Les Says It is Time to Ask The Audience?


Saying the last couple of weeks has been colourful for Scottish Football would be an understatement.

We are now in a position where we have a Taskforce co-chaired by the heads of two clubs to look at what needs to be done in the Covid 19 landscape right now and into whatever future unfolds.

Representatives of the clubs first convened last Monday and Graham Tatters, Elgin City chairman told BBC Saturday Sportsound that the 2nd division has already agreed unanimously to back 3 leagues of 14 as their preferred option.

On the same show Iain McMenemy, Chairman of Stenhousemuir effectively told us among other things that nothing in Scottish Football is ever easy, and mentioned that he believed the fans should be involved in any process.

Around the same time a very welcome conversation was underway between Les Gray, Taskforce co-chair and Paul Goodwin of the SFSA with Les asking for and welcoming fan input.

Dave Allen Called Our Future Years Ago

His oft quoted “I wouldn’t be starting from here joke” is a remarkable insight into where we find ourselves.
Our game is on the cusp of internecine war following the confusing combination of events we’ve all see playing out.

The hastily convened Taskforce has co-chairs who have also been quoted in the MSM as having different agendas, one for an immediate solution and one for a long-term plan.
Nothing wrong with that, in fact brilliant, we need both because they are interrelated.
Collectively we have to ask not just how do we minimise the economic and social impacts of the pandemic but also how do we start to shape our game for a better future?

Both these needs are right nows and both are the remit of the current Taskforce.

Now is the Time to Circle Our Wagons

This unique, open-ended, revenue-winter hit our clubs unexpectedly and overnight.
It is already brutal and will get worse with no current exit plan and no future certainties.
We know Dave Cormack’s Aberdeen is currently burning £1M per month.
No club has Covid immunity and a world of salary reductions, deferrals furloughed staff, little in the coffers and no exit strategy or road map out is a stark reality.
It’s hard to imagine that footballers have become liabilities rather than assets in a blink of an eye.
But it’s not hard to foresee that the financial stress on our clubs will see casualties.
Never before have we needed inter and intra-club teamwork for the common good.
But not in Scottish Football where an internecine spat is about to flare big time.

Civil War Breaking Out?

The record will show the recent SPFL Good Friday vote got an 80% plus backing vote from the clubs but in reality became a farce as Dundee eventually changed their “casting” vote.
This was paralleled by the “whistleblower” outburst by Rangers interim chairman Douglas Park demanding immediate suspension of Neil Doncaster and Rod McKenzie and an independent inquiry that sort of happened but not to the satisfaction of some.
One week later it rages on in the media with words today like “damning evidence, serious concerns, lack of fair play, coercing and bullying” being the vocabulary fed to the MSM to share with their audiences.

It seems some clubs have become unhappy with how our game is run and want to do something about it, so welcome to our world guys, – us fans have been saying that for a long time.
Our game needs big change but it won’t happen overnight and a pandemic crisis is maybe not the best timing for internecine strife.

Closing Down 2019 – 2020

This season is already ended for all Scottish clubs outside the Premiership.
UEFA didn’t do much to help and could have been more proactive in stopping inter club squabbling but plus ca change.
Most football people I have spoken to (with their self-interest hats off) were not totally happy with the implications of closing the season early and pro rata-ing points to decide champions but pragmatically accept it is the best answer or the least worst solution.
Asked about teams being relegated while having a bona-fide chance of fighting back there is less support and indeed genuine heartfelt pushback.

Some more enlightened leagues like the Lowland League who took the decision to avoid further damage on some of their members at this time through a no relegation policy and a wait and see what’s best are seen as wiser.

What Needs To Be Done Today?

We all know that out of the Budge/Gray Taskforce there will be a few options put on the table.
There is always the status quo of 4 leagues 12, 10, 10, 10.
A 14, 14, 14, setup was discussed and voted on by the current second division clubs last Friday.
Our own similar suggestion published on your SFM was 14, 14 and a bottom league of 16 to keep the integrity of the pyramid.

Two weeks on, a more pragmatic option and one to be considered by all might be to agree no relegation for now and to wait until more is known over the next crucial weeks.
We have time on our hands and no need to rush.
Why not take our lead from the sages at the Lowland League?

As a fan what do you think?

Should we plan for an interim period?
Should it be status quo?
Do we apply parameters (like no relegation) but accept that any other plan has to be kept flexible till more is known and agreed?

Your insights and views are welcome by Ms. Budge, Mr. Gray and their team either on this forum where I’ll read and collate them or if you prefer sent to me at

What Needs To Be Done for Our Tomorrows?

We live in the real world and that means money is and always will be the prime driver and starting point.
Money is entwined with self-interest, status, power, politics and sometimes greed.

A given is every club will always want more and that is the easiest of several elephants in any room when looking at change to impact positively on the future of our game as a whole.

