44 pm
0 0 Rate This
fara1968 says:
July 28, 2013 at 12:29 pm
I have read somewhere that him being carried off the park like that made the effects of the injury much worse than they would have been if the player had been taken off properly.
………………………………………………….
Indeed this is the one. Shows though that my memory isn’t so great, I was sure in my head that it was two people who carried him off. Thanks for posting link.
Where to start with Pat Nevin? OK Pat, with a name like that it’s probably expected you go the extra mile to fit in.
When this mysterious sectarian chanting was highlighted, you said you were going to highlight it every time it was heard.
Well Paddy, there has been very offensive chanting heard by lots of us since then on a few occasions.
Your silence Mr Nevin just about sums you up I’m afraid.
But just you keep yourself in that cosy wee number at the beeb though. How’s your old dignity feeling about it
all? Or did they just tell you to leave it in the cloakroom with your jacket as you wouldn’t be needing it anymore?
arabest1 says:
July 28, 2013 at 12:46 pm
Or he could have said, I didn’t hear anything so it’s probably best if I don’t make any comment about that specific allegation. In general I am absolutely against certain singing and chanting no matter what fans it comes from but I can’t really condemn people without a bit more information.
He is an intelligent man and a professional broadcaster, and surely must know his employers position on the matter. He is also responsible for his own actions.
ecobhoy says:
July 28, 2013 at 12:18 pm
2 0 Rate This
… The BBC have a responsibility to state who these people were – were they fans or BBC employees or what. And how exactly did they contact McLean? Where did they do it and when? Did McLean know their identity and did anyone else witness this information being passed and, if so, who witnessed it.
And why didn’t Nevin state that he hadn’t heard anything on the day instead of going into a wooly back-uyp of the McLean position?
———
Exactly ecobhoy, who was producer that day and who passed on the info to him or her?
RM’s statements about ‘those outside’ and ‘it seems to be happening’ are a bit vague and it is quickly linked to Rangers, no doubt to confirm the simplistic two cheeks of the same backside theory, if that was the aim.
But I agree with the new poster wildwood on this (who has been unreasonably TD’ed for what I see as mere common sense). We need to stick to facts and specifics: Who told RM? Did he himself hear it? Did PN actually hear it? Or was he accepting as fact what was being said. They must know which producer and which staff were on duty that day. If they cannot or will not answer, then hound them until they do, by all means, but at least give them a chance to answer specific questions first.
fara1968 says:
July 28, 2013 at 12:50 pm
If I remember correctly it was Phil Boersma(sp) who carried him off.
ecobhoy says:
July 28, 2013 at 12:18 pm
“Obviously the Irvine briefing of Rangers is a disgrace – we need to know who at BBC was briefed and who accompanied Irvine and whether Celtic were given any opportunity to respond. We also require a note of the meeting, any action agreed at it and any instructions, written verbal or in any other way, passed to BBC staff whether full or part-time or or on a conbtract or freelance basis.”
——————————————————————————————————————————————
Is this not a case of 2+2 making 5.
Maybe I have missed something but CF link http://www.scribd.com/doc/156371097/Media-House-Report-May-2011 refers to
– 16/5/11 Call with BBC re how to define pro-IRA songs.
A call does not mean a meeting. It is attributed to ‘LB’ therefore where is the evidence of JI attending a meeting with anyone at the BBC to discuss definitions of pro IRA songs.
The only reference to meetings with the BBC relate to a ‘documentary’
All we have at present is a call being made to persons unknown and yes it would be interesting to know who took the call.
(Maybe the call was made BBC to MH??- who knows)
Now a meeting may have been held but, and I’m playing devil’s advocate, lets not get carried away with accusations we cannot substantiate at this time.
As I say I may have missed something and apologise in advance if I am wrong, but I think we need to be careful how we tread.
As arabest1 says above if people were going around calling Pat Nevin horrible names then we need to play a better and more clever game to take the moral high ground.
Here are the relevant secsions
16/05/11 LB Liaising with SK re 5 Live and IM re response to letters.
Call with BBC re how to define pro-IRA songs. Drafting
response re Graham Spiers.
18/05/11 RS Briefing Herald on Celtic issue
I have conjectured that the staff concerned are Lois Boyle and Ramsay Smith. The questions remain, what does “Call with BBC re how to define pro-IRA songs” and “Briefing Herald on Celtic issue” mean and why were Rangers paying Jack Irvine’s company to do these things.
“ It is not and has never been custom and practice for our commentators to offer opinions on chants from the crowd. They are there to describe the game. Also, whilst commentating they are wearing headphones and listening to the director’s voice in their ear, so I would be surprised if they could accurately make out crowd chants in any case”
Rob McLean wasn’t commentating on the game of course, he was in a studio box above the Celtic fans. Now, I completely agree with the point that the Rangers fans disgusting choice of songs at an earlier final should have been condemned and Mr McAskill’s comments were a disgrace, but are we saying that Celtic fans didn’t disgrace themselves that day with their choice of song? I wasn’t there and although I watched on tv I can’t remember being offended by anything I heard but what about John Hartson? He might have said, whoa, hold on, that wasn’t a bigoted song, what are you guys about!
There is definitely a case for the BBC to answer about Media House’s briefing and their failure to condemn the Rangers fans but I can quite accept that some Celtic fans let their side down that day. If it was just The Fields though and nothing else then certainly it does appear sinister.
Tif Finn says:
July 28, 2013 at 1:12 pm
Totally agree that it is of great interest of what was going on.
My point is however that we need to be careful of getting ahead of ourselves in what is said in posts. Otherwise it just gives the very people we are trying to hold to account the ammunition to dismiss us as mere paranoid internet bampots.
I wonder if BBC Alba will comment on “songs” sung this afternoon, and will we understand what they are saying?
wottpi says:
July 28, 2013 at 1:03 pm
ecobhoy says:
July 28, 2013 at 12:18 pm
“Obviously the Irvine briefing of Rangers is a disgrace – we need to know who at BBC was briefed and who accompanied Irvine and whether Celtic were given any opportunity to respond. We also require a note of the meeting, any action agreed at it and any instructions, written verbal or in any other way, passed to BBC staff whether full or part-time or or on a contract or freelance basis.”
——————————————————————————————————————————————
Is this not a case of 2+2 making 5. Maybe I have missed something but CF link http://www.scribd.com/doc/156371097/Media-House-Report-May-2011 refers to – 16/5/11 Call with BBC re how to define pro-IRA songs.
A call does not mean a meeting. It is attributed to ‘LB’ therefore where is the evidence of JI attending a meeting with anyone at the BBC to discuss definitions of pro IRA songs. The only reference to meetings with the BBC relate to a ‘documentary’
Now a meeting may have been held but, and I’m playing devil’s advocate, lets not get carried away with accusations we cannot substantiate at this time.
