Over the past couple of years, we have built a healthy, vibrant and influential community which recognises the need to counter the corporate propaganda spouted by the mainstream media on behalf of the football authorities.
The media have, not entirely but in the main, been hostage to the patronage of those in charge of the club/media links, and to the narrow demographic of their readership. Despite a continuing rejection of the media’s position by that readership (in terms of year on year slump in sales) there is an obstinate refusal to see what is by now inevitable – the death of the print media. The lamb metaphor in fact ironically moving to the slaughter.
The football authorities in Scotland, once the country that gave the world the beautiful game, are rigid with fear that their own world will fall apart – because they are wedded to the idea that only one football match actually matters. To that end they will do whatever it takes to ensure that it continues. They have long since dispensed with the notion that football is an interdependent industry, and incredibly, even those who are not participants in that match follow like sheep towards the abattoir.
The argument is no longer that one club cheated and got away with it. The debate that we need to have is one about what is paramount in the eyes of the clubs and the media . Is it the inegrity of sporting endeavour, or box-office?
For out part, independent sites like this have accelerated the print media’s demise, and there have been temporary successes in persuading the clubs to uphold the spirit of sport. However our role has up to now been to cast a spotlight on the inaccuracies, inconsistencies and downright lies that routinely pass for news. News that is imagined up by PR agencies and dutifully copied by the lazy pretend-journalists who betray no thought whatsoever during the process.
Despite our successes, it really is not enough. We have the means at our disposal to do more, but do more we need to change ourselves, because the authorities sure as hell aren’t gonna.
We need to provide meaningful insight into the game that removes the Old Firm prism from the light path. We need to provide news that has covered all of the angles. We need to entertain, inform and energise fans of sport and all clubs.
We need to do that from a wholly independent perspective. None of this refusing to tell the truth about club allegiances. There is no reason why intelligent men and women can’t be objective in spite of their own allegiances (although the corollary absolutely holds true). Our experience of the MSM in this country is that the lack of arms-length principles in the media has corrupted it to such an extent that they barely recognise truth and objectivity. We need to be firm on those arms-length principles.
In order to do that we have put together a plan (with enough room to manoeuvre if required) as follows;
We will rebrand and re-launch as the Independent Sports Monitor. We have acquired the domains isMonitor.co.uk and IndependentSportsMonitor.co.uk, and those will be the main urls after the re-launch, hopefully later in the summer.
The change in name reflects the reality of our current debate which is not always confined to Scotland or football. It will also give us the option in future of applying the success of our model to other sports and jurisdictions through partner sites and blogs. This should also help in our efforts to raise funds in the future. However any expansion outwith the domain of Scottish football is some time away, and will depend on the success we have with the core model.
Our mission statement will be;
- ISM will seek to build a community of sports fans whose overarching aim is the integrity of competition in the sport.
- ISM will, without favour, seek to find objective truths on the conduct and administration of sport. We will avoid building relationships with individuals or organisations which would bring us into conflict with that.
- ISM will provide a platform for the views of ALL fans, and guarantee that those views will be heard in a mutually respectful environment.
- ISM will also endeavour to inform and entertain members on a wide range of topics related to our shared love of sport.
- ISM will seek to represent the views of sports fans to sporting authorities and hold the authorities to account.
We have estimated our (modest) costs to expand our role as per recent discussions. The expanded role will take the form of a new Internet Radio Channel where we hope to provide 24/7 content by the end of the year. It will also see a greater news role where we will engage directly with clubs and authorities to seek answers to our questions directly. And we will seek to contact the best fan sites across Scotland with a view to showcasing their content.
We have identified individuals who we want to work (initially on a part time basis) towards our objectives, we have identified premises where we want to conduct our business, and we hope to move into those premises during this summer.
To finance these plans there are a couple of stages;
- Initially (as soon as possible) we need to pay accommodation and hosting costs for the first year. To do so, we hope to appeal to the community itself. Our aim is to raise around £5000 by the end of August.
- There are salary costs (around £15,000) attached to our first year plan, but these have been underwritten by Big Pink, and equipment costs (est. £3000). These will be reimbursed if the advertising campaign we recently started bears any fruit (we will not know about that for a few months).
- It will not be too discouraging if we make losses in the first couple of years, so if necessary we will seek crowd-funding to finance our plans if the resources of the community itself prove inadequate to smooth a path to break-even point.
Our first year may be a perilous hand-to-mouth existence, but I am certain the journey will be an exciting and enjoyable one. We will also need to search our community resources for contacts at clubs; players, officials, ex-players, local journalists etc. Please get in touch if you have any in at your club.
We also hope to tap into the expertise of our community for advice, comment and analysis of developments, and we will be looking for any aspiring presenters, journalists, sound and video editors, graphic designers (and lots of others) to help us find our feet. Any offers of assistance would be gratefully accepted.
We mustn’t lose sight of why we are doing this. It is because we love our sport, because we want to be able to continue to call it that, and because the disconnect we find in Scottish football, that of the conflicting interests of the fans and the money men, will never be addressed as long as the fans are hopelessly split.
The ultimate goal is to allow sport – not our individual clubs – to triumph over the greed and corporate troglodyte-ism of those people who run it. I am confident that we as a community desperately want to be able to make a difference. That is why I am confident we can achieve our aim of becoming a significant player in the game.
dj7 says:
Member: (6 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 1:39 pm
** asking the key questions **
Does the BBC pay its “match of the day” presenters more than to cover Scottish Football ? That would be a real scandal… time to dig?
_______________________________________________
No need to dig. They pay one presenter more than they do for Scottish football.
Do the regular monthly subscriptions count towards the £5000 end-of-August target or just the one-off donations?
In any case I donated £50 on Tuesday and increased my monthly subscription from £5 to £10. Fellow Celtic season ticket holders should remember they are still saving £50 since Rangers were relegated three divisions (sic).
Allyjambo says:
July 16, 2015 at 11:02 am
wottpi says:
July 16, 2015 at 11:12 am
________________________________________________________
Interesting post on RSL site from a Rangers fan he seems to have most of his faculties in working order. Goes by the handle JohnJames@sitonfence on Twitter and is engaged in some sort of civil war type grudgematch with Craig Houston of SoS, perhaps because he can see beyond a lamb dominated diet. He commits the capital crime in the eyes of some of letting Celtic fans follow his Twitter acccount
Turns out there were 5 million options, in addition to the 3 proferred by SoS, that King could have used to put money into the club/holding company (and still could):
john james (@sitonfence) says:
Craig Houston’s latest FB post is indicative of how those who slavishly follow King are prepared to skew the narrative. According to Mr Houston, the former board are responsible for the loss of our NOMAD and subsequent delisting.
The facts of the matter are that WH Ireland were not prepared to vouch for someone with 41 criminal convictions for tax evasion. No authorized agent of a UK exchange will represent any company with a criminal chairman. These are the facts. When it became apparent that our shareholders had taken leave of their senses and that a criminal’s hostile takeover had been successful, WH Ireland resigned.
