We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.


We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.

Some of us are old enough to remember the days when we played football in the streets with lamp posts for goals. The “baw” in my day was a plastic “Hampden Frido” (with wee studs that left yer forehead looking like a golf ball when heading it – see picture) and a “Wembley Mettoy”.

Cue memories of MouldMasters and days of pain and glory

But I digress.

The plastic ball was prone to bursting and on a good day or evening a replacement was secured by the original version of crowd funding.; However, the Calton then was a poor neighbourhood and sometimes the “baw” depended on the generosity of a single provider.

This came with risks because generous folk can still be bad losers and if the provider’s team of rags, taigs and bluenoses (remember when that didn’t matter)  was getting  a drubbing or a high shot was deemed a goal but he protested because he was only 4 feet 6  tall and ,with no crossbar ,height is but a subjective perspective, hence argumentative, or perhaps the goal that created a 10 goal  gap occasionally saw the baw ,metaphorical if not physically, land on the slates, at which point the provider and now owner, out of his sense of entitlement as owner, grab the baw and threatened to storm off in the huff.

As long as the game was everything and in the Calton then EVERYTHING was fitbaw, the bawless plebs were only too willing to reduce the imaginary cross bar height or take their foot off the gas, hence the derogatory saying of those who capitulate too easily “they hivnae any baws”.

Memories! Wit are they like and what is the connection to modern day Scottish professional football?

I’m indebted to this article by The Battered Bunnet first posted on CQN on 30 June 2012 at  https://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/abject-failure-of-leadership/comment-page-2/#comment-1479329  since reproduced on other blogs including SFM but worth reproducing here:

“Senior Hampden source tells ch4news cannot see how RFC were allowed to play lastseason at all. Doesn’t believe they met finance criteria…”

Alex Thomson – Twitter

Alex Thomson’s tweets yesterday re ‘senior Hampden source’ casting doubt on Rangers’ eligibility to obtain a Club Licence last year were rather intriguing.

We have by now a clearer picture of the failure of governance at Rangers through the David Murray/ John McClelland/ Alastair Johnston/ Craig Whyte years, albeit we await further definitive details from the judgement of the Tax Tribunal. Essentially, over a period spanning 2 decades, the means that Rangers used to sustain its football operation utterly disregarded the requirements of both corporate governance and football regulation. While the scandal related solely to payments and procedures within Rangers, we could hope that it was contained internally.

However, the revelation that Rangers paid former manager Souness via EBT while he was manager at Blackburn Rovers confirmed for the first time that the scandal had become external. I understand that RangersTaxCase and Alex Thomson have further information on the extent of payments to Souness and also to Walter Smith, and look forward to the details being revealed, but it is now clear that the Rangers ‘toxin’ had leached out of the club by 2001.

The compelling question now is: How far did the toxin spread?

Was it contained within the ‘outer circle’ of former Rangers employees, however inexplicable such payments may appear? Or did it extend beyond that outer circle, and contaminate senior figures in the Game in Scotland. The contamination does not relate solely to payments from Rangers’offshore trust, but more subtly perhaps, the behaviour of individuals in positions of influence.

We know that Rangers’ Executive Chairman JohnMcClelland was an SPL Board member during the startling ramp up of EBT use from 2003 to 2005, and was himself a beneficiary of the scheme.

We know that Rangers’ Chief Executive Martin Bain was an SPL Board member 2008 to 2011, coinciding with the receipt by Rangers of the HMRC assessments on the EBT scheme, of which he was himself a beneficiary.

We know that current SFA President Campbell Ogilvie was simultaneously an SFA Director and Executive Director and Company Secretary of Rangers, and was a beneficiary of the scheme.

These parallel functions of course present a profound conflict of interest for each man, at once implementing a scam on the Game to disguise a fraud on the Revenue, while owing specific legal duties of care to the Game being scammed.

So far, so shabby.

Thomson’s tweets yesterday indicate a doubt on the part of a ‘senior Hampden source’ that Rangers were eligible to hold a Club Licence last season, thus disqualifying them from participating in European competition, and perhaps Scottish Football too. Is this doubt grounded in a retrospective review of the licence qualifying criteria given what has emerged recently? Or was there a ‘blind eye’ turned by the SFA’s Licensing Committee to information in the public domain at the time of the Licence application? In this respect the ‘Wee Tax Case’ represented a fundamental failure against at least one Licence criterion.

The proposals to the SFL clubs this week make it plain that should the SFA conclude the outstanding Disciplinary issues against Rangers with either suspension or expulsion of Rangers from the SFA(perhaps the only sanctions remaining available to the SFA following Lord Glennie’s Judicial Review) that the Game will face ‘financial meltdown’.

Concurrently, the SPL has adjudged Rangers to have a prima facie case to answer in respect of SPL rule breaches on player registration, the outcome of which will confirm that the club fielded ineligible players in upwards of 400 SPL matches. The only possible disciplinary outcome given such a sustained breach of SPL rules, corrupting the completion as it did from its inception in 1999 to 2011, is expulsion from theSPL.

As a consequence, the SFA, as the authority responsible for implementing FIFA’s Rules on the Registration of Players, will be required to act on these breaches of FIFA rules. Again, expulsion for what amounts to Championship fixing is inevitable.

Curiously, the SFL, this week asking its members to vote to admit the Sevco Rangers club into their top tier, has the same issue given that its League Cup competition featured dozens of ineligible Rangers players through the years, and further claims by Hugh Adam that its‘Premier Division’ competition during the 1990s was similarly bent through the use of ‘off the books’ payments to players by Rangers.

The scale of it all is breath-taking and were the rules of the Game to be applied, Rangers FC would be expelled from each Governing body in turn, before we even consider the extraordinary breaches of faith and duties by co-serving Directors.

But according to the SFL/SFA/SPL circular to clubs, “Rangers Terminated or Suspended’ will cause “Financial Meltdown”.

To avoid this meltdown, it is proposed by the Executives of the combined SFL/SFA/SPL that the rules of the Game are not applied to Rangers, and that the clubs effectively rewrite the rule book to permit what remains of the club to compete at the top of the SFL.

In effect, according to the Governing Bodies,the Rules of the Game CANNOT be applied to Rangers or the Game’s finances will‘meltdown’.

The corollary question this raises is: For how long have the Governing bodies been so unable to apply the Rules of the Game to Rangers? Is this a new epiphany, or a longer standing recognition?

When Rangers submitted their allegedly ineligible application for a Club Licence in 2011, did the SFA recognise that Rangers failing to participate in Europe would cause the club to fail, as it subsequently did? Were the Rules ignored to avoid ‘financial meltdown’ then?