===================================================================
You are quite right it probably was a telephone call rather than a physical ‘call’ at the Beeb which is how I read it because my brain genuinely didn’t compute that something like determining how Rangers and the BBC could define pro-IRA songs could be done in a phone call. I suppose a conference call might just be able to handle it but I still doubt it and hope that CF might have more to add in the way of info.
So I will rephrase my question on the issue to: We need to know who initiated the call and everyone from both sides who participated as it may not have been on a 1-to-1 basis. Were Celtic given any opportunity to respond or participate. And what brought the call about and what was the anticipated result to be achieved.
We also require a note of content of the telephone call, any action agreed during it and any instructions – written verbal or in any other way, passed to BBC staff whether full or part-time or or on a contract or freelance basis – which were made as a result or subsequent to the call but arising from it or dealing with pro-IRA songs.
We further need to know whether there were any further calls or any meeting on the subject of pro-IRA songs or Celtic initiated by any BBC employee, any Media House employee, any Rangers employee, or any person not employed by Celtic.
We also need to know whether prior to 16/05/2011 there were any phone calls or meetings where Celtic and/or pro-IRA songs were discussed between anyone involved with the BBC and anyone involved with Rangers or Media House.
As to ‘LB’ I assume that to be an employee of MH and as the expert there on sectarian matters from the CF emails and apparently the boss is JI I have assumed that on such a sensitive and potentially explosive area then JI would be fully involved and I would be amazed if ‘LB’ was following the company line.
Quote Wottpi: As arabest1 says above if people were going around calling Pat Nevin horrible names then we need to play a better and more clever game to take the moral high ground.
Poor wee Pat. People were calling him horrible names. Just for broadcasting live to MILLIONS across the nation – with neither personal nor audio proof – that the Celtic support were sectarian.
The nerve of these supporters to be upset at him just for providing erroneous, anecdotal video evidence. Evidence which can be accessed historically by future generations as balanced/unbiased BBC reporting by two on the spot pundits – thus conferring an aura of authenticity to his and McLean’s mendacious claims. Think about it Pat (given you present yourself as a – cough – intellectual): you blighted an an entire support and it was recorded for posterity by a source generally renowned for its impartiality. There is no moral high ground here. Perhaps if you had apologised in retrospect, explained that you had been told they were signing sectarian songs but have since discovered this to be untrue, people would have admired you.
Instead, you are running around greetin’ to folk as anxious as you to downplay your lie that you are the victim. Take responsibility for your own actions, Pat. You caused this, accept responsibility.
bobferris says:
July 28, 2013 at 1:33 pm
“I wasn’t there and although I watched on tv I can’t remember being offended by anything I heard …
… but I can quite accept that some Celtic fans let their side down that day.”
Really, on what basis.
On John Hartson
“He might have said, whoa, hold on, that wasn’t a bigoted song, what are you guys about! ”
If he didn’t comment maybe he thought he wasn’t in a position to. Unlike the other two who were happy to make comment based on, as I understand it, hearsay. In Mr Nevin’s case not even primary hearsay.
bobferris says:
July 28, 2013 at 1:33 pm
========================================
One of the things I asked earlier was if anyone had a link to the first-half of the game to hear what actually happened. Pro-IRA songs aren’t acceptable to me and if fans sing them then the club and the whole support is left open to attack. But neither McLean nor Nevin stated they had personally heard any songs. I also haven’t seen the full coverage of the half-time discussion and haven’t heard anything that Hartson said.
Online today DR today reports from Craig McDonald the following:
SCOTLAND’S top-flight football clubs have been given a cash boost by an increase in season ticket sales. Figures were also up last season – as fans rallied to offset gate revenue lost by Rangers’ demotion to Division Three.
Further on states
“That doesn’t appear to be the case – despite negative predictions when Rangers went down to the Third Division.
This sort of drivel “demotion, went down” sums up the biased reporting of Sevco’s situation that goes unchallenged.
This is why their paper sales are going down. They are low life supporting one team and doing their up most to resurrect some sort of entity that has the old rangers bile still in tact. This is shocking enough and the reason I never buy a paper and by doing so hopefully in the future I will see an end to their publications. I do not expect this sort of bile from the BBC as they are funded from the general public. I know all teams can suffer bad PR from Govan sources, but one team in particular suffers more than all others.
I read somewhere else a comment that sums up the SMSM and now the BBC. “Scotland’s press and media in general possible fear a strong Celtic”.
On Sectarian chanting.
Last OF Cup Rangers fans to a man Sang famine song and Billy boys during the game.
Last season Sevco at Hampden v QOS thousands sang Billy Boys
Berwick Rangers v Sevco ESPN pundits live on air had to apologize for the sectarian singing.
Outcome, nothing. So sectarian songs cannot be that bad then?
valentinesclown says:
July 28, 2013 at 1:56 pm
Last OF Cup Rangers fans to a man Sang famine song and Billy boys during the game.
Last season Sevco at Hampden v QOS thousands sang Billy Boys
Berwick Rangers v Sevco ESPN pundits live on air had to apologize for the sectarian singing.
Outcome, nothing. So sectarian songs cannot be that bad then?
————————————————————————————————————————————-
You sure you didnae jist imagine it all? Coz wee Pat would have made some noise aboot it, so he wid.
Mibbe you’re just as paranoid as me? 😆
bobferris says:
July 28, 2013 at 1:33 pm
“I wasn’t there and although I watched on tv I can’t remember being offended by anything I heard …
… but I can quite accept that some Celtic fans let their side down that day.”
Really, on what basis.
On John Hartson
“He might have said, whoa, hold on, that wasn’t a bigoted song, what are you guys about! ”
If he didn’t comment maybe he thought he wasn’t in a position to. Unlike the other two who were happy to make comment based on, as I understand it, hearsay. In Mr Nevin’s case not even primary hearsay.
Point 1 – because Celtic fans regularly sing songs about the IRA away from Celtic Park. I hear them quite regularly on my tv, but can’t recall what was sung that particular day.
Point 2 – fair enough, I watched it again and they didn’t seem to have heard it themselves but were told by someone.
yakutsuki says:
July 28, 2013 at 2:06 pm
You sure you didnae jist imagine it all? Coz wee Pat would have made some noise aboot it, so he wid.
Mibbe you’re just as paranoid as me?
