Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show?


English’s piece changes nothing, whereas the RTC blog changed substantially …

Comment on Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show? by john clarke.

English’s piece changes nothing, whereas the RTC blog changed substantially the view of thousands of us of the administration of Scottish Football, throwing plenty of light into dark corners, shaming the professional hacks who did not do so (out of whatever kind of self-interested motivation (lamb, anybody?).

The football authorities now know that by Jings they’ll have to amend their laws and rules and actually police them properly to prevent any club in the future, particularly any club with an unfortunate stigma attaching to it,acting the goat on the ‘fair play’ front.

The clubs themselves have found the moral courage to resist attempts to bludgeon them into obedience and compliance with policy lines that they did not think to be right.

Scottish football is all the better for it.

And of course, there are a few further little legal matters to be gone into.

john clarke Also Commented

Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show?
bogsdollox says:
Saturday, November 24, 2012 at 02:28
‘Keep up JC – I posted mine yesterday……’
I am truly sorry that I missed your analysis.’
I plead that ‘ I grow old, I grow old, I will wear my trousers rolled..’, and I’ll scroll back.

But I’m even more sorry if you are posting on any kind of basis of professional and/or personal antagonism to BRHT.

It matters not one hoot on this blog whether BRHT just missed becoming Lord President or whether he just missed being struck off ( like Baxendale- whatever- his- name), or whether he is/was a lawyer at all.

He posted like the rest of us.

His post has no more ‘authority’ than any other poster’s.

He knows that. We know that.You know that.

So, no need to ask him why he posted, or what his agenda might have been.

Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show?
bogsdollox says:
Friday, November 23, 2012 at 22:43
“I have been out of the court game for many years now and spend most of my time working away from what might be termed “Legal stuff”— so I am not holding myself out as any sort of expert at all and have no firm thoughts on how to interpret Ramsay and so on..”

So why post a legal analysis in the way you did? Are you familiar with the Ramsay principle and the taxes since.?”
Come, come, bogsdollox!

BRHT has no more need to justify his post than you or I.

He very clearly stated that he does not claim , any more than the rest of us do, to be posting as anything other than an intelligent, thinking person who carefully reads what other people have said, and gives his own reasoned response to, or view of, what they have said.

His reading of Tribunal decisions would naturally, given a legal background, be easier for him than for the rest of us.

His familiarity with the language of the law and the everyday working environment and culture of the law courts makes what he has to say of great interest to many.

His ‘legal analysis’ is exactly his.

It can be disagreed with.

You are allowed to present your own analysis.

So, why merely querulously ask somebody why he has posted, instead of posting your own analysis in rebuttal?

The floor is yours.

Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show?
midcalderan says:
Saturday, November 24, 2012 at 00:35
‘..Are you related to Henry Kissinger JC? …..’
Happily, no.

But what I would give to have that kind of wonderful, indescribable, compelling kind of voice!

He could ( still can I think) talk the same kind of sh-te as, say, Charlie Green flogging shares, but his voice, unlike Charlie’s Yorkshire fruit-market barra-boy’s, rumbled with ‘authority’ and ‘gravitas’.

Recent Comments by john clarke

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
My brother and I, auld men now that we are, meet occasionally for a pint or three.
We tend to pay homage to our late dad by visiting one of the pubs he used as a young man afore the war ( he lived in digs near Partick Cross) , or one of the pubs he used when we were kids during his working life at what  used to be Glasgow Corporation Tramways Parkhead depot,  or the pub he used in Tollcross in his retirement days.
So I feel for the patrons of what had been Annie Miller’s pub in Ropework lane.
If and when the new owners of the premises tart it up gaily as a feeder bar for their adjoining sauna, I expect that it will no longer be a ‘Rangers’ pub,a place of shared enjoyment of football memories and celebration of former days of glory.

Like the historic Rangers Football Club, Annie Miller’s is dead. Ceased trading in 2016. No longer exists as a ‘Rangers’ pub, any more than the Rangers Football Club of 1872 exists as a professional football club entitled to a place in Scottish Football.
That’s the reality.
There isn’t even a ‘Scottish Football Pubs Association’ prepared to create and propagate a lie  that ‘Annie Miller’s’ lives on, there have been no white or green knights/knaves rushing in to found ‘continuity Annie Miller’s’, no running-dog SMSM types betraying their avocation by propagating untruths……and.no convicted criminals begging, borrowing and making false promises about good times to come if only other folk will produce the readies…
Annie Miller’s is dead and gone.
Only a lie sustains TRFC Ltd.
And those who drank in Annie Miller’s know that.
And the evil men of the SMSM and the SFA know it, too.
May 2018 see them confounded, and their untruths exposed.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
FinlochDecember 30, 2017 at 20:42
‘…Craig took a Corinthian and undisciplined club going nowhere fast, rooted it into a previously ignored community and has achieved some incredible health and social goals deep into that community using football as glue.’
Beautifully expressed, Finloch.