There have been various attempts to hold the executives in WH Ireland to public scrutiny. Incredibly, those willing to denigrate WH Ireland were not prepared to scrutinize King. When WH Ireland issued a statement to LSE AIM, the facts about King and his systemic tax evasion were made known to every financial institution in the UK. If there had been anything inaccurate in this statement, King could have sued for libel. Given that he spent 13 years and circa £50M on spurious, litigious actions, why did he choose not to challenge this statement? There are three reasons:
1 This statement was accurate
2. Libel is a rich man’s sport, and as I have painstakingly pointed out King has a net liquidity of circa £3.8M.
3. The sordid maze of King’s tax evasion would be held up to public scrutiny.
King, via his expensive PR advisers Level 5, issued a statement that he had planned to sack WH Ireland with a view to replacing them with another. He stated that he was reviewing two or so, and that one would be appointed in a matter of days. He lied. No NOMAD was prepared to vouch for KIng. They had all read WH Ireland’s excoriation of the worst criminal spiv to darken our door.
King then backtracked and issued a statement that the company, RIFC, should have a NOMAD, as he chose to await the results of the mythical ‘fit and proper’ test. Yet another lie. The only impediment to King becoming chairman of a listed company was his convictions. There will be no UK listing in the future Mr Houston. The new board have had more than four months to address this problem. King is the monkey on their backs.
Mr Houston’s next claim is that King cannot invest as he requires a listing to do so. This is absolute nonsense. If King was as wealthy, or as Rangers minded as Mr Houston believes, he could pay SD £5M and then proceed to use the assets as security on any loans. This option was pointed out to everyone in SD’s statement prior to the EGM.
Mr Houston. King is not a philanthropist. His £20M investment in Murray Sports Ltd was an exercise in tax evasion.
There is nothing radical in my comments. These are the facts that have not been varnished and polished by level 5. I invite Mr Houston to comment on the widely-held view that Rangers have been invoiced for the activities of Level 5 prior to the criminal taking office.
From my perspective Mr Houston, by backing King’s boycott, you have painted yourself into a corner. Everyone is now aware that your new emperor has no clothes and that our new manager has been restricted to out of contract players. If King had been true to his word, a mere £15M would have paid off our debts and would have provided £10M to Mr Warburton to sign Scottish Premiership quality players.
The cold facts of the matter is that King does not have £5M and that he would have to remortgage one or more of his three properties to raise that amount. The Scorpions estimated his property portfolio, in his wife’s name, to be worth £7M. King was forced to provide a bank guarantee for that amount or lose the roofs over his family’s head.
King started to believe his own publicity. Having lied that he was an accountant who qualified in Scotland, King saw an opportunity to pursue the pension and treasury funds in South Africa. With his fellow fake accountant, Greg Morris, he engaged in a pump & dump strategy that enriched him. He was worth £93M and change in 1999 (court transcripts), with a Falcon Jet, 3 properties and a couple of fast cars.
The fact that he was arrested on two occasions on a slew of charges, including racketeering, did not bother him as he always had the money to make bail. Surrendering his passport was his only inconvenience.
So what part of King’s past, and how it impacts Rangers, do you not understand Mr Houston? Have you been so seduced by your 15 minutes of fame that you now have one eye on a board blazer? This is how King buys silence. He attempted to neutralize any prospective RST dissent with the ill-fated appointment of Chris Graham. John Gilligan, who adds nothing to the board, is in position due to his involvement with Rangers First. James Blair will not be King’s last RST appointment.
If you were successful, would you propose Mr Chugg to our board? If we can accept King, surely Mr Chugg’s past can be swept under the carpet?
This appears to be the same argument employed by the wealthy and ennobled of the 19th Century that only the wealthy and ennobled should run the country.
😕
The key, I think, is not to be annoyed by this nonsense, but instead to enjoy the daily dose of laughable old squit that passes for sports journalism in the SMSM.
Is John James Jim Spence? We must be told.
The sweary site is in level five self parodying mode aven beyond what I have seen before Has anyone seen Idiocracy?
I see John Clarke has become something of a celebrity over on the den
Hope your ears are burning
Don’t get me started on the whole doing down of lower league teams. I must admit to having a vested interest, given that I’m a follower of the Bully Wee, so I’d probably rage against anyone that denigrated the ‘diddies’.
That Gannon piece actually smacks of a very similar article that I always hark back to – the one in the Sunday Mail during the summer of 2012, where Craig Burley wrote (or at least, put his name to) a column that made myself, and I’m sure anyone that read it, very, very angry indeed.
The whole premise was ‘Who the hell do these diddy clubs think they are, having the temerity to decide the fate of the mighty Rangers?’. It was written in the run up to the vote by the SFL clubs to allow Rangers a place in the lowest division, and decreed that Rangers were Scottish football, so to let these comparative amateurs, who only paid part-time wages, decide on their fate was an insult. In fact not only that, these clubs, because they weren’t fit to be on the same pitch as Rangers, should have stood aside and let them walk all the way into the top division.
What he failed to mention was that these ‘diddies’ played a massively important role in their local communities, had very little debt, and all cut their cloth according to their material. I’m sure they could have overspent to the tune of multi-millions, bankrupting not only themselves, but other businesses unfortunate enough to be creditors, in the pursuit of glory. They chose not to. They chose to be responsible, to pay players within their means, and to ensure that the communities in which they are rooted would have a team for decades to come…… and for this, Burley decreed that they weren’t worth the dirt on Rangers’ boots.
Now when I see or hear Burley on summariser duties, I don’t think ‘There’s the guy that scored the equaliser against Norway and sparked the greatest burst of joy I’ve ever witnessed in a large group of people’, I think ‘There’s that f****** w*****’.
AmFearLiathMòr says:
Member: (69 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 5:42 pm
And it is an example of why these people, like Craig Burley, don’t understand, and so they fear, the concept of integrity!
So often, when I listen to ex-players commenting on football, I am gobsmacked at their lack of knowledge of the game they made a fortune from playing. So, it’s hardly surprising that when asked to comment on something they have never previously needed to give thought to, their knowledge and understanding is limited to what they’ve read in the sports pages of the Record and the Sun.
Craig Burley will never have given thought to the communities in which the people who watch the game, and so provide/create the riches he has made, come from. Through his sheltered existence, as a pampered sportsman, his community is the big time Charlies that only know of ‘the big clubs’, and regardless of principles as simple as right and wrong, all that matters, to him, are the biggest of the big.
Dare I suggest, on the day he leaves the BBC; compare and contrast with Jim Spence!
scapaflow says:
Member: (1283 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 5:34 pm
‘..I see John Clarke has become something of a celebrity over on the den
Hope your ears are burning :mrgreen:’
_____
I haven’t looked.
It must have been something I said,but I can’t think of anything radically different from what I’ve been saying for the past few years. 😀
John Clark says:
Member: (999 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 7:18 pm
Its your new career as a court reporter they appear to have take the hump about
You need to put some lamb on your sandwiches
Jim Spence, blog
They pay me to watch football and talk football. That’s some people’s idea of Christmas every day. I can’t deny it’s mine too. I view the football world through a different lens from some journalists, because I live and work in Dundee. The Old Firm are interesting, but so was my breakfast this morning. There is a whole lot more on the Scottish football menu than the big two. From the SPL to the juniors, the game offers lots of dishes, and they all get my taste buds going.
Could not have put it better Jim.
scapaflow says:
Member: (1284 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 7:35 pm
‘Its your new career as a court reporter they appear to have take the hump about
You need to put some lamb on your sandwiches
___________
Oh, that’s all right then.As long as their Lordships don’t complain.
But isn’t it interesting that we ( the SFM three)were the only laymen present, apart from Revenue staff?