How far did the toxin spread?

Did this recognition extend back to the period following the disintegration of Murray International, hitherto Rangers’ source of continuing funding? Was the season of ‘Honest Mistakes’ some absurd, dutiful reaction to the recognition that should Rangers fail, Scottish Football would melt down?

Was the ineligible status of so many of Rangers’ first team players noticed prior to the SPL’s Inquiry commencing on 5th March? Was it noticed in an Audit as part of the SFA’s Club Licensing process some years ago? Was it noticed by the recent SFA Chief Executive Gordon Smith, who as an Agent had represented players on Rangers’ books through his Directorship of Prostar Management and other Agencies?

Beyond the duplicity of Ogilvie, McClelland and Bain, were Rangers’ irregular practices known to others at the SFA and SPL,others who chose not to address the matter, thus further contaminated the Governing Bodies with the Rangers toxin?

It is heartening that the Liquidators of Rangers plc will be instructed to examine all of the circumstances surrounding the failure of Rangers as a corporate entity. Equally, perhaps the detail contained in the Tax Tribunal judgement will reveal further connections,hitherto unknown.

What is likely to remain hidden from view though, is the full extent to which key influencers at the Governing Bodies were aware of Rangers’ conduct and circumstances, and how this affected their behaviour and their decision making in applying the rules of the Game to that club.

What we can say with certainty now though is that the people holding office at the Governing Bodies are unable or unwilling to apply the Rules of the Game to Rangers, despite the breaches being fundamentally and profoundly corrupt. The SFA and SPL, despite having outstanding disciplinary cases against Rangers that will, in all other circumstances see the club expelled from the Game, are intent to delete the cases provided the SFL clubs accept the Sevco Rangers into the SFL’s top division.

The Rules of the Game cannot be applied to Rangers.

When the rules cannot be applied, the Game itself is broken, and we can say now with some certainty that the Rangers toxin has spread beyond the club, its former employees and Directors of the Governing Bodies, and contaminated the very Game itself. The Office Bearers of the SFA,whose FIFA mandate requires them to “protect and foster the Game” in Scotland,and “protect it from abuses”, have contrived to do the contrary, to the point where the Game is stricken.

It is for this reason that a thorough clear out of the Office Bearers in the Governing Bodies is now a prerequisite to the Game recovering from the poison inflicted upon it by Rangers. The dissolution of the Governing Bodies is perhaps appropriate.

Clear your desk Gentlemen, the bus to ignominy departs shortly.

The position that the SFA and then SPL found themselves in is perfectly clear from the foregoing. Desperately keen for commercial reasons to hold onto the “baw” they changed the rules, but never took ownership of the baw from the owner and so are still beholden to him.

Hence the blog title “We Are Going To Need Another Baw “ because the one currently in play is burst, stuffed with £14M worth of share vouchers.

What was done in 2012 was understandably commercially necessary, but the price to be paid was twofold:

  1. Not just to the integrity of our game then but the ongoing price now, where all energies are directed at continuing to pretend that the rules are followed without fear of favour.
  2. The idea that the Scottish game cannot survive without a “ Rangers”  is one that most folk would accept but the danger arising, which is unacceptable, is that because of it “Rangers” think they can do as they please as a result which requires rules to be reinforced. And seen to be reinforced.

They clearly aren’t under the SFA’s own rule enforcing process called the Judicial Panel Protocol  https://www.sfm.scot/jpp-perverting-justice/   not to mention Club Licensing processes that have so far manged to avoid the scrutiny that, had Resolution 12 been acted upon in 2013,  would have resulted in changes that would protect the game from all those who think it is still their baw.

The general perception of supporters is that lessons have not been learned from past behaviour.

Until there is evidence that they have, for example: the Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal investigating at snail’s pace the process followed in 2011 that allowed a UEFA licence to be granted to Rangers FC without question, coming to conclusion or providing reasons why it cannot by the spring, the perception will continue to be   “Its all about Rangers”  followed by what is the point?.

Is it not about time now that the fear that drove thinking in 2012 was faced and recognised by all clubs as unfounded and a new integrity filled baw was used?

What is there to fear now from restoring integrity to its rightful place, unless of course you were party to the thinking that kicked the integrity of our game to death in 2012 and are still in a position of influence?

About the author

Auldheid author

Celtic fan from Glasgow living mostly in Spain. A contributor to several websites, discussion groups and blogs, and a member of the Resolution 12 Celtic shareholders' group. Committed to sporting integrity, good governance, and the idea that football is interdependent. We all need each other in the game.

1,434 Comments so far

Cluster OnePosted on6:58 am - Jan 31, 2019

John Clark 31st January 2019 at 06:42
The last time i read something like that, it was Alex Mcleish short of begging the board at ibrox to give him a call. They never did but his friends at Hampden heard his cry.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on7:32 am - Jan 31, 2019

Cluster One 31st January 2019 at 06:58

'…They never did but his friends at Hampden heard his cry.'


Quiet lobbying and self-promotion was  and is undoubtedly necessary in that field of restricted opportunities and competition from lots of others of roughly the same quality/experience.

But I think personal flattery of one's previous CEO is maybe a wee step too far! 

( I had to laugh the other day when I got an email from Linked line telling me that there were two new folk whom I might know ( one was my son!) 


View Comment

redetinPosted on11:33 am - Jan 31, 2019

Cluster One 31st January 2019 at 06:58

Agreed, McLeish was embarrassing when he was looking for the Scotland job, but according to BBC, he had an EBT of £1.7 million (supported by a side letter) to think about. The SFA must have known about this unless they hadn't read the BBC page.


Has their been any further news of recipients being pursued for repayment?



View Comment

easyJamboPosted on12:09 pm - Jan 31, 2019

Further to my post yesterday about the investor loan situation at Ibrox, and taking another look at the RIFC accounts, I think their borrowing requirement for this season is actually £6.6m rather than the much quoted £4.6m.

There is a post balance sheet entry in the accounts which states "Subsequent to the year end the company received further investor loans amounting to £2m", then in another reference says "At the time of preparation, the forecast identified that the Group would require a minimum of £4.6m by way of debt or equity funding by the end of season 2018/2019 in order to meet its liabilities as they fall due. The first tranche of funding is required from investors in January 2019."

The "preparation" date was 17 October, so I would consider that the £2m and £4.6m are separate requirements.

My calculation of £1.84m borrowed, based the Offer Document numbers, may reflect the £2m already loaned to the club rather than be part of the £4.6m figure.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:40 pm - Jan 31, 2019

easyJambo 31st January 2019 at 12:09

'..The "preparation" date was 17 October, so I would consider that the £2m and £4.6m are separate requirements.'