==========================================
Mibbee he was wearing these! http://i43.tinypic.com/jj936a.jpg
The BBC response to complaints re McLeans comments. They saw them made under arts/literature/journalistic and thus not subject to FOI jurisdiction and would make no comment on that front.If however the comments were made in light of recent briefings to BBC staff it should surely remove them from any of the three mentioned above.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/your_coverage_of_the_scottish_cu
Hope the link works
paulsatim says:
July 28, 2013 at 2:13 pm
2
0
Rate This
yakutsuki says:
July 28, 2013 at 2:06 pm
You sure you didnae jist imagine it all? Coz wee Pat would have made some noise aboot it, so he wid.
Mibbe you’re just as paranoid as me?
==========================================
Mibbee he was wearing these! http://i43.tinypic.com/jj936a.jpg
——————————————————————————————————————————-
Haha, love it!
Question 1
On the topic of the Ibrokes ground allegedly requiring a lot of costly repair work in order to gain a safety certificate – is it not a fair question to ask why a cash strapped club has not yet played a game at Ibrokes? Given the amount of money to be made with such a game, its slightly odd that TRFC play their first competitive game of the season in Scotland today at Coatbridge. Does anyone else feel that a game at Ibrokes would have brought in more money that away games at Bristol City or Sheffield Weds? So why no games at Ibrokes?
Question 2
Given the coordinated effort to have Celtic fans vilified for supposedly obscene chants about a recently murdered drummer – the campaign was led by people logging into Brentford website to express their outrage over songs that no one knows the words to, no one knows the tune and indeed the police have said never happened – is Jack and his gang still planting stories and can someone ask TRFC or Traynor if Craig Mather is still employing Ramsay and his cohorts?
bobferris says:
July 28, 2013 at 2:07 pm
“I wasn’t there and although I watched on tv I can’t remember being offended by anything I heard …
… but I can quite accept that some Celtic fans let their side down that day.”
===========================
Really, on what basis.
===========================
Point 1 – because Celtic fans regularly sing songs about the IRA away from Celtic Park. I hear them quite regularly on my tv, but can’t recall what was sung that particular day.
===========================
You already said “I wasn’t there and although I watched on tv I can’t remember being offended by anything I heard …”
So, albeit you cannot remember what was actually sung, you also can’t remember being offended.
So if we take the evidence of your own ears, the fact that Celtic officially lodged a complaint with the BBC, over 800 Celtic fans also lodged complaints, and as far as I am aware no-one has ever named the “source” or provided any evidence of this alleged singing are you still willing to accept that they fans were guilty of what they were accused of. Based on “Celtic fans regularly sing songs about the IRA away from Celtic Park.”
Going back to the Cup final half time comments, like most things, we have to remember what was going on at the time; UEFA were charging RFC with offensive singing at away games in Europe. As an aside it always strikes me as strange the amount of times UEFA have done this and yet it nothing ever happens in Scotland!
Fast forward two years and after the national, not to mention sporting embarrassment, of a broadcaster apologising to their audience at half time in the Berwick Rangers match for offensive singing being clearly heard still nothing is done by the powers that be. Is it any wonder that our leagues cannot attract a sponsor. I ask you who would wish there product/company to be associated with anything like that.
Anyway back to my initial point where UEFA were charging RFC. The media in Scotland have always got to show each one as being as bad as the other even if there is no evidence to support it. The political classes are no different and this is the very reason the ‘Offensive behaviour at football’ bill came into being.
The real issue here is who informed Rob MacLean, via his ear piece, to mention this. I believe this is what happened and it is the production and editorial team that have to have the spotlight put on them.
After all Rob MacLean is also a journalist and for him to be invited to such a meeting with a PR company where the undermining of one clubs support by another via a media company is the subject is Pulitzer stuff. Even if he were to give the story to another colleague if he feared retribution from the BBC.
I have often believed that such stories were planned, or planted, in the media in the lead up to big games. How many ‘old firm’ Saturdays in the past have you woke up to read a negative story about Celtic in the press. This has been going on for certainly twenty years at least; always brushed off when complained about or called paranoid.
The problem for the media now is that that very paranoia has been proven, particularly in the rule breaking and bending to keep a version of Rangers alive, to be correct. So if fans were correct about that what else were they correct about.
Once the curtain has been drawn aside and the truth glimpsed it cannot be covered up again because everyone will now view every story through a prism of distrust. That is not the way for a media to be regarded in any democracy.
However it is for the media themselves to change this and alter the public perception by carefully and truthfully researching and reporting stories and if they cannot do this I suggest they just leave the pages blank.
On the subject of singing, a wee post I observed on the Albion Rovers forum. Not without humour.
“Posted Yesterday at 08:02
One of the funniest (and darkest) Rangers fan websites, is carrying a plea from a poor chap who has obviously either had too much sun, drink or drugs concerning the Big Match on Sunday.
The poor misguided soul has asked his fellow Rangers fans to use their mobile phones to record the Albion Rovers fans singing sectarian songs so that the club can be dealt with by the authorities! I can picture the scene now, over 9,000 mobiles recording us sing “Prof’s an Airdrie Fan” (obviously an attack on Airdrie) the overtly religious “Sing when your winning (not Cardinal obviously) or that well known sectarian chant that we are famous for ” Second Division, you’re having a laugh”
They have no idea what its’ like to be a fan of a great club that gives no truck to this sort of thing. Seriously, I wish us all well and have every faith that when the media spotlight
is shaun eh I mean shone upon us, our Club, team and fans will be a shining of sport and fraternity to all.”
Some extracts from Sun article today, by a David Friel, [won’t post link].
===========
ALLY McCOIST has revealed he is ready to splash cash in January if it boosts Rangers’ trophy bid.
…
He said: “You’d have to ask the board and chief executive, but we’re in a position to spend.”
…
“I think we’ll know things are getting back to normal when we are able to buy somebody.
There will be a time when that is going to have to happen if we want to go right back up to the top…”
===========
All that’s missing is a ‘warchest’ quote… 🙄
Danish at 5:31
A funny extract if all too wretched.I do wonder if the fans of say Barcelona reduce themselves to base,bile-ridden levels of human behaviour when in discussion of Real Madrid.I’m sure your average Barca fan is all too aware of the Franco-ite leanings of their rivals,but given Barcelona’s strong Republican history do they stoop low when gathered on the terraces.I think not.
Fans of Real Madrid,on the other hand,possibly.
Good afternoon, I have been following this site amongst others for a while now as a firm believer in equality and justice for all and a desire for universal moral rectitude. Unfortunately I do not believe I have the time, skills nor necessary intellect to further the inquiry or debate.
I do have my thoughts and beliefs as well as conjecture theories on the main players, events so far and possible outcomes all, it must be said, influenced in some way by the fine reasoned and enjoyably knowledge-filled posts on here. And I will not deny becoming irate at some beliefs but softening in my opinion as the debate explores hitherto unthought of possibilities and newly gleaned information.