No sign of any of ‘The Rangers’ fans going to the bother of trying to get things at first hand.
A bit off topic,will let the mods decide.
Permanent workers at Sports Direct look set to enjoy a windfall of £37m worth of shares when an employee scheme matures later this year.
The scheme was set up in 2011 and will distribute around five million shares to an estimated 2,000 staff members in September.
At the close of the stock markets on Wednesday, the shares were worth around £37m – meaning each employee is likely to get a bonus of more than £18,000.
Another payout is due to take place in September 2017.
But the shares will only be available to permanent staff – those on zero-hours contracts are not eligible, meaning some 15,000 employees will miss out.
The company, which was founded by Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley, has posted pre-tax profits of £300m for the year to 26 April – an increase of 21% and higher than the £293m forecast.
Sales also grew 4.7% to £2.832bn, despite the company claiming it was a “challenging” year of trading.
But the retailer also revised down its 2015/16 core earning targets for its staff share scheme from £480m to £420m, pointing to a failure to expand as much as expected in the past year.
The company saw a 0.4% decrease in its market share price as a result.
Chief executive Dave Forsey said: “The group has delivered another solid set of results in spite of challenging trading conditions including the adverse impact on performance during the period of England’s early departure from the FIFA World Cup in Brazil and unseasonably mild weather during autumn, reducing footfall.”
He said he was “delighted” to be able to reward “the commitment and hard work” of staff.
In response to criticism over the company’s use of zero-hours contracts and the exclusion of these workers from its share schemes, chairman Keith Hellawell said: “Much of the comment regarding the group’s use of zero-hour contracts has been unfounded and inaccurate.
“We comply fully with all legal requirements which relate to casual workers, including sick pay, holiday pay, and freedom to gain other employment.
“Casual workers also participate in general incentive schemes.”
—————————–
Looks like the boycott’s are not working
John Clark says:
Member: (1000 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 7:49 pm
scapaflow says:
Member: (1284 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 7:35 pm
‘Its your new career as a court reporter they appear to have take the hump about
You need to put some lamb on your sandwiches
___________
Oh, that’s all right then.As long as their Lordships don’t complain.
But isn’t it interesting that we ( the SFM three)were the only laymen present, apart from Revenue staff?
No sign of any of ‘The Rangers’ fans going to the bother of trying to get things at first hand.
===========================================================
John
Yes exactly but of course they don’t care now its the “old club”. Nothing to do with the “new” club. Formed in 2012.
Oh my what have I said?
Can someone re assemble this to show its realy realy Pretendygers.
BTW Brilliant Dons. ICT get stuck in.
ianagain says:
July 16, 2015 at 8:46 pm
“BTW Brilliant Dons.”
+++++++++++++++++++
I don’t know about brilliant. Aberdeen only had one shot on goal in the first half and scored from it. They had 30-odd percent of the possession and Rijeka have looked the better side. The 2nd Aberdeen goal was half a yard offside and the replay showed the linesman had a perfect sight of it. It was right on the 18yd line so no way he should have missed it!
Football is a funny old game. Great news Aberdeen are getting a result which helps Scottish football and would love to see them get to the group stages. Could easily have gone the other way tonight.
As I write this final paragraph Aberdeen have scored a 3rd, and it was a cracker! It is a funny old game for sure!
Brilliant Dons 3-0
Co efficient now chaps?
I generally read the comments be “John James” on the RSL blog with a modicum of interest, both because of his apparent knowledge of the current circumstances down by Edmiston Drive and his openly critical stance on all things King.
However, when he posts something that is unequivocally untrue you have to question both his sources and his aims.
He latest post suggests that 30,000 STs will bring in a modest £5.4M after deduction of VAT. That would mean an average £180 per ST.
Even in their first season (2012/13) TRFC earned a net £210 per ST, with sales of 38,228 bringing in a net £8.027M. There have been two intervening price rises, 18% last season and 5% for this season, meaning that the average take this season will be approaching £265. If 30,000 STs are sold, then it will earn the club a net £7.95M, so on a par with their first season.
————————
When the club’s full year’s accounts are published we should see the extent of the black hole that King and the three bears bought into (well maybe not King 😈 ). The figures for staff costs in particular should be at their nadir.
I don’t think anyone should be surprised at the austerity and savage cuts that are currently being made. “First Team” staff costs were recorded as £6.5M in season 2013/14 and shouldn’t really have been any higher last season. Removing the 11 out of contract First Team squad members out the equation should save the club at least £4M a year (based on a conservative average of £7,000 a week wages). Further savings to the business will be made once gardening duties are completed around the end of this year.
As far as I’m aware, only four replacements have been recruited thus far. I don’t know what terms they will be on, but it does look like at least the wages of the footballing side will be at a sustainable level, if not the overall cost structure.
I get the feeling that, if this approach is repeated across the business then costs may surprisingly be brought under control sooner rather than later. The downside of course is that the results on the playing side may not reach the standards expected by the loyal ursine faithful, so the medium term prognosis remains bleak.
“He latest post suggests that 30,000 STs will bring in a modest £5.4M after deduction of VAT. That would mean an average £180 per ST.”
naw, 30k tickets at £225, less 20% VAT = 5.4M
I guess you have to factor in the number of concession tickets into that equation….that will severely hamper the ave ticket price.
Pretty sure from last accounts the ave st price was about £225 – so, i’d expect it to be 5% higher this year as they stated (4% after VAT!)
ianagain says: July 16, 2015 at 9:34 pm
Brilliant Dons 3-0
Co efficient now chaps?
=======================
St Johnstone earned Scotland 0.25 coefficient points from their 1 win / 1 loss
Aberdeen have earned 0.5 from their 1 win and two draws so far
Celtic have earned 0.25 from their 1 win so far.
ICT haven’t earned anything yet.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says: July 16, 2015 at 10:22 pm
Pretty sure from last accounts the ave st price was about £225 – so, i’d expect it to be 5% higher this year as they stated (4% after VAT!)
=======================
The last full year accounts published were for 2013/14 with a quoted income of £214 per ST. Prices went up by an average 18% last season so the average for 2014/15 should have been £245-£250. With a 5% increase this season they should be looking at £260-£265.
I see the subject of Gate Sharing raised it’s head again in the last few days….great topic.
I seem to remember one of the Jambo boys doing a great analysis of this back in RTC days
I think we need to establish what we are hoping to achieve by going down a “gate sharing” route.
It’s easy to say we are spreading/equalising the income for clubs and levelling the playing field, but it’s not that straight forward
Some clubs like St J, Hibs, Celtic (and increasingly many others in the modern scottish game) are run responsibly and will pay off debts, balance the books, improve infrastructure whilst some other clubs are absolute basket cases and will blow it on buying any passing player who will prop them up for a few months (yes Sevco, you!!!)
So, guidance needs to be put in place
I suggest we want clubs to target the following criteria (for example only – i haven’t thought this through entirely)
1. Financial stability – adopting some form of FFP model where clubs must, on the whole, break even – something like break even over a 3 season period – allowing an overspend one year to be balanced out in subsequent years, strict controls on wage to turnover ratios, maybe even a wage cap based on turnover
2. Player development – clubs should be encouraged to develop their own youth players…ideally scottish players, but in reality it doesn’t matter, if they can scout, sign and develop a 14-17 year old Bulgarian who comes through into the 1st team, then fine. But, the pathway should be for youngsters coming through the ranks and into the 1st team rather than the previously flawed models of trying to buy players in (which is a much rarer event outwith Celtic these days) or paying over the jobs for journeymen players looking for a payday.