But maybe, just maybe now is different.
Post Covid many clubs will be on their knees financially and it will be a different world.

Les Gray’s Million Pounds Question For all Fans

No surprise it’s not an easy one
If you were charged with helping to create a sustainable and healthy future for Scottish Football is what would you do?

How would you advise Les, Ann and their Taskforce team about the right moves to make?

Once again insights welcome on SFM or to

As a starter for 10 some stuff that has come up in previous SFSA fan surveys about our game (in alphabetical order) includes –
Better Communication, Bigger Leagues, Community Involvement, Council Telly live games, Gate Sharing, Grass Roots Investment, Fairness, Family Friendly, Fewer clubs, Integrity, Kids Free, Leadership, Less leagues, No Bigotry, Openness, Outside expertise, Same rules for all, Schools Football, Simplicity, Standing Sections, Summer Football, TV Kick-off times, Regional Lower Leagues, Reserve League, Strict Liability, Transparency, Wholesome Sponsors etc.

The list is not exhaustive. Please feel free to add any others.
Some will be contradictory, some nice to haves but the crucial thing to do is to find the smartest moves and build on them.

We’re responding to Les and Ann in good faith

Never before have we the fans been asked in such an open way.

Collectively we have a short-term end of season issue and a need to set up our game for what comes next which might include an interim period.

The background to any responses you offer is uncertainty exacerbated by growing internecine chaos and increasing vitriol.

I’ll end with some wise and hopeful words by a Taskforce Co- chair

Without openness, transparency and pragmatism we will simply keep making the same mistakes.

Ann Budge


1 2 3 11
  1. ‘Finloch 28th April 2020 at 16:52

    Every day we get closer to an unnecessary civil war…’


    I’m not sure that the civil war is unnecessary, perhaps the SPFL is an autocratic organisation that requires examination & reform: it’s just that this isn’t the time for it. Add the fact that TRFC’s premise for attacking it is based on unsubstantiated (at this time) allegations. What if their ‘smoking gun’ is actually a ‘dribbling water-pistol’?

    TRFC is desperate to crash the bus & to do it now. Why? That’s the question for me. What’s so rank-rotten at Ibrox that someone thinks the way out from under is to attempt to destroy the SPFL & its board?

    As you listed a couple of songs, here’s one from me:

    ‘I Was In The House When The House Burned Down’ by Warren Zevon. It mentions a ‘loving cup’, ‘I had the money till it all was spent’ & ‘I had the money till they made me pay’.

  2. Homunculus 28th April 2020 at 21:30

    “However to suggest that what happened in 2012, in the run up to it and afterwards was not illegal simply isn’t true.”

    You may have missed my subsequent post where I clarified that point. I wasn’t claiming that Rangers’ actions weren’t illegal, but that, as far as I’m aware, the football authorities weren’t acting illegally in their failure to deal with Rangers. As I also pointed out, I reserve judgment on the matter of the UEFA licence award in 2011, the outcome of which may determine whether the SFA acted illegally. 

  3. upthehoops 29th April 2020 at 07:15

    "…why is a man professing such a thirst for honesty and transparency so selective at what he gets angry about? There have been huge scandals since 2012 that neither Tom or any of his BBC peers have demanded action on, and in fact have backed Rangers and the authorities."


    'Journalists' like the gombeen man are a worse plague than covid-19 and do far more damage to 'society' and the body politic than any disease. 

    Their non-reportng, mis-reporting, selective reporting even in the matter of 'Sport' in order to suit particular agendas in support of untruth is typical of those who would quite happily report political untruth on behalf of repressive political regimes for personal gain.

    Who would trust any journalist or national broadcaster known to maintain the fiction that RFC of 1872 did not die as football club?

    Many such journalists will end up on the breadline as the disreputable organs they work for progressively go bust-in the same way that RFC of 1872 went bust.

    When that happens, they will be in no mood to think of denying those  Liquidations as they scrabble and scratch to find some other corrupt master to whom to sell their rotten souls.

  4. Even Moira Gordon of the 'Scotsman' is being selectively brave today!

    In her piece in today's edition she says:

    " Given that the SPFL board have been selective in either hearing concerns or deciding which one to address, they are going to have to be far more comprehensive in that document[the Q&A document they are going to issue] if they are to quash the ill-feeling that appears to be swelling rather than abating"


    After 12 years of silence about the Big Lie, and nothing in the way of previous criticism of the cheating by SDM's RFC, she's got some nerve, has our Moira. 

    She  ends her extensive and severe criticism of the SPFLwith this

    " Scottish Football needs answers before it can move along"

    That's her credibility as any kind of journalist well and truly blown.She'll be appearing on BBC Radio Scotland soon, as back-up for the gombeen man!