I have the utmost respect for the “Parents” of this cause /site(s) (I refrain from the potentially inflammatory fathers!) in leading the way in attempting to shine light into the darker neuks of this country’s national sport. This has now led to more far ranging revelations about the Machiavellian machinations of the unelected driving forces behind the scenes of our nation. Worrying indeed.
With what I have attached (not being an IT guru it might not even work!) I hope to raise a smile (‘bear’ with it) but also, with hindsight can it be said that there was a deliberate attempt to get away from the tougher (bad press) question to … Look, a squirrel! Or perhaps there is nothing sinister about it all, merely an attempt to finally conclude an interview that had become bogged down in ‘It’ll Be Alright’ hilarity. It must be remembered the context of it being shown nationally and therefore unlikely to be an indication of institutional bias, just another ‘Chick-ism’.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IwrdK4wHfNk
Anyway, just a reminder that this ‘lean-to’ journalism isn’t a new thing.
Football needs a strong East Fife
Been away, catching up. Really handy for Albion catching the the ranjurs in that wee cup.
Should make up for missing them in the league, must have stuck two balls on the radiator before the draw, clever stuff.
Anyone want to trade Ramsdens cup tickets for some decent Stone Cold Steve Austin memorabilia.
You already said “I wasn’t there and although I watched on tv I can’t remember being offended by anything I heard …”
So, albeit you cannot remember what was actually sung, you also can’t remember being offended.
So if we take the evidence of your own ears, the fact that Celtic officially lodged a complaint with the BBC, over 800 Celtic fans also lodged complaints, and as far as I am aware no-one has ever named the “source” or provided any evidence of this alleged singing are you still willing to accept that they fans were guilty of what they were accused of. Based on “Celtic fans regularly sing songs about the IRA away from Celtic Park.”
——————————-
It was the cup final of 2011, I support neither side so my memory of that day is non existent. I don’t even remember the goals. I’m just saying that Celtic fans regularly sing songs about the IRA away from Celtic Park. I hear it at St Mirren, Inverness etc when they have a few thousand supporters in attendance so it doesn’t take a great leap of imagination to maybe even expect a few dodgy songs to be belted out on a big occasion with tens of thousands of fans present. That doesn’t mean it happened and the source of the info to McLean and Nevin and the timing leaves some very interesting questions. But it’s almost as if to some on here that the notion of sectarian songs being sung by a Celtic support is preposterous when the truth is it happens regularly.
In light of the recent BBC/Media House revelations it’s interesting to look at the full report/evidence into last months decision by BBC Trust to uphold complaints in relation to reporting of Rangers.This is when BBC Scotland argued “A football club, once incorporated, is indistinguishable in Scots law from its corporate identity.If the club was separate it would need its own constitution, committee members, trustees, etc.
Rangers Football Club does not have that because it is incorporated.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-22951447
To get the full report click on pages 27 to 37 of pdf April/May:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/complaints_and_appeals/editorial.html
The thing that’s interesting is the evidence put forward by the RFC complainants & the need to bring Celtic into their argument:,such as:
-coverage of Celtic’s 125th anniversary
-mention of Dundee v Celtic Boxing Day fixture & “near riots” coverage
Also mentions BBC biased against RFC etc etc
Could these complanants be the work of “professionals”
Very interesting nonetheless.
From today’s match report by Clive Lindsay here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23454470
Second sentence “League rules denied the visitors several of Ally McCoist’s new recruits”
Sorry, but I was under the impression that it was a registration embargo that denied the new recruits playing not League rules, and it’s a bending of the league rules that allowed the two “Trialists” to play today despite having already signed contracts with the team under the same embargo.
But what do I know, I’m sure Clive knows better than I do
Spivco says
39 3 Rate This
Quote Wottpi: As arabest1 says above if people were going around calling Pat Nevin horrible names then we need to play a better and more clever game to take the moral high ground.
Poor wee Pat. People were calling him horrible names. Just for broadcasting live to MILLIONS across the nation – with neither personal nor audio proof – that the Celtic support were sectarian.
The nerve of these supporters to be upset at him just for providing erroneous, anecdotal video evidence. Evidence which can be accessed historically by future generations as balanced/unbiased BBC reporting by two on the spot pundits – thus conferring an aura of authenticity to his and McLean’s mendacious claims. Think about it Pat (given you present yourself as a – cough – intellectual): you blighted an an entire support and it was recorded for posterity by a source generally renowned for its impartiality. There is no moral high ground here. Perhaps if you had apologised in retrospect, explained that you had been told they were signing sectarian songs but have since discovered this to be untrue, people would have admired you.
Instead, you are running around greetin’ to folk as anxious as you to downplay your lie that you are the victim. Take responsibility for your own actions, Pat. You caused this, accept responsibility.
–———————————————————–
Are you really saying Nevin made this up? Really? Is it beyond the realms of credibility that he did in fact here ira songs from Celtic fans on cup final day? you may consider this disloyal, misplaced, unwise, but ‘mendacious’? When did he ‘blight an entire support’ ? Your justification for the boneheaded morons who yell abuse and obscenity at a man out for the day with his family is odd to say the least, but tribal loyalty is a toxic phenomenon when observed….or worse still betrayed. Lets be be clear about this, the story is not about Pat Nevin, that would be a red herring, this is about the disgraceful conduct of Rangers and their PR agents. If this were Juve smearing the Milan clubs or Liverpool smearing Man U, questions would be asked in parliament amid a media feeding frenzy to rival a royal birth. This is big…way bigger than Pat Nevin, who has publicly made some cutting observations about the culture of west central Scotland…..some uncomfortable truths….but truths none the less.
Auldheid says:
July 27, 2013 at 11:02 pm
http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/topic/8635639/94/#post10896910
—————————-
Your links are very informative and two songs are mentioned in the text.
The Soldiers Song and The Boys of the Old Brigade.
Now it is argued with some justification that these songs are not sectarian as they refer to an episode in Irish history nearly 100 years ago which is a matter of record. The 1916 uprising happened and as a result the political relationship between the United Kingdom and the Irish Republic altered at that point. This is a reality.
The complainant cites ‘Flower of Scotland’ and ‘The British Nationa Anthem’ as equivalent historic anthems that also carry sectarian sentiment. Flower of Scotland has an anti-English sentiment in its chorus and God Save The Queen has an anti-Scottish sixth verse. It is hard to make an equivalence but I can accept that historic songs may include sentiment that should be understood in the context of the historic period referred to.
I’m not trying to excuse Rob McLean and Pat Nevins statements but I think it is fair to try and understand them. Perhaps if they did not appreciate that these songs referred to an earlier period in Irish History then their assessment that they were sectarian may have had some merit. What muddies the water is the revelation that Media House were in communication with the BBC concerning the status of the Celtic song book. Having seen much evidence recently of PR placement in the main stream media I am no longer immune to the possiblity that this influence could stretch into a half time discussion at a televised Cup Final.