Following on from that though, for the benefit of the domestic game, i think clubs should also be rewarded for playing domestic reared players – i.e. keeping talent developed in scotland in scotland.
3. Finally, clubs should be rewarded based on their on field performance.
now that we have established some loose criteria for what we need clubs to do to be successful and therefore rewarded with real cash money, we need to find that money.
The subject of gate sharing is a hard one for fans to swallow, but it is undeniable that the scottish game was mush more competitive when gates were shared.
So, lets not start there, lets start with UEFA money!
Celtic get approx £20M for reaching the CL group stages. Alone, that far outstrips the income of many clubs, so why not “tax” it.
Lets take 50% of all UEFA monies and through it into a “prie pot” (Europa monies will go into the prize pot too, i’m not suggesting just Celtic fund this)
Then, lets put a “tax” on transfers – say 10% of all transfer fees received goes into the prize pot.
Then onto the subject of “gate sharing” Instead of splitting the gate 50/50 with the opponent on the day, I suggest we start more modestly. in the 1st year, lets take 10% of the ticket income for the year (ST’s or walk up) and throw that into the prize pot as well. it can be ramped up to 50% over a number of seasons.
Into the prize pot goes all the other commercial income generated by the league – TV, sponsorship deals etc.
that then gives us a big pot of cash
That can then be divided up based on the earlier criteria – run a tight financial ship, bring through a lot of youngsters and play a lot of scottish players and do well in the league and you could get more than the team that wins the league but had huge debts, no youth players and full of foreigners.
Over a period of 10 years, this would hugely level the playing field in Scotland, we’d see much more competition, we should see more stability at clubs as they manage finances better and we should hopefully see a lot more youngsters come through – and reach the quality that is needed to improve the quality of the game overall.
Anyway, that is my thoughts on the subject (and i guess that is why my name was not mentioned in the list of posters that were missed!!)
y4rmy says:
Member: (100 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 3:21 pm
Not when they are paying guys 50 bucks a week. They have their place in the pecking order and in their communities.
But not at the thick end.
This appears to be the same argument employed by the wealthy and ennobled of the 19th Century that only the wealthy and ennobled should run the country.
?
The key, I think, is not to be annoyed by this nonsense, but instead to enjoy the daily dose of laughable old squit that passes for sports journalism in the SMSM
=============================================
Excellent y4army.
I never thought that I’d read “old squit” on a Scottish football site.
Next thing, you’ll be saying that Scottish football governance’s playing field is “on the huh”. 😀
easyJambo says:
Member: (705 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 9:48 pm
However accurate John James’ posts are, or aren’t, and whatever his motives, I think his general message is an important one for the bears to heed. A sensible supporter would, at least, investigate JJ’s claims before attaching himself to King’s bandwagon, but, sadly, very few seem to be doing so.
The actual problem with that DR article is its promoting Rangers to be on the SPFL board.
Well as far as im concerned a club run by a criminal (albeit from abroad) doesn’t get a place on that board.
This could be the next battle, get on to your execs at your clubs and make it very clear its NOT ON.
Gate sharing is never going to happen while we still have the 11-1 voting system.
Wage caps are also a bad idea as there are easy ways around them such as giving players wives a fake job and paying her a load of money. There are also more dubious ways of paying players, such as EBTs 😆
How about a luxury tax, which iirc they have in baseball. Let’s have a limit on wages of 60% of turnover which would be free from the luxury tax. Any wages over this limit would be taxed, at say 50%. The money raised from the luxury tax would then be split between clubs which kept their wage bills below 60% of turnover. Clubs could still spend as much as they liked on wages but other clubs would benefit from any splurges.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Member: (6 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 10:46 pm
I could have written much the same myself. Totally agree on concept, safeguards and aims.
Was there ever an answer to MA’s question about the terms of the 3B’s(and maybe DCK’S) loans ? It they were convertible to shares, surely his would be as well, notwithstanding the SFA’s reluctance to allow him to own more than 10% .Would he still have control of the assets, given that the loan wasn’t repaid ?As for gate sharing, there may have been enough corrupt bookkeeping in the era that it happened to prevent it happening again ? Some teams kept money in biscuit tins , would you believe .
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Member: (6 comments)
To add. I would not call it a “tax” on CL money. Bad karma.
I’d call it reward money under the same reward principle that pays out according to league placing.
Without the other clubs the title winner could not be in top position, so think of the CL income as the League’s rather than a club’s.
Now THAT principle carried to its logical conclusion would equalise the leagues throughout Europe.
Hats off to Aberdeen for a really great result last night. They have surely done enough to get through the tie, and as an added bonus take the seeded place of their opponents.
Amazingly Aberdeen achieved this result against the backdrop of a ‘broken’ Scottish game and a top league bereft of any credibility in the absence of Rangers!
First of all 😀 😀 Fabulous result last night for AFC. Lets hope they don’t contrive to throw it away in the return leg. Hopefully a decent crowd will turn up for that.
ICT ain’t out yet, but alas they now have one helluva difficult task in front of them. That said I reckon playing away from home will suit them better – fingers firmly crossed.
One wee comment on:
“beatipacificiscotia says:
Member: (31 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 9:34 pm
ianagain says:
July 16, 2015 at 8:46 pm
“BTW Brilliant Dons.”
+++++++++++++++++++
I don’t know about brilliant. Aberdeen only had one shot on goal in the first half and scored from it. They had 30-odd percent of the possession and Rijeka have looked the better side. The 2nd Aberdeen goal was half a yard offside and the replay showed the linesman had a perfect sight of it. It was right on the 18yd line so no way he should have missed it!”
——————————————————————
Disappointed me that – Is that not just what Euro football is? Away legs for as long as I can remember have always been something like that. 0-3 against a team that Valencia couldn’t beat in Croatia last year, who were unbeaten in 12 euro matches at home, have suffered only 2 defeats in 52 games at home, a team who have reached the Europa leagues stages for the last 3 seasons..
Oh and all this in 35 degree heat..
(the 1st half was interrupted for a “cooling” break because of the heat. One wag on an AFC supporters website wondered if that would be needed in the return leg at Pittodrie, to which came the reply “Aye, a hot chocolate break maybe” – well I found it funny!)
0-1 could be luck, 0-2 could be very lucky, 0-3? That must be all of AFC’s luck gone for the next 5 seasons then! We also had a goal chopped for offside which by all accounts was more marginal that the dodgy goal we did get, and Rooney missed one he would normally be expected to tuck away in the last couple of minutes. Lots of reporting of the home support applauding AFC from the pitch at the end too.
Yes, of course we had luck on our side, but that shouldn’t detract from the fact that it was one helluva performance. Fingers crossed (for fellow sheepies at least) that we draw massive confidence from this and kick on to bigger and better things.
Good stuff NTHM (btw, I see you on twitter from time to time like many other once familar names). A lot of very well thought out suggestions for a more equitable distribution of resources.
A while back I posted a little about the way the Danish Superliga distributes it’s actual pot of prize money based on its TV deal. I should maybe throw it in again with a bit more detail. Figures are based on a couple seasons ago. Excuse the awkward English it’s translated from an article in tipsbladet.dk
An annual 260 million kroner (ca. £26m) pool was/is spread out over 4 different ‘parameters’. In reality, pool one could be bigger, imo, but is perhaps limited to retrict promoted teams from just creaming the cash for one year on a minimum budget.