  5. A lot to digest from the statement but before it gets lost :

    "…..the SPFL furloughed several staff and a number of the executives voluntarily took salary cuts. As a result, only an executive team of five remain to administer and manage the on-going business of the organisation as well as planning for the end of the current Season and for Season 2020/21. Their workload has been extremely onerous, managing a huge number of additional tasks – liaising with the SFA, medical officers, the Government, UEFA, other league bodies, our commercial partners and clubs."

    Note : No mention of supporters. Telling.

    Scottish Football needs a a strong Arbroath.

  6. Apologies for quoting myself from 1934hrs last night:

    'What if their ‘smoking gun’ is actually a ‘dribbling water-pistol’?'

    Keith Jackson's piece this morning:


    'As one source said last night: “What Rangers need to deliver now is something devastating. Something that points to serious wrongdoing inside the SPFL board room. What they need is a smoking gun. But the general consensus around most of the clubs right now is that they are holding nothing more than a water pistol."'

    Morning Keith, hope you're well & enjoying the content heremail

  7. Mordecai 29th April 2020 at 06:00
    Mo problems here, may be something on your side of things.

  8. John Clark 29th April 2020 at 09:45

    (Moira Gordon)  ends her extensive and severe criticism of the SPFLwith this

    " Scottish Football needs answers before it can move along"


    Hey! Do I not have copyright on this?

    Scottish Football needs strong IPR enforcement….

  9. Being the cynic that I am, I feel that there may be a PR box ticking exercise going on here. The proof of the pudding lies in the outcome of course, and there is no doubt that vastly divergent views between fans and authorities over this may only highlight the need for institutional change.

    The ability to be proactive in the face of Covid 19 fallout is limited, so I think the principles that should be established on reconstruction should be governed by the over-arching tenet that as ar as possible, no club should be punished as a consequence of the lockdown.

    Ordinarily I would say that this should be a deal-breaker, but these are extraordinary times.


    It has been suggested to me that we have some kind of non-partisan petition created along the line of "Scottish Football fans have no confidence in the governance of the sport by the SFA and SPFL."

    Current issues have certainly precipitated this, but despite the SFSA's understandable attempts to set up a line of communication with the authorities, how do we feel about this right now?

  10. Put it this way BP.  To requote Andrews own quote of Ms Budge’

    without openness, transparency and pragmatism we will simply keep making the same mistakes.

    we all know the reality is that they’d be delighted to continue to make the same mistakes because here’s the thing – they don’t have sufficient consensus vote to convince themselves they’re doing anything wrong.  That’s fine, its understandable even, but it does require the trifling matter of several thousand mug punters putting their dissatisfaction to one side and turning up every week.  Yet suddenly, without their cash, sorry support, suddenly it’s all a load of mistakes and they’re very keen not to repeat them.  Temporarily.  And for the  top league only.


    As I said before, I would be lying not to admit I’m enjoying their self inflicted self absorbed discomfort.


  11. Andrew Smith,  I would add to that list Reform of refereeing in Scotland.  Especially breaking all ties with the SFA. The leagues to appoint refereeing associations on fixed terms and monitor performance.
      Also, to fully adopt Financial Fair Play.

  12. I think keeping it simple and non-partisan enables support to be garnered from all quarters of Scottish Football.

    "Scottish Football fans have no confidence in the governance of the sport by the SFA and SPFL."

    We all know the issues and the roots of the mistrust. Let's get the door open and take it from there.

    Scottish Football needs a show of fan strength.

  13. BP;


    It has been suggested to me that we have some kind of non-partisan petition created along the line of "Scottish Football fans have no confidence in the governance of the sport by the SFA and SPFL…"


    Totally agree BP, that this would be preferable, IMO.

  14. Mrs Budge said “without openness, transparency and pragmatism we will simply keep making the same mistakes”.

    I don’t disagree with Mrs Budge, but I do have to ask why it can be cherry picked in terms of when openness and transparency is demanded. Can she use her influence to ask for the Five-Way-Agreement to be made public? Can she also ask why it is acceptable for the SFA to sit on a disciplinary matter for two and a half years? Lastly, why is it not open to people from every group in society to become a Grade 1 match official?

    I thought when Mrs Budge came into the game she might have challenged the age old secrecy and prejudices which blight Scottish football governance. So far her silence has been her consent in my view, until now of course when her club is directly affected!

    I will finish by saying that I do think imposing relegation on any club is very unfair. Therefore I would be in favour of the 14 team top league model which has a split which guarantees fairness in terms of home and away fixtures, which we currently don’t have. 

  15. Jingo.Jimsie @ 10/09

    Made me smile and reminded me of part of a line from Mr Tambourine Man:-

    “in the jingle jangle (!) morning I’ll come following you”

    Another one up for the Bampots!!