100 years is not a long period in historic terms. I wonder if the Croatian supporters sing similar songs when they meet Serbia in international games. What about Ukraine and Russia. North Korea and South Korea. This is a difficult area and I can understand people being sensitive about historic songs especially when there are more recent events that may echo in the lyrics.
However I do not see what role a rival should play in informing the opinion of a public broadcaster on such matters. It would be interesting to know if Celtic made similar representations to the BBC concerning the Rangers songbook.
mailroomtim says:
July 28, 2013 at 7:17 pm
The “trialist” Nicky Law appears to have done really well for them.
Rangers should sign him as soon as possible.
Castofthousands says: July 27, 2013 at 11:03 pm
… The piece that TiffFinn posted at 12:14 pm was very enlightening. It seems that the methods used to launder RFC(IL) had already been practised in other fields by the Bank Of Scotland before (Sir) David Murray’s grasp on reality finally dwindled. Even down to the control of the media. This is not just a football story. However rather than trying to take on the whole world, if we can pursue this particular agenda we may move a wider cause a bit further forward.
—————————————————————
Rather than write an extended post, I will take the easy way out and direct you through a series of articles that might help piece the bigger picture together …
——————————————————————-
MIH / Lloyds – Pound of flesh or ‘incentive’ … ?
A bit of background reading ….. Starting with MIH
http://www.ianfraser.org/i%E2%80%99m-still-in-the-game-says-murray/
http://www.heraldscotland.com/business/company-news/lloyds-117m-capital-injection-helps-cut-murray-debts.2012042113
An insight from inside the Blue Room …
Lloyds are adamant that they don’t run the boardroom …. Walter at the time said different … Seems like the Chairman also disagrees with Lloyds … !
http://www.business7.co.uk/business-news/scottish-business-news/2012/05/23/b7-exclusive-alastair-johnston-speaks-out-on-the-collapse-of-rangers-106408-23870448/
Asset stripping ….. or bank debt recycling …. ?
Don’t miss the Douglas Fraser analysis …..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-12975048
The satirical article by Ian Fraser referred to by TiffFinn posted at 12:14 pm comes to mind here …
Hope noboby missed the Murray clarification on separation of RFC debt …. no longer guaranteed or underwtten by MIH ….. the plan for sell off was ….. ready !
Infact, as the prior article lays out, different parts of the group had been separated in readiness for disposal ….
And indeed all was analysed and reported way back ….
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/murray-international-holdings/
Of course the full picture has its roots much further back …..
I noted an interesting comment by Murray back in 2005 during a Herald interview …
MIH has increased its total debt, mainly borrowed from HBOS, to £500m, compared to £164m a year earlier. The borrowings are mainly to fund aggressive investments in UK property, as well as a rights issue at Rangers … (thats the failed rights issue for reference ….)
But …… the really interesting bit ….
Murray further commented at the time that he “is optimistic about a purchase through MIH’s Charlotte Ventures arm …”
So what’s that all about …..
I recall BRTH and others contributions on RTC about a year ago ….. regarding Gavin Masterton ….
So here’s some further reading ….. HBOS & Masterton
http://www.ianfraser.org/the-worst-bank-in-the-world-hboss-calamitous-seven-year-life/
Ahh yes …. Stadia …. An interesting retirement plan …
The Livingston story ….
http://www.ianfraser.org/keane%e2%80%99s-last-stand/
And under-pinning the whole of this omnishambles ……
http://www.scottishmediamonitor.com/features2.cfm?ID=34
Charlotte 18 …. !
And ……… Jack’s never far from the story ….. is he ?
Pat Nevin made the story about Pat Nevin ‘oh, they are yelling abuse at me and my family.’ As to his telling the truth, no one has complained about his personal views before this. If he wanted to leave Celtic for Hibs, good on him for speaking up about it, more power to the elbow of all who do speak out against what they perceive as inappropriate signing. On either side.
The BBC themselves offered a defence that none of them could ‘hear’ the crowd due to sound proofed boths and headphones. Pat has never actually said he heard it either. Whoever ‘those outside’ are heard it. No one else. He bandwaggoned, jumped on McLean’s chastisement of Celtic fans as braodcast down his earpiece by ‘those outside’. If Pat had heard it I would be the first to congratulate him for speaking up and urge him to do so when all ‘tribes’ are chanting. However, I’m afraid poor Pat suffers from the same selective deafness the Scottish media has when RFC (deceased) were regularly belting out party tunes with abandon. And impunity.
Your concern for his children is admirable. I work with children on a daily basis. Perhaps Pat would have helped me explain to some of bewildered children from the hooped tribe what exactly it was they had sung which earned this condemnation? Their parents had been unable to be specific when questioned. No one had heard it. Others were angry, they had been at the game and behaved appropriately. Heard nothing remiss. But came home only to find themselves tarred as sectarian. These children were distressed. They said they felt like racists yet had done nothing other than go to a match and support their team in a law abiding manner.
Perhaps Saint Pat would also have helped me deflate the glee expressed by those who supported the blue team from Govan about they fen*ans getting what they deserved. I am certain he would even have been gracious enough to help me pull what was presumably a Celtic supporter out from under the 3 RFC (deceased) fans on top of him. And I am sure Pat would have been shocked at 13/14 year olds yelling triumphantly that the taig was nothing but a dirty fen*an B, it wiz oan the telly.
Pat Nevin’s children are not the only ones in the world. McLean, Nevin and the BBC without any evidence of sectarianism acted on hearsay (as far as was broadcast) and stoked sectarian flames. It is ridiculous and deeply, deeply distressing that children are still labelling each other in these outmoded and derogatory terms. It must be stopped. The BBC broadcast that day was a classic example of how NOT to tackle it. Defend Pat all you like – I consider his conduct indefensible.
My take on the two cup finals being discussed is this.
The CIS Cup
I heard Rangers fans sing sectarian, banned throughout an entire game of football. Not a minority, the majority. Not once or twice, throughout the game. The full songbook as I recall, “Billy Boys”, “Famine Song” etc. heard it with my own ears, and had it confirmed by two Rangers fans who were in the crowd and who absolutely loved it. They said in advance they were going to do it and they did. It happened, it’s as simple as that.
The Reaction
Media during the game – Nothing, no comment that I can recall (maybe I am wrong in that).
Justice Minister (Who brought in the law banning the behaviour) – Praised the fans
Assistant Chief Constable (Responsible for enforcing the law0 – Praised the fans.