Anyway, the 260m kroner is distributed like this:
(i) A solidarity or joint pool at about 30 percent of the total amount (clubs receive this equal payment by the 11th round of matches)
(ii) A placement pool of 30 percent of the total (after 11, 22, 33 round of matches)
(iii) A performance pool of about 20 percent of the total
(iv) A media market allocation of about 20 percent of the amount
so….
(i) The joint pool – 78 million kroner:
The 12 clubs regardless of league position receive about 78 million kroner to be shared, giving each club 6.5 million (this payment is made to clubs quite early in the season)
(ii) Placement-pool – 78 million kroner:
This 30 percent of funds is awarded by each club’s ranking after 11, 22 and 33. rounds of play. So, put simply, this 78m kroner is divided into 3 lots of about 26m kroner and each distributed based on league position after 11th, 22nd and 33rd rounds. All to play for throughout the season. The actual distribution among the 12 teams looks a bit like this in actual cash terms:
1. 20% = 5.2
2. 15% = 3.9
3. 12% = 3.12
4. 10% = 2.6
5. 9% = 2.34
6. 8% = 2.08
7. 7% = 1.82
8. 6% = 1.56
9. 5% = 1.3
10. 4% = 1.04
11.2,5% = 650,000
12 1.5% = 390,000
(iii) Performance pool: 52 million kroner
This part of the allocation of television money applies to won matches. The number of won matches directly determines how large a share of this pot each of the 12 clubs get. This pool is usually closely related to placement-pool since the number of victories is usually directly related to league position.
Like the placement pool the performance pool rewards top positions and especially a lot of victories. Effectively no meaningless matches, though, since a run of end-of-season wins for a lowly placed team can mean a lot financially even though mid-table, play-offs or relegation look inevitable. On the other hand, low-ambition mediocrity is not rewarded.
(iv) Media Market pool – 52 million kroner
This money is distributed by what choice a match is on television.
Viasat select first (match Sunday night – Match of the Week), while Canal 9 (or Canal 8) have no other choice, TV3Sport have third and fourth choices, while Canal 9 and TV3Sport respectively take care of battle number five and six.
Sounds a bit complicated, but the more of the first selected matches a club takes part in through the season the greater share of the media market pool the club gets. This tends to be an advantage for bigger clubs, who, even though down on their luck, will often get prime coverage because of status, crowds, past history, etc. In spite of that, this pool is only a quarter of the total available.
I don’t know all the nuts and bolts of how distribution is made in Scotland. Mind you, a £26m TV deal isn’t bad for a small country like Denmark. And this was a few years ago. But the country is not competing with Germany to the south, as Scotland does with Sky, BT & the EPL. Danish TV fitba subscriptions go to Danish football not to some monolithic TV empire that then throws crumbs back. If Denmark was a north German province things might be a bit different.
Some clubs do go over budget and I like NTHM’s suggestions with regard to rewarding living within your means. The Danish club Brøndby have been running at a sizable loss for quite some and the actual debt burden of other top clubs (especially FCK) is not good. It’s unfair on other clubs living within a sensible budget. That said, I doubt any club would be allowed to operate in the league system by living on month-by-month loans with no apparent financial plan or formal oversight.
tayred says:
Member: (148 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 9:17 am
I wonder if the ‘journalists’ of the SMSM will see it as important a result as the fabulous 3-2 defeat that TRFC gained at Tottenham’s training ground? I’d imagine that, if they apply the same criteria to their judgement of Aberdeen’s performance as they did to TRFC’s, then they’ll be telling us the Dons are going to win the Europa League and leave Celtic trailing as they romp to a Premiership title.
I think there is more chance of Aberdeen achieving both, than there is of them receiving such gushing praise from the SMSM 🙄
Well done to the Dons, great result of the kind most teams would delight in in Europe!
Tayred
Great result,I don’t buy morning papers but I would imagine /hope that our smsm are gushing in their reporting of this fantastic away result for Sottish Football helping us climb out of this Armegedon we are in,we are in one ,are we not?
Are you in the Petrofac then?
And to be clear that’s another dig at the media, not RFC*
Is it just my lack of Twitter smarts, or has The Clumpany disappeared from Twitter? If he has left, I do hope it’s by his own choice and not through any ‘we demand to know his name, we have a right to know’ type behaviour.
Hopefully it’s no more than some technical problem and he’s back clumping very soon.
Bryce Curdy says:
Member: (118 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 2:02 pm
Do the regular monthly subscriptions count towards the £5000 end-of-August target or just the one-off donations?
In any case I donated £50 on Tuesday and increased my monthly subscription from £5 to £10. Fellow Celtic season ticket holders should remember they are still saving £50 since Rangers were relegated three divisions (sic).
Bryce,
Regular donations are not included in the running total, but new ones like yours are included. Rationale is we are trying to raise an extra £5k. Thanks for the bump incidentally 🙂
Tris
28 3
============
Thanks for the reminder. Modest donation made.
You’d have thought Tayred, but this caught my eye inn the Daily Record:
Here’s some numbers for teams who’ve been in the top league to help Mr Mann.
% Change in average crowds 2011-12 to 2014-15
Celtic -12%
Aberdeen 44%
Dundee United 8%
Dundee 65%
St Johnstone 10%
Motherwell -28%
Kilmarnock -26%
St Mirren -14%
Partick 61%
Hamilton 63%
Ross County 23%
Inverness -7%
Rangers -29%
Hearts 19%
Hibernian 3%
Falkirk 45%
QOTS 84%
Dunfermline -47%
AllyjamboAllyjambo says:
Member: (1081 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 11:17 pm
easyJambo says:
Member: (705 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 9:48 pm
However accurate John James’ posts are, or aren’t, and whatever his motives, I think his general message is an important one for the bears to heed. A sensible supporter would, at least, investigate JJ’s claims before attaching himself to King’s bandwagon, but, sadly, very few seem to be doing so.
34 0 Rate This
—————-
There was similar acceptance of Brian Dempsey as the “fans choice” when there was the campaign to remove the Kelly’s and Whyte’s from control at Celtic.
In those days , printed fanzines and word of mouth were the only community tools of influence. Dempsey came from an old school political family who knew how to get the media on board. Particularly the Daily Record. I told anyone who would listen that Dempsey would be a disaster for Celtic, and amongst private box holders and executive lounge members , there was a fair amount of skepticism about Dempsey. Business people knew he didn’t have much money, and many were wary of his populist approach and claims.
However the majority of the fanbase, just saw somebody with a big car, who said what they wanted to hear and appeared to be in a different league to them financially. Thankfully Fergus knew exactly when to jettison Dempsey, and saw through his attempts at personal enrichment .
There is much more publicly available information on King . The reality is that most Rangers fans don’t want to know. They are thoroughly fed up of crooks, chancers and cheats running their club. They are desperate for stability. Having hung their collective hat on King, it’s too painful and embarassing for them to contemplate that he is merely the next emporer with no clothes.
Should the fanbase investigate King and put their support on hold ? Yes , of course they should , but when even those with the means to invest aren’t doing that , then the ordinary fan will take comfort and are then easy prey to level 5 spin.