Football as a glue of ‘community’

Of community trust,

of basic honesty,

of the  Corinthian spirit,

of sporting integrity….

and of all the virtues that the SFA has so spectacularly abandoned, in its determination to insist that Charles Green’s Sevcoscotland is entitled to call itself the Rangers of 1872

That such an incredibly monstrous perversion of truth of any kind, never mind sporting truth, is being, and has been for 5 years, propagated by our Football Governance body and supported by the SMSM is stark evidence of a deep, deep corruption at the heart of our sport, and, worse, at the very essence of our ‘free’ Press.

in this little country of ours.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
And since I’m talking to myself while all you guys and gals are snoring your heads off, can I just mention that in the local newspaper this morning there was a piece about school sports.

It seemed to be about the ‘pick’ of the best players.

I didn’t have time today to read the whole thing ( and it’s too late to disturb the household to go looking for the paper!) but it seemed to be related to the use by ‘soccer’ teams of the American  Football  concept of who gets to pick the best player in the ‘draft’.

I have only the haziest understanding of that concept.

But in so far as it might relate to attempts to create genuine ‘sporting’ , on-field, equality of talent, it must have something to recommend it.

Even the Americans realise that in order to make money out of sport,there has to be some concept of genuine ‘sporting competition’

Auldheid reminded us, quite movingly, of the joyous nature of our game as we all experienced it.
We all knew instinctively what was fair, and what wasn’t.
Remember how our street game teams were picked?

The two ‘captains’ tossed for first choice.Whichever won the toss would pick the ‘best’ player. The other guy would pick ‘the second best’ and so on.

And, if it appeared that there was an imbalance ,or if there was an odd number of players, then it would be agreed that a ‘John Clark’ would play the first half for one side to give them the extra man, and the second half for the other side, to try to be fair in the use of that useless lump!

( who, I may say, was actually quite good at lifting the wee ba’ from the street up onto the pavement, one hand on the lamp-post outside the Thomson’s house on Cuthelton Street, and bringing it to the goal at the lorry entrance to the Domestos depot ( formerly Donald Clarke’s steel kind of place, which in 1947 sirened One o’Clock,with the siren they used ‘during the war!’)

And it is these kinds of memories that fuel my contempt
contempt for the cheating bast.rd of a knight of the realm who killed the RFC of my day

contempt for the SFA who, like some referees,not only did not ‘see’ that cheating but went further and assisted in that cheating

And who continue to propagate the lie that the football club that cheated its way to death by Liquidation is somehow the same club as a five year old creation that they themselves have lied into existence.

And as for the the whole lot of the successive boards of either Sevco 5088, Sevcoscotland, The rangers football Club Ltd, RIFC plc  how can they be described otherwise than as  scavengers of carrion? Feeding as they do on the dead flesh of a once proud football club?

It gars me greet…
Quietly and solemnly, into my glass of “Goose IPA, 5.9%, made from hops from Idaho” ( And actually quite surprisingly pleasant, reminiscent of McEwan’s pale ale.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
It’s 11.43 pm in Scranton,PA,  and we have just come back from being wined and dined  in tremendously good company in a friends-of-the-son’s home.

I am therefore in a cheerful frame of mind. (Mind you, sitting in the back seat of the car I had one of those A9 moments of absolute fear, when the driver overtook another car on a blind bend, before I realised we were still on a dual carriageway!)….

For one reason or another, it suddenly strikes  me that I don’t actually know ( or remember) when it was that the concept of ‘transfer windows’ was introduced, or why it was introduced.

On the face of it, it’s as much of a restriction of ‘trade’ on ’employers’, as the pre-Bosman situation was on freedom of employment was on ‘workers'(players).

Is there a decently worked out rationale for the concept?

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
easyJamboDecember 27, 2017 at 17:49
‘..I think that the document will only be a restatement of the resolutions that were approved at the AGM (Resolutions 10 & 11).’
You’re perfectly right, of course, eJ: it was only the official recording  of the AGM resolutions.

I think I for one (in my general ignorance) tend to think that any plc of which a director has been taken to the Courts( in an unprecedented action by the Takeover Panel) would have every form or document that it submitted to Companies House rigorously examined, cross-checked, double-checked, treble checked ,even, in a way that ,for example, the SFA does not do with documents submitted to it by its trustworthy gentlemen members.

The Takeover Panel has a lot riding on how the Law stands in its approach to the Panel’s need for support in their regulation of rogues in the market-place.

So I tend to look at anything touching on RIFC plc that seems even a wee bit different as something worth exploring.

Largely tongue-in-cheek, of course: -we’re not likely ever to be told anything confidential by CH! But if they say something will appear, and then it doesn’t appear when promised, then it allows one to ask why. Keeps them on their toes!

And we know that when even the gentlemen of our free Press are not above behaving with less than complete honesty when it comes to TRFC Ltd/RIFC plc  there may (God forbid!) exist a ‘protective of companies’ mindset in CH, rather than a ‘get the baddies’ approach.

Who knows?

About the author