Scottish Cup Final
I watched that game as well and heard nothing sectarian or banned. I have heard or read no evidence supporting the suggestion that either set of fans was singing or chanting sectarian or banned songs. Again I could be wrong, but I can only speak about the evidence I have seen or heard.
Reaction
Media during the game – Decried the Celtic fans, live on television, in front of millions based on hearsay, in contravention of the national broadcasters own stated customs and practices. As far as i am aware the source has not been identified.
Justice Minister (Who brought in the law banning the behaviour) – Nothing that I am aware of.
Assistant Chief Constable (Responsible for enforcing the law0 – Nothing that I am aware of.
I can guarantee you this, If I made the above comments to the likes of Hugh Keevins on their radio hone in I would be cut off, then mocked for my typical Celtic fan paranoia. Thankfully I have never phoned one of their shows and rarely if ever listen to them now. If I do it’s by accident in the car home and I listen for a few minutes before switching over.
So, call me paranoid if you wish. However I have now seen enough evidence in relation to referees cheating, media manipulation, financial irregularities, football authorities bending and breaking their own rules etc to confirm absolutely and without any shadow of doubt that there was no paranoia involved. In fact the accusations of paranoia and phrases like “biscuit tin mentality” were really only part of the same agenda.
Edit
I meant to say, by the time you include the Government, the Police, the media, the banking system, the legal system and the football authorities you pretty much have “the establishment”.
Who was their club again.
Castofthousands said:
“Your links are very informative and two songs are mentioned in the text.
The Soldiers Song and The Boys of the Old Brigade.
Now it is argued with some justification that these songs are not sectarian as they refer to an episode in Irish history…”
The Soldiers Song is a National anthem. No doubt it would be even more offensive to some if it were sung in Irish/Gaelic. No more offensive than Rule Brittania sung by those with an undying loyalty to the royal house of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, now known as Windsor.
For anyone who may be interested in a bit more information on Media House
http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Media_House
Going back to when Aiden McGeady played, there was a game at Celtic Park were not only was the famine song sung by Rangers fans but potatoes were actually thrown on the pitch. Result, yet again nothing done by SMSM or Sporting authorities.
To be honest the only reason the famine song got banned was due to a source of journalism outwith Scotland. The man responsible for this was Phil Mac Giolla Bhain.
The SMSM and other entities cannot accept the old Rangers and their songs should be challenged. In fact it is killing them that the old club is dead (they are dead and they know it, may never say it but they know what liquidation is as they printed anything to avoid it and the consequences of what it meant). They seem to not be able to contemplate Scotland without them. I can and do.
Whistleblower?
Disillusioned with the PR tactics of your employer? If you have inside knowledge about wrongdoing in a PR or lobbying agency, a corporation or government office, we would love to hear from you.
Get in touch anonymously if necessary – we will investigate and help get your story out. Call the spinbusting hotline: +44 (0)7973 424 015 or email us now.
http://www.spinwatch.org/
Sounds like just the type of organisation to help spread the message of the alleged wrongdoing at the SFA, SPL, BBC etc. 😉
valentinesclown says:
July 28, 2013 at 8:55 pm
I know Phil has been a tireless campaigner against things like that and other forms of bigotry. More power to him and long may he continue.
However in addition to his work did the Irish Government not actually formally complain to Holyrood.
I’ll put my tin helmet on but I thinks it’s a pity there there are any songs to do with Ireland (politics/History)sung at games in Scotland.
I’m only glad I grew up in a part of Scotland that was oblivious to all this.
I note Motherwell are listed as Media House clients on that website – what do any ‘Well fans dropping in here feel about that given recent revelations?
On the subject of alleged sectarian singing, I fear some people are letting their anger cloud their judgement just a little. I don’t blame people for that – these are passionate issues. However surely it’s better we work to build pressure on all the parties involved here. That we keep asking the questions and demanding full disclosure of what is and has been going on – rather than resort to vilifying and abusing individuals.
Individuals make mistakes, I’d rather not throw someone to wolves for one incident without fully understanding what happened. And the fact is we don’t know what Nevin or McLean were informed and what they were told to say.
As others have patiently pointed out the story is not Nevin or McLean – it’s the BBC and their involvement with Media House.
Tif Finn says:
July 28, 2013 at 8:02 pm
I have bombarded my ‘political representatives’ about this debacle since it happened and all I get is utter sh*te from them.
I am utterly appalled in this respect but will still keep going.
However, I have been following the shenanigans of the Bilderberg group for many years now and the similarities, no, replication of tactics, are depressing.
Onwards and upwards!!
I wrote a piece for the Irish Post on the BBC /RobMcLean songs story in 2011.
Given that Rob McLean had said at half-time that Celtic supporters had been singing ‘sectarian songs’ we asked them to name them.
In the first half (I was at the final) there were three non football songs from the Celtic end.
Boys of the Old Brigade, Fields of Athenry and the Solider’s Song.
Which two of those three (or all three) we asked was deemed sectarian?
WE assumed that-within the BBC world view-TBOTOB was a given.
Then it came down to which one of the other two.
After this call from the Irish Post ‘songs’ became just ‘song’.
I knew that the BBC Scotland head of Sport had instructed Rob to make that statement at half-time.
I spoke to Rob at the time and I thought he was uncomfortable with the entire story.
Yet again spivco you avoid the question. Are you accusing Pat Nevin of making this up? That is he did not hear Celtic fans singing Ira songs on cup final day? That he instead invented a story to stoke sectarian flames, to assist Media House and further to callously, ‘distress’ the children of the hoops? Is that what you are saying? I mean no ill will to Celtic fans, but it is not exactly a hysterical accusation. Nevin has said publicly that he does not wish to bring his children up in the atmosphere of football in west central Scotland. As a man who grew up in Glasgow, played for Celtic, Motherwell and Kilmarnock and was rejected by Rangers on account of his ethnicity, I would have thought that he is entitled to make that choice and eminently qualified to make such a judgment. To interpret such comments as a way of giving succour to one side (either side!) shows just what scottish society is up against. To twist his words into some kind of attack on children is plain hysterical. To my knowledge Pat Nevin has never issued the sort of blanket condemnation that you refer to, unless you can provide evidence to the contrary? Scotland has a problem….IMO people are either part of the problem or part of the solution it is obvious to me where Pat Nevin stands, whether you agree with him or not. Pat Nevin’s children may not be the only one’s in the world, but the should be free to go about their family life unmolested by individuals who have a warped sense of perspective, something you initially justify, and then engage in a rather feeble manifestation of whataboutery…..families nursing children over the trauma of half time punditry, really?. 🙄
I am less convinced of the innocence of other journalists and pundits who contribute to the overall tapestry of sectarianism in Scottish football.
PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
July 28, 2013 at 9:31 pm
I know this will come across as facetious, however I really do think it is a genuine point. Were you inclined to ask them if they would be doing the same the next time the Scotland fans sung “Flower of Scotland”, the de facto Scottish football national anthem.
Or is sending invading armies home OK sometimes.
Bill1903 says:
July 28, 2013 at 9:14 pm (Edit)
I’ll put my tin helmet on but I thinks it’s a pity there there are any songs to do with Ireland (politics/History)sung at games in Scotland.
I’m only glad I grew up in a part of Scotland that was oblivious to all this.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Let me put this fire out before it gets started. The country of origin of any song shouldn’t matter a jot. To deplore the use of a song because of where it was written, or where it was written about suggests thoughts from a darker place than I would like to see here.
The nature of chants is the important thing. It is one thing to celebrate one’s heritage and quite something else to decry another’s. However that is not really a topic for discussion here, especially as events across the sea over the last 45 years have made it difficult to bridge cultures.
The reason this subject is relevant – for the moment – is that it is part of the fallout of the Media House/BBC briefing allegation and the hitherto unsubstantiated accusations by Rob McLean and Pat Nevin of sectarian singing by Celtic fans.
We don’t want to be like Jack. In other words we will leave what constitutes a sectarian song to the likes of him and his crowd, since it is essentially a subjective and worthless pursuit. Respectful and polite as we tend to be here, I don’t think we are ready to have that discussion, because it requires all parties to see BOTH sides of the story. It is no surprise that when subjects like this are raised, people appear from nowhere to stir the pot.
Please stay on topic. We will remove anything OT.
newtz says:
July 28, 2013 at 7:29 pm
“Rather than write an extended post, I will take the easy way out and direct you through a series of articles that might help piece the bigger picture together …”
———————–
newtz, I’m glad in this instance to have had the benefit of the truncated version as absorption of the full information cache would almost certainly have resulted in a brain seizure. That is not to decry your research abilities but more to point out the intellectual capacity limits that I and most others have inherited. Reading this material seems to me the mental equivalent of attempting to lift one’s own body weight.
Enough of my neural network appears to have remained intact for me to pose a question/make an observation pertinent to the main saga under our consideration. Lloyd’s neede MIH to wind down their debt. Rangers (now IL) were a not insignificant part of this mountain. Indeed Murray appears to have thrown £200M at the project over the piece, a considerable amount of which would have ended up on MIH books and subsequently (partly at least) written off as irrecoverable.
There’s something about the change in heart about CW’s eligibility to become the new owner that is curious to me. AJ notes that he has no credentials to make him a suitable owner but for some reason Lloyd’s decide he is a viable option. It feels as if there was a plan hatched at this point. The stiffing of Ticketus for £27M may not have been a significant sum in the whole scheme of things but when such huge losses have been allowed to accumulate any crumb of comfort may have been seized upon. The stiffing of a bunch of investors was not a new strategy as TiffFinn has illustrated so the modus operandi is consistent.
AJ observed that CW had no working capital allowance which suggests CW was never intended as a long term resident. So assuming (Sir) David Murray is orchestrating an orderly collapse of Rangers, what might be his end game.
Does he need to be able to bring Rangers back to life in due course in order to perform a parallel resurrection with his own business reputation? Or, as others have conjectured, is there a property/land portfolio waiting to be asset stripped?
@Tif Finn
We (The Irish Post) weren’t editorializing.
It was a straight news piece and we wanted to know which of the three songs (or all of them) that the BBC considered to be ‘sectarian’.
It had to include (TBOTOB a given for the BBC world view) either the Fields of Athenry (love song) or the Irish national anthem (oops).
After that all plural became singular.
Now with MH’s involvement alleged things become a little clearer.
Arabest
Like you I have had the experience of PN’s company on several occasions. I have nothing against him. In private he takes a back seat in discussions, which is not a bad thing, but he tends to think with his mouth on TV. Because of that, he got found out that day. Given the location of the TV studio at Hampden, I’d be pretty sure he was not in a position to hear whatever the fans were singing, which is probably why Rob M made it clear that he had been told by those outside.
Had Nevin been thinking clearly instead of following like a :slamb: he would have made his perfectly reasonable comments about sectarian chanting with the rider that he hadn’t heard anything himself in this instance. he’s supposed to be one the smart guys? Fans of any team would be angry to hear false accusations of misbehaviour bandied about like that.
I had been told by a friend at the BBC at the time that they were on the lookout for offensive singing because of the recently passed law. The studio panel were aware of that on the morning of the game.
Nevin got conned – as did McLean. Hartson didn’t, because he told the before the game not to get him involved, protesting that he was hired as a football expert.
Bill1903 on July 28, 2013 at 9:14 pm
——————-
I think I understand what your trying to day Bill but we also have to be conscious that people all over the world are passionate about the roots and genuinely feel pride in celebrating these.
I’m no expert but as far as I can see there are 2 songs which in no way can be described as an expression of pride on someone’s roots: Billy Boys and The Famine Song. In fact I’m not sure these really qualify as songs but that’s another debate.
The others mentioned as being sung by some celtic fans all seem to me to be legitimate songs celebrating Irish culture or independence in one way or another.
Just my opinion. Like yourself I’ve never really been immersed in this stuff or the history that it relates to. I’m very much an outsider “looking in”.
===========================
PhilMacGiollaBhain on July 28, 2013 at 9:31 pm
——————————————-
That helps keep things in a little perspective thanks.
And seems to me it reinforces the suspicion that there was some hidden purpose driving these statements being made by the BBC.
@TSFM
Rob didn’t ‘get conned’ rather he was instructed by his boss.
Perhaps there is the connection to MH/JI
PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
July 28, 2013 at 10:07 pm (Edit)
@TSFM
Rob didn’t ‘get conned’ rather he was instructed by his boss.
Perhaps there is the connection to MH/JI
____________________________________________
Phil
I think he was told what to say by his producer, but I’m not so sure that McLean is guilty of a breach of trust. Arguably even dafter than Nevin, because he has more media savvy. In his defence however, I know how difficult it is to chair a discussion with a producer/director chirping in your ear so I wouldn’t assume a Rob McLean role in any conspiracy. BUT…
There was an editorial decision to look for instances of what they regarded as sectarian singing. I knew that at the time, but in the light of CtH’s recent input, it may be reasonable to assume that MH’s contact with the BBC was a factor in that policy being arrived at.
TSFM says:
July 28, 2013 at 9:55 pm
Hartson didn’t, because he told them before the game not to get him involved, protesting that he was hired as a football expert.
===============================
Forgive me for asking, but if John Hartson was hired as a football expert, what were the other two there as, social commentators.