    Breaking news – according to Rangers Radio caller has heard that (I know – what was I doing in there?), Peter Lawell’s son works for Deloitte!

    I demand that they be investigated!

  16. And who has made the following quote, from The Sun today;

    "I just hope that what comes out of reconstruction isn't an outcome that protects the few that it's a conclusion that looks at what's in the best interests of Scottish football.

    "I would include the Highland, Lowland, Juniors and even the amateur game in that as well.

    "It can't just look at what's right for the existing 42 clubs."


    Step forward and take a bow, the absolutely shameless Stewart Regan!  angel

  17. I smell shite !! All of a sudden they want fans opinions , open and honest, transparency and all that. Now is not the time . Its time to buckle down be safe and see whats left at the other end . Sickens me that the media are in a flap about honesty , truth , , transparency . What they really mean is selective honesty, selective truth and selective transparancy . Obviously because Rangers are drowning in a sea of debt, lies and historical fraud they are gonna try and Mask Rangers HUGE financial problems by claiming “It was the corona virus wot did it” . Alec Rae is the new Derek Jonston cheerleader , no points lost if you go into administration . We all know where you are going with this Alec you are fooling no one . Just the start of a concerted campaign by you and and all the other media lapdogs . I genuinely feel for clubs who have ran their club within their cash budgets and are now struggling because of the Corona Virus .  A points deduction would be unfair if they go into administration .The Rangers however have probably been trading insolvently for god knows how long and it would stick in the craw if they used this as an excuse when the enevitable administration comes their way. . Im self employed and have nt earned a penny since lockdown and dont know when I will so I know where the genuine honest clubs are coming from. .Im sure everyone on here would probably agree to a genuine Q&A about truth blah blah blah if they thought it was genuine . I for one am very suspicious of this and the timing. Wait until this is all over and have this Q&A as long as nothing is off the table. Lets visit the reasons when it all started to go wrong , Yes away back to the early 2000s when a world class administrator helped set up EBTs for a certain club  ( his club) then moved up the greasy pole to the SFA where he gladly kept them hidden along with probably all the high heid yins at the SFA of that day . Then lets talk about OCNC ,or giving a team a golden pass into the champs league fraudulently , The 5WA  , the LNS sham, continually turning a blind eye to a club that was a financial head case . As long as this and probably loads of other stuff Ive forgotten is part of your Q&A then yes Im all for it. As I said before now is not the time though . I could save you a lot of bother and tell you the common denominator on the vast majority of our problems . The Club from Govan and the Authorites who are paid to protect and make our game flourish ( stop laughing)   are afraid of them . I need a cold shower angel

  18. After reading both the statement from Rangers on Sunday and the open letter from the SPFL board yesterday. It struck me that a strange shift had taken place.

    Instead of the customary long rambling affair, the message from Ibrox was short, sharp and to the point. The letter from the SPFL board in comparison, was indeed a rambling and IMO poorly drafted effort that didn't appear to go down well with many in the media who commented upon it.




  19. As my mind and body begins to recover from my Coronavirus shock (I've not had it, as far as I know, but I have been living in something akin to a state of shock for a few weeks now) I feel a bit more like entering the debate over Scottish football's future, though that might not last for I think bad news will be just around the corner for some time to come.

    I'll start by saying I didn't realise that the current blog had been written by a guest blogger and thought it was something Bink Pink had written, so I read it without any mistrust or preconceived expectations, and I have to say I found little wrong with it, so I read it again, and lo and behold, I found nothing wrong with it again, and found more to agree with than not.

    Andrew Smith offers no solutions, and I don't think that was his intention, but I think it's important for all involved to continually take stock, which is what I think he is doing here, of where we are as our society changes as more is learned of the effect the virus will have on the world. In my opinion there is less than little chance of next season starting in August and a more than passing chance that it won't start this year.

    I am very much of the opinion that the title issue and the relegation issue should have been tackled completely separately, as they are both completely different in both their sporting effect and the economic outcome for the clubs involved. This is true even in normal times. For each season starts with (in the case of the Premiership) 12 teams all on zero points and ends up with one winner who gains a title while nobody else loses anything that they had held as a result. 

    On the other hand, we start with 12 teams who have a place in the top league, but end with one, or two, clubs losing their place, and not only losing that place but also having a question mark placed on their future with the only certainty that they are going to lose a great deal of potential income while having to continue to finance an expensive (for the league they will be playing in) squad. This year, of course, that future takes on a much more sinister hue. A hue akin to death in some cases.

    I think that, by trying to solve both issues in the same motion, the SPFL has caused many more problems than they would have if they'd kept them as separate matters. I think TRFC, in trying to stop Celtic being crowned champions, have been able to gain at least one ally, that really has no interest in who is made champions, they might not have had had the two issues been kept separate.