I suspect that that would be a fair assumption.

Is there, as a matter of interest, a legal obligation on a plc to give information about its finances for a period immediately following the 'date of preparation ' of the yearly accounts?

That's probably   a silly question, given that the likes of  those running RIFC plc  appear sometimes not even to be willing to comply  without fuss  with a Court Order. Still less  would they be likely to tell anybody anything that they are not legally required to tell about their finances!

If it's not a legal requirement, fair do's to them for that degree of honesty- which of course, shows a worse picture of the true situation than the actual statutorily required annual report and accounts, in that it would suggest that 'the going concern' criterion is really a bit more shaky than the formal accounts in themselves show.



View Comment

StevieBCPosted on12:56 pm - Jan 31, 2019

Haven't read the SMSM's 'reporting' of Lennon's departure, but on the face of it, IMO;

– a shambles which doesn't reflect well on Hibs management

– Leann Dempster is on a shoogly peg

– Kamberi is on a shoogly peg

– a few other players could be on a shoogly peg

– would a new manager get the backing – and budget – to clear out players whose mere presence undermines his own authority?


Of course, I defer to Hibees Bampots' interpretation of a rather strange episode, [and especially when Lennon's contract is – allegedly – being paid up in full: so why the drama?]

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on1:01 pm - Jan 31, 2019

John Clark 31st January 2019 at 12:40

The "Post Balance Sheet Events" is the standard way for PLCs to communicate significant borrowings or other transactions that occur between the year end date and the publication of the accounts.

The auditors for their part raised their "material uncertainty relating to going concern", also dated 17 October, in full knowledge of the additional £2m already borrowed, but their concern was more about the promise of further funding of £4.6m being delivered.

I’m certain that the auditors would insist on such transactions being disclosed in the accounts (as long as they know about them).

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on1:59 pm - Jan 31, 2019

easyJambo 31st January 2019 at 13:01

'..(as long as they know about them).


Thanks, eJ.

I suppose I was imagining that it might be possible for a business to let the auditors see 'the books' and bank statements etc up to the legal year-end, and to give no information about bank balances, debts, borrowings or payments, that arose after the legally specified accounting date.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on2:39 pm - Jan 31, 2019

As it is now midnight plus here, and I am about to go to bed, can I just go off topic completely to say that this morning, here in Cleveland, I shook hands with the Prime Minister of Australia, Scott Morrison, and the Lady Mayor of Redland City Council, in Amuri's café opposite the Hospital where my daughter-in-law works as a midwife.

And I have a photograph to prove it.

And, further, I spoke to 'scomo' (the nickname with which he signed the daughter-in-law's autograph book) to say that as a visitor from Scotland it was no place of mine to comment on the politics of Australia but that it was an honour to meet the representative of the people of Australia.

What struck me most  was that ,when the PM began to speak, a big chap at the back said, matter-of-factly, " jump up on chair, mate, so we can all see and hear you"  And he did.

There is that wonderful thing , wonderful understanding, that those in 'power', in Government, are just you and I-who put them there, temporarily, and can tell them to gtf at the ballot box, and that all the Kings, Queens, lords, ladies , politicians, in the world are just people like us-and have no personal claim on us other than what we collectively  are prepared to allow them.





View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on4:46 pm - Jan 31, 2019


Some reality settling in down Ibrox way? Well for some at least.


View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on6:21 pm - Jan 31, 2019

RFC died, they had an unfair sporting  financial advantage by using EBT'S.  This new club has an unfair sporting advantage by being in debt to tune of roughly £20 million ( soft loans). Why no outcry from all other SPFL clubs? Are they waiting for this new club to die? Not one club has raised this issue so are they all fine with this unfair advantage? 

View Comment

shugPosted on6:47 pm - Jan 31, 2019


View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on7:33 pm - Jan 31, 2019

Any help with this one?
Oh aye and it turned out it was the holding co only. Any docs on what came out the Ashley court action that show the other side for the montage?

View Comment

shugPosted on8:12 pm - Jan 31, 2019

Now this.



View Comment

Big PinkPosted on9:47 pm - Jan 31, 2019

John Clark

When you get back, I want a rub for luck! Hobnobbing with the top guys – could do with some of that here 🙂


View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:17 am - Feb 1, 2019

Ex Ludo 31st January 2019 at 16:46

Some reality settling in down Ibrox way? Well for some at least.


For me the cloud cuckoo land stuff is about to begin off the park big style. Now that the transfer window has 'slammed shut' (why can't it just close?) we move on to the fact the Chinese window is still open. It's one thing having a friendly Scottish media run a story a French club wants your star striker for £8m, then demanding double that via the same media. It's another thing when the reasonably accessible Manager of the said French club tells everyone the story is a load of horse manure! China though – that's a different story. Their clubs will be blissfully unaware that the Scottish media are reporting they bid £18m for Rangers star striker only for Rangers to proudly announce to the same media he's not for sale at any price. It worked last year and it will work again, especially as the Scottish media seem to think China is not contactable in the modern digital era. 

They're only kidding themselves though. As you can see from the article you posted not all Rangers fans are blinded by the daily diet of propaganda. 

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on9:35 am - Feb 1, 2019

UTH 09.17

It proves how dense our Scottish Media Puppets are,digital era modern or other wise you just need to go into any Chines establishment in Scotland and ask your wee China pal what’s happening in their football world and you will get the answer right away,no horse manure from these guys,these guys know everything 

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on9:48 am - Feb 1, 2019


For the new club, winning the Scottish Cup has now become an absolute necessity. To win the league the new club must win all 15 remaining games and hope that Celtic lose at least 3 of theirs. It’s possible that could happen but imho it’s unlikely. If there is no cup success then the whole Stevie G experiment collapses in a heap and it’s safe to say the supporters might be unhappy. Their next big hurdle in the cup is Kilmarnock who should be confident of success in that tie and I would not be at all surprised if KFC go all the way and win the Scottish Cup this year. 

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:53 pm - Feb 1, 2019

upthehoops 1st February 2019 at 07:17

'…especially as the Scottish media seem to think China is not contactable in the modern digital era..'


A wee look at           en.people.cn/n3/2019/0131/c90000-9543059.html   will show that the Chinese press are well into understanding the political/economic advantages of getting more deeply into the only truly worldwide sport.

And if the Chinese government Press backs something for political, ideological reasons- you can be sure that they will throw every energy into fostering and promoting it.

Accredited sports journalists on UK media should be in there and up to the minute with any developments touching on UK and European clubs

The SMSM in particular can claim special rights!