The reason they don’t want to investigate is twofold in my view . Firstly the call to investigate King is mostly coming from fans of other clubs, and in the eyes of the Rangers support that makes it tainted and prejudice.
Secondly , they see no alternative to King. They are desperate , and when you are desperate good judgement is suspended. The problem is when you are in the last chance saloon and King is the man dispensing drinks, then the chances are it’s already too late
AllyjamboAllyjambo says:
Member: (1083 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 9:56 am
Is it just my lack of Twitter smarts, or has The Clumpany disappeared from Twitter? If he has left, I do hope it’s by his own choice and not through any ‘we demand to know his name, we have a right to know’ type behaviour.
Hopefully it’s no more than some technical problem and he’s back clumping very soon.
———
There was an oblique tweet last night about going away for a while. No doubt off on his Clumpany hols 🙂
Btw, I tried listening to the Sportsound podcast. The proper Dons & ICT coverage came more than halfway in. Still, starting with ‘Stuart McCall after Rangers’ was captivating stuff on such an important night of Euro football :irony:
AmFearLiathMòr says:
Member: (69 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 5:42 pm
neepheid says:
Member: (681 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 1:50 pm
Don’t get me started on the whole doing down of lower league teams. I must admit to having a vested interest, given that I’m a follower of the Bully Wee, so I’d probably rage against anyone that denigrated the ‘diddies’.
That Gannon piece actually smacks of a very similar article that I always hark back to – the one in the Sunday Mail during the summer of 2012, where Craig Burley wrote (or at least, put his name to) a column that made myself, and I’m sure anyone that read it, very, very angry indeed.
The whole premise was ‘Who the hell do these diddy clubs think they are, having the temerity to decide the fate of the mighty Rangers?’. It was written in the run up to the vote by the SFL clubs to allow Rangers a place in the lowest division, and decreed that Rangers were Scottish football, so to let these comparative amateurs, who only paid part-time wages, decide on their fate was an insult. In fact not only that, these clubs, because they weren’t fit to be on the same pitch as Rangers, should have stood aside and let them walk all the way into the top division.
What he failed to mention was that these ‘diddies’ played a massively important role in their local communities, had very little debt, and all cut their cloth according to their material. I’m sure they could have overspent to the tune of multi-millions, bankrupting not only themselves, but other businesses unfortunate enough to be creditors, in the pursuit of glory. They chose not to. They chose to be responsible, to pay players within their means, and to ensure that the communities in which they are rooted would have a team for decades to come…… and for this, Burley decreed that they weren’t worth the dirt on Rangers’ boots.
Now when I see or hear Burley on summariser duties, I don’t think ‘There’s the guy that scored the equaliser against Norway and sparked the greatest burst of joy I’ve ever witnessed in a large group of people’, I think ‘There’s that f****** w*****’.
141 1 Rate This
=====================
Well said.
The smaller clubs, whether semi pro, amateur or just the more modest professional clubs do no harm to anyone else in the game and surely can only add value as long as they live within their means and within the rules of the game.
By living within their means they all find their own level so the notion they somehow handicap professional clubs is really a load of tosh. This is IMO motivated by an agenda to promote the perceived established order and denigrate everyone else to do so.
What I don’t understand is why some of these clubs do not work together to make their case publicly and stand up for themselves. Perhaps it is too much to ask but I’d love to see them find a way to make sure their voice is heard (form private club and hire their own PR??) and some real world honesty is spoken for once instead of the fairy land nonsense the press usually print about Scottish Football.
Barcabhoy.
I very rarely disagree with any of your posts, and always look forward to reading your work.
However I find your comments re Brian Dempsey a bit over the top.
At the time the fans appreciated what he was trying to do, and he was able to get great press at his attempts to rid us of the previous dynasty. Yes I would agree that though by normal standards he was wealthy, he didn’t appear to have access to the funds that Fergus had.
Any comparison to the glib and shameless one is in my opinion not appropriate.
For all his faults, history will remember Brian Dempsey fondly for all the good work he did.
More than what can be said for King.
Danish Pastry says:
Blog Writer: (1307 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 10:13 am
‘.. the Sportsound podcast. The proper Dons & ICT coverage came more than halfway in. Still, starting with ‘Stuart McCall after Rangers’ was captivating stuff on such an important night of Euro football :irony:’
________
In my view,DP, that was BBC Radio Scotland at its pernicious worst, continuing to try to keep TRFC in the forefront.
They clearly think that, because McCall has a role in the National team set-up, the rest of us won’t complain when they use him as vehicle for bigging up the new club,even when the focus for the vast majority of Scottish club fans was the European scene.
No question but there is a right dog-in-the-manger, spoil-it-for-everybody attitude in that sports department, on an occasion which Liam MacLeod reminded us was a great night for the Highlands
I don’t think it’s McIntyre’s personal doing, but he certainly seems to relish every opportunity that his producers/editor provide to bring anything to do with TRFC into the programme.
The proposed review of the BBC’s Royal Charter should, I hope, provide an opportunity for the perceived bias and misreporting of the colonial branch to be to be looked at.
Further to the disappearence of @TheClumpany he may well have been head-hunted by The Evening Times as a headline writer 😀 Among current top sports headlines are 3 x Warbs stories, with the Dons Euro triumph well down the page…
Barcabhoy says:
Member: (192 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 10:03 am
Totally agree with what you say. We all find it hard to accept the opposite of what we want to believe in most things in life, but when it comes to our football clubs, we cling to even the most desperate notions.
The thing about the bears, though, is that King is the third man, since Murray, to promise them fantastic, and ludicrous, success, and, despite the obvious character defects, his triumphal rhetoric is greeted with almost total unquestioning acceptance. In the meantime, the only man to offer sensible leadership is treated with contempt and multiple threats to his business enterprises.
It may already be too late, but if I were a bear, I’d want to suss out King and get rid of him if what John James claims is true (I’m sure most of it, if not all, is) while Ashley is still in the wings. I suspect the longer King is around, the more Ashley will become alienated and bored with the situation, and when King eventually scuttles off, Big Mike will be more likely to take his plunder and settle into the less troublesome business of stiffing competitors.
Whatever happens, and however long it takes, Ashley might be happy to hang around and pick up the pieces to lead the club to a sustainable, if unspectacular, future; but if it was my club, I wouldn’t want to risk backing a promising, but unreliable horse, with dodgy legs, while chasing off the strong, reliable plodder that is guaranteed to get me across the line.
One thing I’ve come to realise about King is that he seems hell bent, not only on being the ‘Rangers Messiah’, but to alienate and chase off every other potential saviour not prepared to keep/install him as club chairman.
billyj1 says:
Member: (24 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 10:24 am
‘…For all his faults, history will remember Brian Dempsey fondly..’
_____
And perhaps his biggest fault was the wearing of the camel hair coat. 😀
( If there are any historians of fashion aboard the blog, I’d like to hear how a garment that was very much ‘U’ in the early sixties became the garment of choice of the flash Harrys on the race tracks and in second-hand-car dealerships!)
So its a possible Trip to Inverness for Us Hammers 😀
@ Danish I didn’t see the tweet you mentioned and can’t now because when I click on any reference to @theclumpany I’m told the account doesn’t exist. While you can hide (protect) tweets I am not aware you can hide accounts so it looks like the account is daectivated. The wordpress blog is still up though with two additions yesterday one of which highlights that he has an article published in Scotzine on the Jim Gannon furore
Barcabhoy says:
Member: (192 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 10:03 am
There was similar acceptance of Brian Dempsey as the “fans choice” when there was the campaign to remove the Kelly’s and Whyte’s from control at Celtic.