    I can offer no solution to the way forward, other than to say that I feel that the SPFL (and all leagues) should be viewing the matter as far more complex than just deciding on relegation or how many clubs per league we should have next season. They should be looking at it with the question, how do we find a set up that will allow us the flexibility to shift from a season starting by the Autumn and one starting in Winter while allowing a viable league competition to still take place?

    In the meantime, I think the overriding aim of the SPFL should be to try to ensure the futures of all their member clubs, even TRFC, while not only ensuring all are treated equally and fairly, but that no club is put in a worse position than they are now if they were not already doomed*.

    *This clearly does not impact on the title decision as neither Celtic nor TRFC will be doomed by the outcome (though one of them might very well be doomed by their very own brand of hubris).


  20. StevieBC 29th April 2020 at 13:20

    '…Step forward and take a bow, the absolutely shameless Stewart Regan! '


    Shameless isn't the word,StevieBC.

    Regan was at the very heart of the 5-Way Agreement which enshrined an actual untruth of monstrous proportions in that it proposed and propagated the lie that TRFC (or SevocScotland/Club 12) was Rangers of 1872. 

    An untruth eagerly seized upon by the drafters of the Prospectus for the IPO, and continuously since then propagated relentlessly by successive SFA/SPFL boards as well as by football hacks in the print press and the BBC.

    Scottish Football might very possibly die under the weight of its own deceit over the past decade.

    Covid-19 might simply just hasten matters.

    I do not wish that to happen: but I'm pretty sure we cannot go on with the Big Lie and the generalised distrust and suspicion of our governance bodies that their readiness to sustain that Lie creates.

  21. From McLelland's Q&A.

           "In the absence of any such report, those alleging "bullying and coercion" risk bringing the game into disrepute and sowing further unnecessary division".


         Regardless of sowing further unnecessary division, bringing the game into disrepute is a serious charge. It should not, and cannot, be allowed to slide, or be ignored, should the report not be forthcoming or consist mainly of jumbled up words in no particular order. 

  22. easyJambo 29th April 2020 at 13:06

    Re Macleannan's Q&A

    Understand why loans weren't the answer but no explanation of why an 'extraordinary' interim payment couldn't have been made based on current placings and a final but nominal payment issued at a later date once the season had been either declared ended or played out. 

    Talk of clubs clambering for money but the lower division clubs I heard on the radio such as Forfar and Falkirk said they were fine for cash until after the summer. Does anyone know who exactly was needing the small amounts, given the pro-rata split of only £1.8m, and the fact they wouldn't have normally expected it until towards the end of May when the leagues and play-offs ended?

    The 'false deadline' of 5pm of good Friday was poorly chosen. Similarly the SPFL board seemed to feel pressured by what they feared as potential 'negative press' if a result wasn't announced later that same evening. Therefore they didn't think it through in terms of the 28 day rule and are clearly able to be easily manipulated by press reaction as opposed to doing the 'right thing'.

    It also seems the SPFL did not think through the scenario of what would happen if not all the required votes were received by the 5:00pm false deadline. MacLennan seems to be implying that regardless of what occurred the board seemed hell bent on reaching the objective of releasing monies to the lower division clubs and to hell with everything else.

    Still no explanation of why Dundee's email didn't make it through before the false deadline,  like all other votes bar the one received during the meeting that commenced at 5:00pm everyone else's. We understand it got stuck in quarantine, but does anyone know how/why?

    Not sure if it has been said but who was the 'outstanding' votes in the Premiership and League 1 & 2. I assume the rejection in the Premiership was Hearts but who from that division didn't put pen to paper.  While their vote may not have mattered in terms of the required 75% it would be interesting to know who abstained, when and why. Similar to the lower divisions. (As discussed before when a relatively well run club like Aberdeen said they were scrambling around trying to digest information, seek clarification, get legal advice, gather their board's views etc it clearly wasn't the best way to make an important decision).

    No recognition at any time, even when issuing press releases on 15 April that clubs like Partick and Stranraer were being hard done by in the immediate aftermath, in terms of sporting integrity, by being relegated without deciding their own destiny on the pitch. This was only an afterthought. The same could of course be said for those who missed out a chance of potentially gaining promotion via the play-off system.

    If you are a members organisation and a handful of your members are going to be disadvantaged by the results of a vote,  you should  have the decency to acknowledge that and, at the very least,  thank them for 'taking one for the team' in difficult circumstances.

    The upshot for me is that the main thrust of the exercise was to get paltry sums to the lower division teams and worry about any other fall out afterwards.

    In other words the same quick fix, short term thinking that has blighted and held Scottish football back for decades.


  23. No matter how they try to camouflage it, The Rangers sole aim is to prevent Celtic being declared 9 in a row champions, and also take the spotlight away from the perilous financial state that they are in. There is little or no chance of their resolution, to have an independent enquiry, being passed, and then what.