It was/ is the Glasgow 'Evening Times' which produced  a wee red book, long, long  before Mao produced his in 1964!

And their wee red book no more  tells the truth about TRFC Ltd's origins and sporting achievements,  than the SFA does,  or  than Mao's wee red book told the truth about his governance of China!


View Comment

StevieBCPosted on1:07 pm - Feb 1, 2019

Stolen from Twitter;


"Roddy MacKay Roddy MacKay @The_Badgeman · 31 Jan


Rangers issue a hands off warning to all clubs interested in John Beaton, Bobby Madden, Willie Collum, Craig Thomson, Douglas Ross & Andrew Dallas, all of whom are vital to their title challenge

#HonestMistakes "

View Comment

TimtimPosted on1:10 pm - Feb 1, 2019

Time for a look on the bright side if you are a fan of the Ibrox club*. Despite failing to offload their star striker or/and the captain for the estimated £20m they are worth the fans can surely take heart that  if nobody takes up the miserly offer of 20p per share ,Dave King (it appears) has approximately £10m cash in a UK bank account to fund the shortfall til the end of the season. Fellow Directors will no doubt be able to sleep a little easier in the coming months. Well done Mr King , it looks like you have ran rings around yourself.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on1:15 pm - Feb 1, 2019

My post at 12.53 refers:

that was bum link! (I'm no very good at this!)

so here is what the piece says:

"Top soccer clubs Arsenal, Bayern Munich deliver Spring Festival wishes to Chinese fans

(People's Daily Overseas New Media)    15:38, January 31, 2019

(Screenshot of the Arsenal Spring Festival video)

Top soccer clubs Arsenal and Bayern Munich have both delivered their Spring Festival wishes to Chinese fans, as the nation’s growing demand for entertainment since reform and opening-up continues to expand to other industries, including sports.

On Monday, Arsenal and Bayern Munich each posted a Spring Festival-themed videos on their official Sina Weibo accounts, in which their players – from Laurent Koscielny to Manuel Neuer – expressed their New Year wishes in Chinese with traditional Chinese outfits and other festive decorations, such as Spring Festival couplets.

“It’s a promotion strategy for overseas soccer clubs to attract more Chinese fans as China’s vast population means a lucrative market with great potential,” a Beijing-based sports industry observer surnamed Lu commented.

In earlier years, clubs like Serie A giants Juventus and Real Madrid also expressed their New Year wishes to Chinese fans during the Spring Festival.

Not only are these international clubs active on Chinese social media accounts like Sina Weibo and Douyin, many also set their eyes on more offline interactions, from hosting exhibition matches to opening themed restaurants and cafes.

“Reform and opening-up brought high-level sporting events to China, which quickly gained a huge fan base after a long-time void,” Lu said.

(Screenshot of FC Bayern Munich Spring Festival video)

Since Chinese audiences were first exposed to international sports events in 1978 with the FIFA World Cup hosted in Argentina, reform and opening-up has not only brought more economic progress, but also more entertaining sports events to the nation.

In the 1980s, the Italian Serie A was introduced to the Chinese mainland. Over the decades, all five major leagues in Europe – Serie A, Premier League, Bundesliga, La Liga, and Ligue 1 – have not only found their way to China, but also an expanding fan base.

Bundesliga, for example, has grown to become the most influential league in China since the official broadcast by China Central Television in 1990s, data from digital marketing company Mailman Group showed. On Sina Weibo alone, Bundesliga’s account has over 2.75 million followers.

There is no exact number of Chinese fans of international soccer clubs, but according to the market research company Nielsen, China is home to at least 187 million soccer fans."




View Comment

StevieBCPosted on1:32 pm - Feb 1, 2019

“I’m not sure why the onus has been put on the managers to change things [at the SFA].  We don’t get paid to change it, people get paid to do that, they should change it. 

“I got the invite [to Perth] late on the Tuesday to go to a meeting on Thursday, but I had already made plans. I couldn’t go.  But I’m also quite sure of the fact that the people who are paid to run the game in Scotland should be capable of running the game in Scotland instead of going around and canvassing managers who are not paid by the SFA."

“They should do their own jobs. It’s up to them to put their house in order and get things right. They can ask the opinion of managers, but the SFA and people in charge of the game have to take responsibility."


Spoken like a true Internet Bampot!

Extracted from the DR today: Steve Clarke is going to get into more trouble with the Hampden diddies… for stating the bleedin' obvious / the truth.


Refreshing to hear from a [newbie] SPL manager.

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on1:32 pm - Feb 1, 2019

Timtim 1st February 2019 at 13:10 

        Time for a look on the bright side if you are a fan of the Ibrox club*. Despite failing to offload their star striker or/and the captain for the estimated £20m they are worth the fans can surely take heart that if nobody takes up the miserly offer of 20p per share ,Dave King (it appears) has approximately £10m cash in a UK bank account to fund the shortfall til the end of the season. Fellow Directors will no doubt be able to sleep a little easier in the coming months. Well done Mr King , it looks like you have ran rings around yourself.


     He has the courts agreement, that as soon as the I's are dotted and T's crossed, his change is to be shipped back to where it first came…..I doubt the Sevvies will be seeing any of it.

View Comment

theredpillPosted on1:45 pm - Feb 1, 2019

Stevie Bc

Thanks for that , Steve Clark went up another notch in my estimation . Unlike the majority of managers he’s not for playing the game as it were.

View Comment

normanbatesmumfcPosted on2:00 pm - Feb 1, 2019

Spoken like a true Internet Bampot!

Extracted from the DR today: Steve Clarke is going to get into more trouble with the Hampden diddies… for stating the bleedin' obvious / the truth.


Refreshing to hear from a [newbie] SPL manager.


And hopefully the next Celtic FC manager!!

View Comment

TimtimPosted on2:37 pm - Feb 1, 2019

@CO 13.32

"He has the courts agreement, that as soon as the I's are dotted and T's crossed, his change is to be shipped back to where it first came…..I doubt the Sevvies will be seeing any of it."

I doubt it as well but then the questions will be asked why he won't or cannot fund the shortfall that he has promised to do and instead looks to other Directors who are tapped out or resorts to loan sharks such as Close with their 30% interest charges. That saying " you can fool all of the people some of the time……….." is about to expose King to those who foolishly trusted him.

View Comment

paddy malarkeyPosted on2:57 pm - Feb 1, 2019


View Comment

stevoPosted on3:46 pm - Feb 1, 2019

paddy malarkey 1st February 2019 at 14:57

"At least Queen's Park are actual amateurs." mail

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:39 pm - Feb 1, 2019

stevo you're very bad…but 'nail on head', absolutely!