Thankfully Fergus knew exactly when to jettison Dempsey, and saw through his attempts at personal enrichment .
////////////////////////////////////////////////
While I agree with most of the post regards King it shouldn’t be forgotten the ”Fergus” made a serious amount of money from his 5 year stint at Celtic.
He reshaped Celtic and rebuilt the club but he wasn’t it purely for the love, he hadn’t set foot in Celtic park for something like 30odd ? years before taking over the club.
I’m sure if internet bampots had been about in those days we would have discovered a lot of jiggery pockery and back stabbing going on behind the scenes as people protected themselves and their investments.
blu says:
Member: (200 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 10:02 am
“Here’s some numbers for teams who’ve been in the top league to help Mr Mann.”
—————————–
Nice clear insightful analysis. I was hoping that you might have rounded it off by providing the aggregate attendance change across all clubs for the period given. I’d imagine, glancing at the numbers, that there would be little significant change.
The gate sharing debate (incepted by I think Tcup a day or two ago) is bubbling along nicely and has grown some arms and legs. I was thinking a wee spreadsheet with team attendances over the last decade or so might be a useful tool for those that wanted to plug in percentages and figure out what the impact of any particular scenario might be.
Since you already have some numbers to hand, is it possible to post a link to your source?
I might cobble something together for folk to play with.
blu says:
Member: (200 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 10:02 am
% Change in average crowds 2011-12 to 2014-15
Celtic -12%
Aberdeen 44%
Dundee United 8%
Dundee 65%
St Johnstone 10%
Motherwell -28%
Kilmarnock -26%
St Mirren -14%
Partick 61%
Hamilton 63%
Ross County 23%
Inverness -7%
Rangers -29%
Hearts 19%
Hibernian 3%
Falkirk 45%
QOTS 84%
Dunfermline -47%
=====================================
Can Blu’s superbly helpful analysis be placed in the Archive or a new repository for such factual information to aid any hard of thinking churnalist or football official before they again spout arrant nonsense on this particular subject?
Scottish Football needs a strong Aberdeen (gosh, a wee bit surprised at saying that!) and ICT (good luck in the second leg). And Arbroath, of course.
EDIT And capture the COT input too please! Our posts crossed in the ether.
Good Afternoon everybody , not been on lurking much past week or so because of work, could someone please point me in the direction of what John James has been saying about King…….Thanks in advance
ToC. See attached. I’ll DM you the Excel file.
Matty Roth says:
Member: (203 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 10:14 am
“The smaller clubs, whether semi pro, amateur or just the more modest professional clubs do no harm to anyone else in the game and surely can only add value as long as they live within their means and within the rules of the game.”
———————————-
I think it is easy for the powerful to underestimate the importance of the apparently powerless. Our perceptions seem to have a limited range that cuts us off from the potential for information overload.
Going big on metaphor: I came across something concerning cement a while back that surprised and interested me. Cement is a very fine powder which when combined with an aggregate like sand or sand and stones, will harden to form mortar or concrete. I always assumed there was some kind of chemical bonding involved, however if my perceptions were accurate then its actually a mechanical bond based on surface contact. The cement fragments are small enough to fill the gaps between the grains of sand and thus bind the mixture together by sheer virtue of the difference in size between the fragments.
This propensity is redolent throughout nature. A mighty oak withstands storms based on the root network that binds it to the earth. This network starts as weighty fibres but as it spreads becomes ever more tenuous tendrils. Nature has evolved the most effective manner of gathering nutrients from the soil and the resulting plant superstructure is precisely in balance with this root structure.
Indeed I suspect it is the most tenuous of tendrils where the most effective work is done since they will have the porosity that a strong anchoring root by necessity will lack.
The small clubs therefore provide sustenance to the footballing megalith. A kid might feel a bit overwhelmed at the prospect of walking up to the front door at Celtic Park and asking for a game. He is likely however to feel not at all self conscious about having a kick about in the streets or in the schools team or local youth club outfit. Even Craig Burley should be able to see the logic in this.
There is a great preponderance these days to stand back and admire the megaliths whilst having little disinclination to denigrate their roots that lie beneath our feet. Scale can be a very impressive thing. However if you want to keep a tree wee, stick it in a wee plant pot that restricts its root growth. It will eventually suffocate itself as its root network becomes the majority of the soil base it stands in.
The talk about taking a percentage of European prize money and putting it in a common pot appears attractive. However I think a plant needs some sunshine as well as water and nutrients. Providing a team with aspirations and giving them the wherewithall to achieve them probably invigorates the organism right down to its roots.
A farmer will monitor his crops over a lifetime and alter his husbandry in the light of experience and emerging events. There may not be straightforward formula that can be applied but you have to start somewhere in order to monitor progress.
Its probably why its so important to have strong ethics at the heart of an organisation. If over the long term distortions are allowed to take hold, their effects will multiply over time and their consequences can be severe.
When the policy makers absent themselves from their duties then others will take their place. Is SFM Scottish Football Governance in exile?
castofthousands, figures from a range of sources, including the SPFL reported attendances. This is a handy site: http://www.andysstats.co.uk/attend.asp?division=SP&season=201415
I see that ScottC has uploaded a table. The unsurprising summary is that Celtic and, even more so, Rangers have been hardest hit between 2011-12 and 2014-15.
roddybhoy says:
Member: (22 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 2:47 pm
——————————-
Here you are.
redlichtie says:
Member: (261 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 2:41 pm
“Can Blu’s superbly helpful analysis be placed in the Archive or a new repository for such factual information to aid any hard of thinking churnalist or football official before they again spout arrant nonsense on this particular subject?”
—————————–
I mentioned previously the possibility of having an SFM Wiki. Wiki’s are a kind of blog format where contributions are moderated and built into substantive articles. These might be useful for new blog entrants who would have the ability to read into a topic and be able to see the progress already made and make potentially more satisfying contributions.
I’ve never contributed to the best known of Wiki’s, Wikipedia but I use it all the time for reference. It has become a powerful and authentic information source. Perhaps if SFM hits its funding target and there is a quiet period in the office during the day an attendant mod could moderate some content onto a SFM Wiki. We could link up all the reference material that has come to light down through the ages. Posters could contribute into a static repository in addition to contributing to the rolling commentary. This might take the place of ‘threads’ and allow the conversation to weave an interesting pattern as it has always done and be able to draw on a palette of topics that have been built up and largely authenticated.
Here’s a link explaining Wiki’s, from of course Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1084 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 10:49 am
The Bears are in an impossible position.
They face a Faustian Bargain, the only “choice” they have is whether Mephistopheles is based in England or South Africa. (And, it is entirely possible that the English choice no longer exists).
Abandoning the carcass to the predators and starting again, is the rational, if unpalatable choice.
tykebhoy on July 17, 2015 at 12:33 pm
@ Danish I didn’t see the tweet you mentioned and can’t now because…
———-
Same thing happened a few months ago. He appears have taken the account offline. He reactivated it again last time with no apparent loss of tweets and data.
woodstein thanks
OT, well sort of, the “Old Firm divide” is something many are interested in. Here is a new article by Michael Rosie. Enjoy
http://t.co/mJXvxxbPLk
After extensive research I now concede defeat. How does one reply to a particular post? I see a general ‘post comment’ option, and a ‘view comment’ option but no ‘reply’ option. Self-evidently a first time poster.
easyJambo says:
Member: (705 comments)
July 16, 2015 at 9:48 pm
I generally read the comments be “John James” on the RSL blog with a modicum of interest, both because of his apparent knowledge of the current circumstances down by Edmiston Drive and his openly critical stance on all things King.