    Like spoiled children, they will continue to moan and groan at everyone and anything, ably assisted by the MSM, and their own placemen on radio, TV and print determined to disrupt and divide while their own house is about to fall down round about them.

    Cant they wake up and realise that when football restarts, with social distancing they’ll be playing in front of crowds of circa 10,000, not the 50,000 they were used to. They couldn’t balance their books when they had the massive income from the large crowds. How on earth will they manage with crowds and income down by 80%? 
    If reports are correct, they are currently up to their eyes in debt which they can’t service, and are also facing substantial damages in their ongoing court cases.

    As soon as the EGM is over and their resolution lost, The Rangers should immediately be charged with bringing the game into disrepute and their CEO asked to resign his position. 


  24. It is plain to see that the SPFL have not covered themselves with glory in trying to rush a solution to release funds to clubs without thinking through the consequences. It is further evidence of incompetence but corruption? I’m not so sure. Reading EJ’s posts the last couple of weeks one gets a sense of his anger and frustration not previously noted on this blog. I believe that anger is justified in the conflation of champions and relegation into a single vote. I can sympathise with Hearts but I fail to see a legitimate reason for grievance from TRFC. Realistically they were not going to overtake Celtic and if they have substantive evidence of wrongdoing beyond ..but,but Dundee changed their mind then they should publish and be damned. It would be relatively simple at this stage for the SPFL to cut the ground from under TRFC by advocating no relegation and say they are actively pursuing a 14/14/14 restructure subject to audited business plans and rigorous financial fair play rules. Clubs run with proper financial probity should not be disadvantaged by the reckless profligacy of others. After this crisis has passed whatever professional football is left standing will surely have changed .One hopes it will be for the better. A hae ma doots.


  25. This bit of the Q&A piqued my attention –

    ' Members either agree with a resolution put to each of them or they do not, and although Members were asked to state a position by 5pm on the Friday, every club was told in writing that it could, if it wished, take the full 28 days in which to respond to agree or otherwise.'

    If that is the case , why all the noise about artificial deadlines , other than mischief-making ?


  26. I have no problems with no points deduction for going into administration at this time as long as they club/clubs can prove beyond doubt that they were on a sound financial footing before this occurred.

  27. As most other pursuits are kind of closed to us these days, I'm doing a fair amount of reading.

    A long time ago I was much taken by the film "55 days in Peking". Prior to seeing that film I don't think I had even heard of the Boxer rebellion. Shortly after watching the movie I bought "The Siege at Peking' by Peter Fleming [brother of Ian Fleming of James Bond fame].

    I am now in process of re-reading it.

    About half an hour ago I reached page 53 where there is this description of a journalist who was in the Britsh legation building during the siege. 

    "Dr George Ernest Morrison was thirty-eight years old.The son of a Scottish emigrant to Australia…. he began his journalistic career with a pungent exposure of the traffic in native labour between the South Seas Islands and the Queensland sugar plantations…..He walked across Australia…He led an expedition to New Guinea…He qualified as a doctor…served as a medical officer at the Rio Tinto copper mines in Spain and as court physician to a Moroccan sheikh…..then walked across China from Shanghai to the Burma frontier..and in 1895 joined 'The Times', becoming its Peking Correspondent two years later.

    He combined flair with scrupulous accuracy to an extent which sometimes irked the Foreign Office in London. It was he who provoked Lord Curzon to coin the phrase “the intelligent anticipation of events before they occur,”, which '(wrote The Times' ..was perhaps the most genuine tribute ever wrung from unwilling lips to the highest qualities which a correspondent can bring to bear upon his work”

    My kind of journalist!

     Is there a Morrison-type among the SMSM /BBC pack of Big Lie deniers and PR handout propagandists?

    Or a newspaper prepared to have anyone like him on their payroll?

    Courage and scrupulous accuracy combined with flair. How wonderful!

    [ I don't think he Morrison featured as a character in the movie, but during the siege he played a significant and courageous part in saving many lives]

  28. gunnerb 29th April 2020 at 15:56

    Reading EJ’s posts the last couple of weeks one gets a sense of his anger and frustration not previously noted on this blog.


    Your observation is undoubtedly correct. I guess that it is to do with having a stake in the game (both as a Hearts shareholder and an FOH contributor).

    That frustration is with the football authorities, their decision making, and the self interest of clubs who unquestioningly support their respective Boards’ decisions. I see it as being similar to that experienced by the fans of many clubs in the lead up to RFC’s demise and its aftermath.

    In both sets of circumstances the  football authorities have circled the wagons and sought to deny and deflect any criticism of the actions they took.

    There are however a couple of differences.  The most obvious one is that the MSM appears to be on the case and willing to press the SPFL for answers.  That pressure is at least forcing some response in the form of press statements and open letters to clubs (some of it misguided).