Tif Finn says:
July 28, 2013 at 10:12 pm (Edit)
Forgive me for asking, but if John Hartson was hired as a football expert, what were the other two there as, social commentators.
_________________________________________________________________
You’d have to ask them 🙂
Castofthousands says: July 28, 2013 at 9:48 pm
————–
noted !
I note with interest a couple of posters, who have more access to some of the Scottish media than most of us, are willing to state the half time comments at the 2011 Cup Final were pre-meditated. The key questions to be answered are:
1. Was it because the BBC generally thought the anti had to be upped on sectarianism at games, even though in most people minds they botched up what was sectarian?
2. Or was it because Media House had convinced them a few days earlier the BOTOB was a sectarian song?
As licence fee payers we deserve to know. This particular story does NOT belong under any carpet.
Barcabhoy says:
July 27, 2013 at 9:18 pm
56 1 Rate This
#Briefing-gate is potentially as damaging as Dougiegate. No club should have the ability to brief the National Broadcaster in a way designed to damage it’s main competitor.
The BBC asks staff to sign a declaration with regards to any external business interests or relationships that their staff have with customers/suppliers/direct competitors of the BBC. They clearly take very seriously any conflict of interest. This applies right up to the Director General.
Given the publicly funded nature of the BBC and the wonderful reputation it has worldwide, I hope they do not decide to ignore this. I would endorse Auldheid when he suggests that those who took the considerable time and trouble to write to the BBC on the “sectarian singing ” issue originally to make their respondents aware of this new information
=========================================
Just dug out my original email response from the BBC complaints dept and sent a new one to them regarding the new information from CF. I have asked them to investigate and confirm their relationship with Media House and have they ever carried out work for a PR firm regarding footballing matters. I told them many Celtic fans believe it was a deliberate smear linking them with ‘sectarian’ singing during the cup final and the Media House report from May 2011 firmly strengthens that belief .
I will keep you posted of any replies.
I will keep you posted on any reply.
Excellent post Newtz.
Noam Chomsky once argued that the whole landscape of the left-right political debate had been skewed by the media, to the extent that what had been considered middle of the road became left-wing. I see a parallel.
It seems that as more and more information becomes available (as far as it can be considered ‘available’ wrt CF tweets) the opinions/claims that would have been viewed as ‘paranoid’ are now legit and mainstream. The list of sectors of society that helped old Rangers in some way lengthens and the list of the remainder shortens. Debate now squarely sits on the extent of the help that has been forthcoming, and the fact of them being aided and assisted seems a given.
However, this shift has not come about by hijacking the debate, but by unearthing more and more uncomfortable facts and much dot-joining. The truth will out.
amoamasamat says:
July 28, 2013 at 8:11 pm
“No more offensive than Rule Brittania sung by those with an undying loyalty to the royal house of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, now known as Windsor.”
—————————
We’re on a very sensitive topic here so I will take TSFM’s advice and tread lightly.
You make an important point. These islands have enjoyed the influence of a variety of nationalities through the ages. Historically the Romans, Anglo-Saxon Germans, Scandinavian Vikings, French Normans and and Low Countries Dutch have all had reason to beach their boats on our shores. None of these groups however managed to carry forward their history sufficiently long to be able to establish a football team that wished to celebrate this heritage. There is therefore a dearth of comparisons that can be made with the team that plays in green and white hoops in the west of Scotland.
The closest I can get is Tottenham Hotspur who celebrate a Yiddish element within their support but this comparison does not stand up to major scrutiny. Perhaps a better parallel can be drawn within cricket. The Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Indian, Caribbean and Australian communities within the UK will flock to see their (spiritually) international team perform against England when the occasion arises. Although Norman Tebbit at one point did place a question mark over the loyalty of such supporters, it is generally accepted that the celebration of such cultural roots can bring great colour to a sporting occasion. Indeed I have grown to marvel at the stiff upper lipped Home Counties types that positively revel in the atmosphere provided by such fans.
It is not a direct comparison, just an attempt to provide a bit more context.
I can only speak for myself, however judging by the comments posted on the blog today it is seems the revelation that media house may have had an input into BBC editorial decision making has upset many contributors. People have a right to their own opinion and should be free to make any comment they see fit as long as it falls within the guidelines of the blog. Personally I would rather see the blog discussing ways in which we can establish the facts surrounding any media house involvement with the BBC as revealed by Charlottes latest tweets than getting bogged down in discussing what does or doesn’t constitute a sectarian song and who sang what, where and when.
Again this is only my opinion and in keeping with the spirit of the blog if I have offended anyone I apologise.
I’m afraid that I can’t accept Nevin’s position on the day in question. He tends to cast himself in the role of the thinking fan’s intellectual pundit and I have no problem with that.
However when McLean made his hearsay statement about reports that Celtic fans were singing sectarian songs then the response from Nevin should have been prefaced with the caveat that he himself had either heard or not heard the sectarian singing referred to by McLean. If he then wishes to add historical experiences that he has personal knowledge of then I have no problem with that if accurate.
I also have no problem with Nevin removing his children from an environment that he doesn’t wish them to experience although he should remember that few in the west coast of Scotland can afford to do so and that is why the problem that exists must be dealt with in a factual way and not on hearsay because the ones most likely to suffer are those trapped in poorer areas. It is a bit ironic of course that football is what has provided the cash for Nevin to remove his children from the poison that some supporters bring to the game.
I have no doubt that someone at BBC Scotland flagged-up the issue as one that would be discussed at half-time and it was either decided before the game even began or because there actually was ‘sectarian’ singing during the first half. Of course that doesn’t exclude the possibility that it was decided beforehand and there was also ‘sectarian’ singing.
[Removed – OT]
There is another point that puzzles me as to why the issue was discussed when that appears to be against previous BBC policy. Particularly if McLean didn’t just run off at the mouth but was instructed to raise the issue by a BBC employee in charge of the programme.
Nevin has said on twitter he is prepared to explain his position to Celtic Supporters Clubs’ and I wonder how TSFM would feel about extending the blog to him to answer a series of questions about events that day. I would also say that McLean and Hartson should also be asked to answer similar questions.
Obviously McLean has to be asked who told him about the singing and whether there was any discussion before the match that the issue of sectarian singing or chants would be discussed. The three of them might not be happy but if you take the money and something like this blows-up especially if there was no sectarian singing then you have to deal with the fall-out.
Obviously the recent CF revelations about contact between Media House and the BBC over the defining of pro-IRA songs just days before the match is worrying and a new investigation must be called for from the BBC into the issue. It may be purely coincidental but it doesn’t feel that way especially in view of all the other material released by CF which has alerted us to the PR pressures and dirty-tricks being employed and given credence with the assistance of a compliant SMSM.