And the article states that the SFA was planning to spend £3M on improving the surrounding area.

So that will probably cover the cost of filling in the pot holes!

The SFA can't run a game of football… so why do they think they can be real estate owners / developers?!


View Comment

stevoPosted on5:00 pm - Feb 1, 2019

Sadly I cannot take the credit for that gag as it was one of the comments on the BBC site.

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on9:39 am - Feb 2, 2019


Stevie Clark endearing himself to the referees again. 

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on1:01 pm - Feb 2, 2019

StevieBC 1st February 2019 at 16:39

And the article states that the SFA was planning to spend £3M on improving the surrounding area.


There simply can't be a more despised Football Association anywhere in the free world. 

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on2:08 pm - Feb 2, 2019


A wee montage courtesy of fanswithoutscscarves. 

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on2:27 pm - Feb 2, 2019

The fans without scarves thing is nothing new of course, but still shocking to see. Kudos to FWS for presenting the facts – particularly the bit that highlights the failure of our national team to qualify for any international tourney since The Cheating Years began in earnest.

The SFA and its satellites are utterly corrupt. Nepotism, cronyism, amateurism. No meritocratic behaviours or procedures of any kind – even when it comes to what goes on in the field of play. Run by third rate lawyers on behalf of fifth rate blazers. And the lawyers and the blazers know this

No accountability. No shame. We have long been a laughing stock to those south of the border who see us as their pound-shop doppelgangers. They no longer even bother to laugh.

Ridicule has lost it's novelty.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:08 pm - Feb 2, 2019

Absolutely, BP.

And if the SFA had been run just competently since before 1998, then you would think that we could have qualified for mibbees one or two Finals since?

Regardless, fans would have a hell of a lot more trust and respect in the SFA today.

Average national team home attendances would arguably be significantly higher.

So… what amount of cash – and lost opportunities for investing in grass roots football – has been 'lost' to the game over the last 20+ years by the SFA, WRT the national team alone?

Now the blazered buffoons are reduced to ‘scavenging amongst the sofa cushions’ looking for any contributions towards buying or developing a wholly unfit for purpose Athletics Stadium.

And they can't seem to manage to complete the deal in a competent manner either…


View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:26 pm - Feb 2, 2019

3 penalties for TRFC within 55 minutes, with one missed.

Ref is one Andrew Dallas.


Of course, they could have been 3 'stonewallers', but I'll wait to see the highlights.

Addressing WHY refs are held in such low regard by most SPL teams fans' could be a useful starting point for the SFA.

Before even looking at their actual performances…

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on4:56 pm - Feb 2, 2019

StevieBC 2nd February 2019 at 16:26


3 penalties for TRFC within 55 minutes, with one missed.

Ref is one Andrew Dallas.


Another in the 80th minute it seems.

Thoughts on that from a well know Rangers site.

"Call me paranoid, but I wouldnt be surprised if this was deliberate. Give Rangers a ridiculous amount of decisions in a game they were always going to win so we cant complain about any other decisions as the argument can just be “Yous got 4 penalties in one game, blah blah”


So either Dallas Jnr on his own or in concert with others has decided to give Rangers 4 penalties as a prelude to shafting them on other occasions. Yes that makes sense.

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on5:10 pm - Feb 2, 2019

I can’t remember 4 penalties being awarded in any senior game before. Only 1 goal from open play wouldn’t really help with the goal difference. It will no doubt be explained away on Clyde SSB. 
A new world record?

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on5:31 pm - Feb 2, 2019

Stevie G just on Clyde SSB claiming there should have been a 5th penalty. As a justification for the other 4 I don’t think that will work. 

View Comment

shugPosted on6:09 pm - Feb 2, 2019

Steven Gerrard:
"I've been challenging these guys at Ibrox all season and eh, fair play to the guy, I've got a reaction, he's taken his chance.
Everyone's talking about his age, 36 years old, can he still do the job for Rangers? But I thought Andrew Dallas had a superb match."

It's advantage to Andrew Dallas as he moves ahead of John Beaton in the running for the Rangers Player of the Season Award


View Comment

StevieBCPosted on7:00 pm - Feb 2, 2019

Having played for footy teams for c.20 years, I don't think I ever saw a team being awarded 4 penalties: and at the juvenile end of the spectrum you did get some blatant 'homer' refs.


Watching footy on TV – and attending games – for 40+ years – I can't recall one team being awarded 4 penalties within a 90 minutes game – or ever, at all.


I'm guessing most Bampots have similar memories.


But, guess we're just paranoid…   

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on7:06 pm - Feb 2, 2019

Just in and just heard, MOTM Andrew Dallas for his 4 penalties.
Is this true? and if it is the pressure must be right on now.
Oh and did ST Mirren want an ibrox thing to be in scottish football back in 2012.
you reap what you sow, hell mend you.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on7:20 pm - Feb 2, 2019

It is sometimes interesting to consider how other people think about a situation, what their view is regarding how they are treated and to juxtapose it with one's own.

This is lifted from what I believe to be Rangers' biggest fans forum and is from one of its more frequent posters. I have not changed the format, it really does come as one big word brick.


The Rangers Supporters Action Group.