    That’s the same MSM, which for the most part refused to get involved in the RFC saga, despite having evidence of wrongdoing laid on a silver salver for them. It is galling that they have acted this time when they don’t have the same level of evidence available to them.

    The most likely reason is that it is a favoured club in the form of TRFC that is leading the complaints of wrongdoing on this occasion, hence their championing of the cause.

    If that club has the damning evidence that they claim, then we should all be grateful.  If they don’t have that evidence, then they should immediately be subject to a charge of bringing the game into disrepute. No ifs, buts, or maybes about it.

    The other notable change I’ve noticed is on the blog itself. The current issues don’t appear to have generated the level of discussion that I would have expected, particularly when the actions and governance of the footballing authorities is questioned. I don’t know for certain why that is, but I suspect that it is a mix of sentiments, some reluctant to be seen to support TRFC (albeit without them publishing their dossier of evidence), some actually supporting the stance taken by the SPFL, some content with the direction of travel in a partisan way and some just disillusioned by what happened during the RFC saga who might want change but are content to watch from the sidelines.   

    I can’t believe that many posters on SFM don’t want change at the top of the game. If this situation leads to change then I would most definitely welcome it. I couldn’t care less who triggers it, whether its a single club, a few, or many. 

  29. The head of the French federation also revealed how the final tables will be decided.

    They will be based on the last completed round of fixtures, and promotion and relegation will be enforced.

    He said: "That's what the rules say. We've set an example with the amateur leagues and, believe me, it's not easy.

    "Promotion and relegation? Yes, it has to be that way."



  30. paddy malarkey 29th April 2020 at 16:14


    If that is the case , why all the noise about artificial deadlines , other than mischief-making ?


    It's just that, noise.

    If the document which I have copied is real it specifically said that members had 28 days in which to respond. That was the only "deadline"

    The 5pm was a request on the voting slip which was attached to that document, again it is clear it is a request. They wanted to move things forward as quickly as possible and if the resolution reached it's 75% (in each of the three voting blocks) then they didn't have to wait the full 4 weeks. 

    You often see these things in such situations, something starts being said, then repeated, then magically becomes a fact. There was only one deadline.

  31. I notice from the new blog above that subjects that have arisen during previous surveys held by the Scottish Football Supporters Association included Same Rules For All, Strict Liability, No Bigotry, Fairness and Integrity, amongst many others listed.

    Perhaps it’s just me, but I’d be utterly astonished and more than a little disappointed if a substantial number of Scottish football supporters had never broached the subject of one of the elephants in the room, namely the development, enablement and acceptance of a sterile duopoly that has stifled the game in this country for 35 years, during which no club other than Celtic or Rangers has won the top league title.

    Leaving aside the rancour and division actively encouraged by our money-grabbing football authorities during a century plus of pseudo-religious, Irish political nonsense that should have no place in football and the subsequent mass glory-hunting by fans leaving behind their home town clubs to instead attend matches at Parkhead and Ibrox on the back of success achieved in such circumstances, isn't it worthy of an airing?

    When I refer to enablement and acceptance, think of the death through liquidation of the original Rangers Football Club. Think of the automatic reaction of the football authorities in 2012, which was to take whatever drastic action they deemed necessary to salvage television and other commercial contracts because they were largely predicated on ‘Old Firm’ matches.

    No thought was given to the notion that in the fullness of time, Aberdeen or Dundee United might build themselves back up to a level that would see them once again challenging for titles, or that Hearts, Hibs, Kilmarnock, St Johnstone or others deserved the opportunity of replacing Rangers in the top two.

    Think about the football authorities’ attempt to gerrymander a new club into the then SPL to avoid the predicted financial Armageddon that never materialised. I’m not quite sure why they didn’t just rewrite their rules and regulations to specify that Celtic and Rangers are prohibited from finishing in the bottom six of the league, far less being relegated or even liquidated! That would of course be akin to ‘rigging’ football, but thanks to our myopic money-driven football authorities, the game is all but rigged anyway. There is an acceptance that that’s the way it must be – Celtic and Rangers as the largest supported clubs, driving the most money into football’s coffers, must be at the top of our game for the rest of eternity because no other model works. End of.

    Unfortunately, such dogma works, because chairmen of all the cannon-fodder clubs such as my own were and are only too happy to feed off the scraps from the table of the big two rather than admit that one of the protagonists had died, even although that death offered a once in a generation opportunity for advancement to many of those clubs, who instead opted for perpetual mediocrity and, at best, mid-table obscurity.

    I know that the ‘New Firm’ broke the duopoly back in the late 70s/early 80s of their own volition, but there is no sign of a modern day Alex Ferguson or Jim McLean on the horizon, nor is there any likelihood of our football authorities opting for anything that threatens the status quo, even to the extent that a Rangers Version 3 will inevitably be unveiled if Version 2 goes down the plughole like its’ predecessor, as seems increasingly likely.  