However, when he posts something that is unequivocally untrue you have to question both his sources and his aims.
He latest post suggests that 30,000 STs will bring in a modest £5.4M after deduction of VAT. That would mean an average £180 per ST.
Even in their first season (2012/13) TRFC earned a net £210 per ST, with sales of 38,228 bringing in a net £8.027M. There have been two intervening price rises, 18% last season and 5% for this season, meaning that the average take this season will be approaching £265. If 30,000 STs are sold, then it will earn the club a net £7.95M, so on a par with their first season.
================================
Don’t forget TRFC are paying a company to sell their SBs for them because they can’t handle debit & credit cards (merchant status?), so will lose about 10% (or perhaps more, due to their distressed state) in handling fees.
Jingso.Jimsie says:
Member: (61 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 4:42 pm
////////////////////////////////////////
Yes they may have sold 30k season tickets
But how many of them have been sold at full price?
There maybe a significant amount of concession/kids tickets included in the 30k total
Thanks Scottc and Blu.
Plenty to get my teeth into there.
scapaflow says:
Member: (1286 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 4:08 pm
“OT, well sort of, the “Old Firm divide” is something many are interested in.”
————————————
The article invites me to believe my perceptions are skewed. If I can get my ego out the way, even then I might struggle to entertain its findings.
Castofthousands says:
Member: (253 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 5:41 pm
Its certainly thought provoking. The current issue of Social Affairs is dedicated to the S issue
http://www.euppublishing.com/journal/scot
Fergus McCann said what he was going to do from the outset including the walking away with a bucket of money after five years part.
Sometimes daddy teams beat the big ones those days are remembered Clyde 2 ( going on 6 ) Celtic 1 is memorable. However, over the long run these are rare events that is why TRFC are so good in the Petrofac Cup…the only way to constantly fail in that is to be a bearer of diddiness is it not..l
Castofthousands says:
Member: (251 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 3:07 pm
‘..A mighty oak withstands storms based on the root network that binds it to the earth. This network starts as weighty fibres but as it spreads becomes ever more tenuous tendrils.’
________
This gives me a chance o go away off topic and express my(still!) amazement at what I heard a guy from Kew Gardens say on a radio prog some time ago, discussing the great storm of the 1980s (?) and the damage it did to some very old trees.
He said that very few trees, no matter their height or girth, had a root system deeper than about 33 cm! He also said that after that storm, they had come across a huge tree which had been vertically uprooted by the winds, but had dropped straight back into its position and carried on as before.
One lives and ( if one has an open mind) learns!
Cluster One says:
Member: (230 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 6:58 pm
Mann is a s big an idiot as the rest of the “If only Rangers were in the top flight, the stands would be full, the TV deal Golden and it would rain whisky” brigade.
Putting a Rangers into the Premier league, that is not ready, either on or off the field, is a recipe for failure.
Though it would be hugely entertaining, in a slow motion car crash sort of way
Scapa, a very valid point. None of these people seem to have considered that TRFC would most likely be fighting a relegation battle from the off.
You’d need a 24-28 club top division for them to have any breathing space.
If TRFC somehow got into the top league in the near future we really would see Armageddon.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Musing on a Friday night;
For a short period at the end of last season, the three Championship qualifiers, including the Ibrox club, were listed as playing in the Premiership Play-offs. They all returned after that short sojourn to the Championship.
Does that mean, at last, that TRFC are back where they belong? Or is it ‘in their rightful place’?
redlichtie says:
July 17, 2015 at 7:30 pm
You’d need a 24-28 club top division for them to have any breathing space.
————————————————————–
If TRFC don’t get promoted this time round, I suspect that proposals for a 24-28 club top division may only be a matter of time.
scapaflow says:
Member: (1288 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 7:09 pm
Cluster One says:
Member: (230 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 6:58 pm
Mann makes it clear that it is West of Scotland clubs who appear to be suffering . Now why would that be ?
Castofthousands says:
Member: (253 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 5:41 pm
scapaflow says:
Member: (1286 comments)
July 17, 2015 at 4:08 pm
“OT, well sort of, the “Old Firm divide” is something many are interested in.”
————————————
The article invites me to believe my perceptions are skewed. If I can get my ego out the way, even then I might struggle to entertain its findings.
_______________________________________________
Snap!!!
There are lies, damned lies and statistics.
Mark Twain
John Clark says:
July 17, 2015 at 6:31 pm
This gives me a chance o go away off topic and express my(still!) amazement at what I heard a guy from Kew Gardens say on a radio prog some time ago, discussing the great storm of the 1980s (?) and the damage it did to some very old trees.
He said that very few trees, no matter their height or girth, had a root system deeper than about 33 cm! He also said that after that storm, they had come across a huge tree which had been vertically uprooted by the winds, but had dropped straight back into its position and carried on as before.
One lives and ( if one has an open mind) learns!
…………………………………………………….
Now I may be laying myself open to all sorts of slings and arrows here, but, JC, I don’t think that most trees only have a root system of about 33 cm.(that seems awfu’ exact, by the way) below ground. Even for pine and fir trees growing on rocky hillsides, just over a foot below ground seems a bit slim. Established, deciduous trees go well down into the ground – not quite like icebergs in the sea, but well down. That’s where the term ‘tap root’ comes from.
On another topic, I agree entirely with your treatise on camel hair coats, and thoroughly enjoyed it.
I also sympathise regarding the rather rough and uncouth terms and phrases which came your way following your ‘exposure’ in the Den. They even had the temerity to suggest that you were probably unemployed and couldn’t think of anything better to do with yourself!
I am receiving a certain amount of flak myself on the Killie Forum Blog at the present. You will all be aware that I was not too keen on Killie taking on Mr. ‘Elbows’ (sorry, the man that fell on his sword for his team’s sake). I followed Killie on their pre-season tour of England, i.e., Shielfield Park and Berwick Rangers (the real article) and was shocked and stunned to see this very man in Killie colours.
Today I was even more shocked and stunned to see what the Killie Chairman had (apparently) said to a churnalist from the SMSM.
As a consequence, I made my feelings clear on the Killie Forum.
I had been considering buying a season ticket, although I don’t get to any home games, but I am now thinking about something more useful, like a chocolate teapot.
As you may imagine, my thoughts have not been well received by some, and a certain amount of invective has been flung my way – not quite at the same volume and temperature as JC received.
However, it prompts me to consider the amount of time which has gone by since Mr Whyte set the cat among the pigeons. For me, and for many posters on here, remembering the survey on age groups we did, it seems only like yesterday that Mr. Whyte was making his statement about Administration. However, for a good proportion of younger supporters of all ages, and all teams, those events probably smacks of something which happened well before the Civil War – and they’re not really interested anyway.
This makes it all the more important that we continue to make as much noise as possible about the deplorable way in which our game has been ‘administered’ over the past twenty to thirty years. That’s why I get so peeved at the amount of time some of our best minds spend in dealing with the next troll, and the next, etc.
I rest my case!