Myself and a few others @Dapre plan to create a Rangers SAS. RANGERS SUPPORTERS AGAINST SECTARIANISM. A pressure group to ensure parity on the application of the laws against football Supporters. For instance, singing about murdering huns, glorifying Proscribed Sectarian Terrorist organisations etc. is all illegal at a football match. Rangers SAS would also be against the illegal BBC boycott, that stems from the BBC Pacific Quay CFC sectarian employment/recruitment policy. We list the songs that we Rangers sing with the correct words We highlight how these songs are NOT sectarian in content, however accept that they may offend certain sensitive souls We then confirm we don't give a collective fúck about these permanently offended We list the NBM and certain politician bias We highlight the lies and sectarian nature of individual reporters and editorial staff (record and BBC CFC watch out)… with detailed evidence We leave in all the sweary words?I'm not sure that linking any 'action group' to the Club would have any useful value and in fact may take the group's focus off the target. The overt racism and sectarianism is perpetually directed towards us (Rangers Supporters) and us alone. We are disparate from our current Board and this is obviously their collective preference, to keep us at a useful but semi-distant length from any decision making that goes on at our Club. We need to start to bite back. My preference is that we form a pressure group, to exert our will on the Club whilst, unfettered by corporate protocol (such as Club 1872), we go after in full on attack mode, our enemies. This mob they are talking about creating is for discrimination that does not exist. There is NO SUCH THING as anti Irish racism. Nor is anti Catholic sectarianism a major issue. What is a major issue is the persecution of Loyal Rangers supporters, so lets do something to counter this mob. Strict Liability is coming. A month or so back I was debating with other posters the merits of starting up a Rangers Pressure Group. The "Rangers Supporters Against Sectarianism!" or Rangers SAS. Fellow Bears volunteered to assist and on that thread I made some suggestions for a draft Constitution. The initial phase of the strategic plan would be to proclaim The Rangers SAS formation as a registered charity. It's aim would be to defend our proud heritage and to seek out and attack our detractors by highlighting their hatred and exposing their skewed sectarian bias. We list the songs that we Rangers Supporters proudly sing with the correct words. Follow Follow, The Blue Sea of IBROX , Derry's Walls, Father's Advice, The Sash and Build My Gallows to name but a few. We produce and distribute a 'Rangers Supporters against Sectarianism Song Book'. This will detail the correct words with no add-ons whatsoever. We highlight how these songs are NOT sectarian in content, they are traditional songs some of which are proudly loyalist. We acknowledge that they offend republicans that hate the country they live in, however we make no apology to the permanently offended. When we have established to the world that our house is in order we begin a second strategic phase. We detail the clear agenda of organisations such as NBM by highlighting their complete lack of action against the terrorist lovers in the East End and their historical bias against Rangers Supporters.We highlight the weekly pro-IRA and anti-Protestant songbook from our enemies across the city. Exposing the distastefully sick songs and graffiti they pollute our town with when referencing the tragedy that was The Ibrox Disaster. All this and not one comment from NBM. We show the world that we have to share a city with those that refuse to adhere to a simple minutes silence to honour our war dead and their repugnant annual refusal to publicly support The Poppy Appeal.We provide the press with evidence of political bias, highlighting the likes of the bigot Dornan and his previous references to Rangers Supporters as h#ns.We ask the difficult questions of our politicians and our judiciary, for example: what action was taken (either by their club or the courts) against the celtc supporters that staged two 'mock executions' at Parkhead over a year ago? These supporters engaged in a public display of threatening sectarian behaviour that was intended to incite public disorder. What punishment did they receive, was it comparable to a Rangers supporter being jailed for singing a song?We highlight the lies and sectarian nature of individual reporters and certain publications editorial staff (i.e. Hamilton in the Record and Mcglaughlin at the BBC etc.) by providing detailed evidence of their lies and biasWe expose the previous behaviour of FARE, such as when they provided names and addresses of complainants directly to Celtc FC. We highlight that organisations links to Celtc supporters and the anti Rangers views of their UK staff. One of their wives even appears on a video singing anti British songs allegedly.We reveal to the country that the official Celtc FC Supporters representative publicly stated he wished more protestants had been killed in the Titanic. The poster @Maude managed to get NBM's Dave Scott to admit that Celtic's supporters chief, Joe O'Rourke's comment about the Titanic builders drowning was "sectarian". Maude still has the letter and, surprise surprise, O'Rourke is still in position at Parkhead and is pestering the SFA to strip our licence issued years ago. Another prominent celtc supporters representive employed at Glasgow University regularly broadcasts on various social media platforms her support for a proscribed terrorist organisation.For those that say ignore them, don't listen, don't read them, I say no. That's why we are where we are today – because of our inertia. For those that say, this is the Club's responsibility, I also disagree – our continued inaction (as the strongest supporter group in the country) will be our downfall. Actually I'm not sure that linking any 'pressure/action group' to the Club would have any useful value and may inadvertently take the group's focus off the targets. This overt racism and sectarianism is perpetually directed towards us (Rangers Supporters) and us alone. We remain disparate from any decision making that goes on at our Club and that leaves us free to attack our enemies head on. It would also mean we don't need to seek the Club's validation and we remain independent and able to start to bite back. In fact, my preference would be that we form this pressure group to exert 'our will' on the Club whilst unfettered by corporate protocol (such as the constitutional rules that govern Club 1872), we remain free to begin straight away in 'full on attack mode'. Our enemies have control of the press. Mcglennan, the head of The SFA, also oversees the media in the employ of Dermot Desmond. Shifty McGifty is a man who has admitted 'I hate those bastards' when discussing the Rangers Support and we sit idly waiting for Dave King to defend us. No. It's no longer acceptable to turn the other cheek. . The fight belongs to us. WE defend ourselves. The relentless dehuminising of you, me, our families and the demonising of our Club has to stop. Our Board can't take this fight on entirely, they are battling to reinstate the Club's worldwide brand. We have to help them fight back in this decade long war that's been waged against us, who could possibly be better as allies than The SAS

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on7:32 pm - Feb 2, 2019


Oran Kearney might be joining Stevie Clark on the SFA naughty step.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on9:39 pm - Feb 2, 2019

Shirley, even if all 4 penalties were good calls, and as refs' performances have come in for flak, especially this season…


To gauge performance you would think that there would be reasonable tolerance limits set, based on statistical analysis, above which a thorough review is automatically instigated.


– if >x yellow cards shown in a game [might already exist?]

– if >y red cards shown in a game [might already exist?]

– if >z penalties awarded in a game

– if >a penalties awarded for one team in a game

– if >b offside decisions given in a game

– if >c freekicks awarded in a game

– if >d disallowed goals in a game



Outlier results in many / most organisations would prompt a review.

I'm guessing the SFA doesn't apply real world scenarios to refereeing performances…?

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on10:28 pm - Feb 2, 2019

Homunculus 2nd February 2019 at 19:20
………..With words like
Action Group.
Terrorist organisations.
off the target.
full on attack mode.

SAS formation .
we begin a second strategic phase.
honour our war dead.
‘mock executions’
free to attack our enemies head on.
‘full on attack mode’. Our enemies
The fight belongs to us. WE defend ourselves.
fight back in this decade long war that’s been waged against us
This guy has spent too long playing call of Duty on his x-Box

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on10:41 pm - Feb 2, 2019

Cluster One 2nd February 2019 at 22:28

I think someone (possibly a trained professional) may have to sit down with him and explain that what he is talking about is a game of football. 

One concern however is the question, does he have children. 

View Comment

fishnishPosted on11:55 pm - Feb 2, 2019

From a dispassionate pov, 3 of the 4 Dallas penalties were unworthy: 2 outside the box, 1 Morelos CHOOSES to fall over an immobile foot upon which someone was standing.

Such an increasing amount of poor refereeing/honest mistakenly becomes demoralising.  

As is the simplistic nonsense spouted by Cluster one at 19.06 above.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on8:14 am - Feb 3, 2019

Leaving aside any talk of bias (and that can't be ruled out), there needs to be a serious facing up to of the nepotism which is allowing Referees as poor as Andrew Dallas to have an influence on the league with his appalling decision making. Does anyone seriously believe he would be anywhere near Grade 1 status if it wasn't for his Father? His Father of course only became a great Referee in the eyes of the media after being famously hit by a coin thrown by some clown at a Celtic v Rangers game, which he was refereeing in a dreadful manner. That aside people are entitled to also ask why the Lanarkshire Referees Association has such an influence on who makes it and who doesn't, and if it is true that over 80% of Grade 1 officials are indeed Rangers fans then this country has a deep rooted problem which requires root and branch reform. Such a situation simply can't be a mere co-incidence.

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on11:13 am - Feb 3, 2019

fishnish 2nd February 2019 at 23:55 As is the simplistic nonsense spouted by Cluster one at 19.06 above. ……………. I will take that as a complimentheart

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on12:24 pm - Feb 3, 2019


This is exciting. Hopefully a no holds barred free and frank discussion of yesterday’s big talking point. I can’t wait.

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on12:35 pm - Feb 3, 2019

Not sure where all the thumbs down for Homunculus @19.20 yesterday came from. As he made clear it was a direct lift from the supporters website demonstrating a world view which is deeply entrenched.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on1:50 pm - Feb 3, 2019

I'm thinking there could be another referees' related 'summit' on the horizon?


Mibbees this time at Hampden.

Tea and coffee served…perhaps also sherry for the SFA attendees.

In addition to biccies, perhaps an assortment of tapas-like nibbles and and a range of cakes?


…suppose the challenge for the blazered buffoons will be identifying who can be trusted to create this complex catering order, right first time…

But it could be another nice wee chat with the SFA.


[And after yesterday's penalty spree, I bet Steve Clarke is feeling rather vindicated that he chose to wash his hair instead on the evening of the 'summit' last month.]


View Comment

StevieBCPosted on3:31 pm - Feb 3, 2019

Plagiarized from the interweb;


The last time an Ibrox club received this many penalties at home… they were liquidated by HMRC…

View Comment

gunnerbPosted on3:58 pm - Feb 3, 2019

Ex Ludo 3rd February 2019 at 12:35


Not sure where all the thumbs down for Homunculus @19.20 yesterday came from. As he made clear it was a direct lift from the supporters website demonstrating a world view which is deeply entrenched.



These kind of posts can be confusing for the thumber.I prefer to think in this case that the disapproval was directed to the opinion of the source and not to the poster who highlighted it.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on7:34 pm - Feb 3, 2019

I wonder if the Compliance Officer will be busy just now selecting her panel of impartial referees to judge whether or not Jermaine Defoe should be offered a two game ban for simulation leading to the award of a penalty.

In other games today Sergio Aguero gets a perfect hat trick with goals from a header, right foot and left arm.

Roll on VAR.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on10:17 pm - Feb 3, 2019

easyJambo 3rd February 2019 at 19:34

I wonder if the Compliance Officer will be busy just now selecting her panel of impartial referees to judge whether or not Jermaine Defoe should be offered a two game ban for simulation leading to the award of a penalty.


The media wagons have already been circled to protect Defoe. There will be no case against him. He was just 'anticipating contact and got straight back up'. 

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on12:05 am - Feb 4, 2019

Wonder what odds Ladbrokes would have given for 4 penalties being awarded to an SPL team?

If you could get a quote: 200/1, 500/1… ?


Would a punter NOW be able to place a similar bet on TRFC in future with Ladbrokes?

I'm guessing they simply wouldn't accept such a bet, as being 'unsafe'?

The farcical SFA / refs’ performances will inevitably be rubbing off on the SPFL sponsors, IMO.


Whatever happens, [probably nothing], the SFA and SPFL continue to make Scottish football extremely unattractive to 'decent' sponsors.

If they manage to scare off the bookies, what's left?

More booze, more junk food, and mibbees vaping and loan sharks…?

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on6:46 am - Feb 4, 2019

upthehoops 3rd February 2019 at 22:17

'..'anticipating contact and got straight back up'

Is that a direct quote from someone, uth, and if so, was he called out for the eejit he shows himself to be?

If whoever it was means what I think he meant he should be ridiculed for that comment as much as ever Bryson was for his lunatic pronouncement (that let LNS off a hook) that 'ineligibility' is NOT  ineligibility until it is discovered, so that all the time someone was ineligible he really was not ineligible!

Daft ba.t.rds both!

And may they some day be appropriately punished ( their brass necks mean that , like brute animals, they can feel no embarrassment or shame ) in some domain or other for their contribution to sports cheating.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:18 am - Feb 4, 2019

John Clark 4th February 2019 at 06:46


The general theme from hacks on Twitter etc and from what I've read online from the mainstream is Defoe was not claiming for a penalty. In other words no fuss will be made because they don't want to risk a two match ban for him. For what it's worth I think it’s also clear the last penalty was a dive into the box by Candeias but he can't be called out either it seems. It's a real conundrum for the media because they clearly see the aberrations that occurred, but the benefactors make it much harder for them to demand retribution. 

I see Kenny Macintyre from the BBC on Twitter bumping his gums about discussing it all on Sportsound tonight. For anyone who listens (I won't be one), be prepared to be treated like an illiterate moron, possibly by an ex-Referee, rather than going for the nepotism which allows such an incompetent Referee as Andrew Dallas to wrongly influence proceedings the way he regularly does. It would have been so much easier for them had another team been awarded four penalties at the weekend, because they could then discuss it properly. Instead the wagons will be circled as always. 


View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on8:24 am - Feb 4, 2019

The BBC are certainly building up their penalty “debate” scheduled for this evening as one of their internet highlights segments invites the viewers to judge the merits of Mr Dallas’s decision making during the match on Saturday. I would be amazed if anyone on the programme demurs from the party line though. 

I occassionaly have a read through the JJ  site and I know he’s not everyone’s cup of tea but he has maintained from the start of the season that t’Rangers players are being coached to fall down at every opportunity during games because the management team at Ibrox noted very early on that a lot of 50/50 decisions were going their way. Impossible to prove either way of course but the incredulity in Jonathan Sutherland’s voice as he reacted to the penalty decisions in his match commentary is telling.



View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on8:42 am - Feb 4, 2019

Ex Ludo 4th February @ 08:24


Even allowing for my bias I think it is clear that Rangers players go down very easily, much like England players do because they are strong at set pieces into the box. Whether it's because Gerrard thinks they get 50/50 calls or whether he told them to do it from the outset is another matter. I realise all teams have some players who go down easily but many are booked for simulation. Morelos for example can dive throughout a game but is rarely punished. Then again he is rarely punished for anything.

View Comment

mungoboyPosted on9:44 am - Feb 4, 2019

Ludo & Hoops

re your thoughts that the Boys in Blue seem to hit the deck rather a lot and whether they are being coached in this skill, if you go on YouTube and do a search for ‘Steven Gerrard Dives’ you’ll find an interesting compilation of incidents involving Mr G. 

Seems he made a career out of it. 

Now, remind me, who is their coach again?????

View Comment

DarkbeforedawnPosted on9:49 am - Feb 4, 2019

Another week of dreadful refereeing performances I see! An incredible four penalties in one game, and the most obvious stone wall penalty is the only one Dallas doesn't give smiley. First one was a penalty, second was a dive, third was a foul outside the box, fourth was a dive outside the box! How a referee can get so many big decisions wrong is embarassing. This was off the back of the Cowdenbeath game where Rangers should have been awarded two penalties yet the referree gives a dodgy penalty to Cowdenbeath! And how Celtic never got a penalty for the foul on Eduardo is also beyond me. So in those three games the men in black managed to one of 9 big decisions correct! I would say 4 of those wrong decisions wen't Rangers way, 4 went against us so I don't agree with the conspiracy theories, jut a sheer ineptitude yet again of our refs in Scotland, and the lack of accountability! It's time for foreign referees.

View Comment

ulyanovaPosted on10:09 am - Feb 4, 2019

Defoe may not have appealed for a penalty but neither did Jamie Walker in August 2016. I seem to recall Hearts unsuccessfully challenging a 2 match ban from the compliance officer on that basis.

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on10:41 am - Feb 4, 2019

Darkbeforedawn 4th February 2019 at 09:49

      Another week of dreadful refereeing performances I see!


    Why foreign refs DBD?……I doubt you say that because Scotsmen are not to be trusted?…I assume you relate to incompetence, rather than bias, so how can it be that incompetents can be promoted beyond their ability?…Is it really the case that a country of 5 mill, steeped in fitba' history, cannot produce a handful of competent refs?…………..Baloney !

     The referees are satisfying the work requirements of their employers. ….That is what needs changed….These hand selected referees, are doing the job they have been hand selected for…..If there is a problem, it lies with the selectors, and the selection process.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on11:10 am - Feb 4, 2019

"Social unrest" triggered by Scottish Refs.

As the season progresses with no obvious improvement to refereeing standards, there is a real risk that an 'unusual' refereeing decision could result in fans invading the pitch to vent their anger and frustration.

This applies to games affecting the title AND relegation or play off positions.

The fans are more informed today and more tuned in to refereeing performances.

Any remaining goodwill or leeway given towards SPL refs, exited the pitch earlier this season, IMO.

The SFA inaction is simply creating a perfect storm for several 'powderkeg games' being lined up through to the end of the season.

Hope I'm wrong though…

View Comment

DarkbeforedawnPosted on11:29 am - Feb 4, 2019

CO, I am just not convinced we have the quality of referees required for the game. It may be the training, or the nepotism that means referee's are in positions because of who their family are. But regardless, I know the state of refereeing the world over is poor, but the ineptitude in Scotland is beyond anything I've seen anywhere else. I know people will argue that refereeing 'evens itself out' over a season, and whilst I would agree to an extent (there have probably on reflection been an equal number of decisions gone against my team as has gone for them this season) but that doesn't take away from how many games have been adversely impacted by these bad decisions.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:55 am - Feb 4, 2019

ulyanova 4th February 2019 at 10:09 Defoe may not have appealed for a penalty but neither did Jamie Walker in August 2016. I seem to recall Hearts unsuccessfully challenging a 2 match ban from the compliance officer on that basis.



That was my first thought on seeing the incident and the SMSM reaction to it. Both very similar incidents in how they came about and the results.


On all the penalties, regardless of their validity, Dallas seemed very (overly?) keen to point to the spot. All that was missing, I felt, was the fist pump.


On the 'was it in, was it out' issues, if there is ever any doubt it is very unusual for a ref not to err on the side of caution and to give the benefit to the defence, even in one such incident, but to find match officials to so readily point to the spot twice when it was, at best, marginal, beggars belief. That penalty number four, number bloody four, should not incur such caution from the match officials is particularly strange!What referee wouldn't have a thought, 'can I really give another penalty?' before seeking the safety to his reputation (I know, I know) of a direct free kick at the edge of the box?


Again a referee is happy to do his best for TRFC with little natural thought for his own benefit and reputation. Though perhaps he/they are actually thinking of their own benefit and reputation – amongst their ane folk!


They really are getting a lot of decisions, on the field and off, going their way. Now I'm not going to suggest it's a sign of favouritism, or even fear, but it really can't be anything else!

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:55 am - Feb 4, 2019

upthehoops 4th February 2019 at 07:18

'..and from what I've read online from the mainstream is Defoe was not claiming for a penalty.'

So, from now on, a diver can dive and , provided he himself doe not claim ( whatever about his teammates and/or his support in the crowd) the award of a penalty by an incompetent( unforgiveable ) or partisan ( morally, ethically and possibly criminal) referee would stand!

Now, that's a recipe for disaster , a diving cheat's charter in times of necessity or as and when his coach orders that it be followed.

( And what would you make of  any player who, anticipating that he might be tackled and fearing the possibility of physical contact,  opted to remove himself from any risk by taking a theatrical dive?)

To what absurd insults to our intelligence and to Truth these guys subject us!

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on12:12 pm - Feb 4, 2019


Statistics of course can be interpreted in many ways and decisions even themselves out over the course of the season as the saying goes. The link above  would suggest otherwise and the importance of penalties being given or not can affect the outcome of league contest. Even by a single goal.

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on12:22 pm - Feb 4, 2019


Stevie Clarke speaking out again. The lone voice in the wilderness that is Scottish football. 

View Comment

SmugasPosted on12:47 pm - Feb 4, 2019

I’ll actually give Defoe a partial benefit of the doubt here.  He does anticipate the contact and he does go down just as he equally readily bounces back up again knowing full well it’s not even a foul.  The bit he didn’t foresee and can’t really control was the (aye) readiness of the obviously star struck Dallas pointing to the spot.


But im quite sure even he would then have expected when the next 50:50 penalty came that he would err on the side of caution.  He will learn.

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on1:33 pm - Feb 4, 2019

View Comment

Comments are closed.