    Now, before any of you Celtic supporters get your panties in a twist, firstly at my audacity for linking the two clubs together and secondly for daring to suggest you might want to give up what effectively has been virtually a decade long monopoly (rather than the usual duopoly), I suggest you might want to have a word with Peter Lawwell and Dermot Desmond about financial inter-dependency before berating me for simply stating the bleeding obvious.

    I do have a modicum of sympathy for you not wishing to give up what is rightfully yours just to satisfy those of us who are bored of the repetitive nature of your incessant trophy haul, or ‘jealous’ as you might call it, but I do so in the same way that I view hundreds of square miles of beautiful Highland landscape in my neighbourhood that is owned by a single landowner. While that seems grossly unfair to me, I can at least acknowledge that if roles were reversed, I would be loath to give it up if my ancestors had owned it for centuries.

    Unfortunately, I don’t have ready-made solutions to the ‘problem’ other than some form of  financial handicapping akin to the franchise system adopted by some US sports, which I don’t personally like or endorse, or perhaps a drastic rejigging of prize-money dispersal whereby the pyramid is turned upside down so that finances are more equitably spread.

    I fully appreciate that nobody knows how many clubs will be left standing once the coronavirus pandemic has finally departed and that the health of our nation has to be the current priority, but we may well find we have no football at all to watch for a long, long time to come, in which case, why not discuss the unmentionable in the intervening period?

  32. Highlander 29th April 2020 at 17:51

    Celtic were literally hours away from going out of business and have built the business back up from practically nothing, or less than nothing when you think about the debt position. 

    Who helped the club when the Bank of Scotland were happily going to put them out of business … the Celtic support via share issues, buying tickets etc.

    Celtic are where they are because of the support, building the business sustainably and for the most part living within the club's means. Yes there was some stupidity at a later date but the fans rallied round again.

    Celtic are in the position they are in because of the support and an excellent board running the business.


  33. I can’t immediately cite instances but I am pretty sure the “duopoly” and finances have been regularly aired on this site. Including but not limited to gate sharing and a more equitable distribution of Champions league monies.

  34. Highlander 29th April 2020 at 17:51

    I think most fans of the diddy clubs view CFC and TRFC as two cheeks of the same *rse , sh*tt*ng down on the rest of us from the top of the table , the only difference season to season is which sits higher . We are tolerated only because they couldn't survive without a competition but are still viewed with contempt . They wouldn't have looked back had they been given the opportunity to join a different league to further their own interests . And regardless of whether you accept that one of the clubs died , you are still only getting scraps off the table . You never know , though , that if a large number of clubs go to the wall in England , they may get invited to make up the numbers in those leagues . We can but hope . 



  35. Highlander 29th April 2020 at 17:51

           I'm with you on the distribution of prize monies Highlander, but there is no need for pyramids of any kind, upside down or not.    It takes X amount of clubs to form a league, likewise, a cup tournament.       Without them there is neither leagues nor cups. Divvy the purse monies equally. Taking a wee amount from a big pocket, is akin to a large amount in an empty one. It's not much, but it's a start.

           A cup or a flag, plus either promotion or Euro entry is plenty. Clubs already capitalise on successes through other revenue streams such as broadcasting, matchday income etc. There really is no need for a purse prize……I've yet to see a fan cheer at a player holding a cheque aloft.

  36. Tom English has had an article published on the BBC website tonight that would not look out of place on a Rangers fans blog. 

  37. Highlander29th April 2020 at 17:51===================

    Excellent post. 

    People such as Auldheid and dare I say myself recognise the financial inequality you highlight and have advocated ways of changing things to create a leveller playing field. It would be useful if more fans of the big two could get on board with this.

    Sharing the finances more equally should create a more competitive environment and improve the product on the park that the fans could enjoy.

    With all the corruption and mismanagement in the game I have lost my appetite to attend the matches of my diddy team but still contribute to the fans trust out of a misplaced sense of loyalty.

  38.  From English on his BBC platform tonight 


    “..MacLennan has been chairman of the SPFL for almost three years and in that time he hasn’t done a single interview with a journalist.”

    Yer dead right Tom,  plenty of hacks like yourself to trot out their stupid cliches, but never a true and honest journalist among them! 

  39. Makes me chuckle a bit that Doncaster is now seen as a great administrator after all these years of being public enemy number one. cool


  40. Homunculus 29th April 2020 at 18:09

    Oh and the "panties in a twist" nonsense. Grow up.


    In the circumstances, I can only refer you to wise advice from a frequent poster on SFM to play the ball, not the man, for the purpose of avoiding hypocrisy.

  41. The SPFL are pointing toward the expense of another Independent Inquiry (I.I.) as an important reason not to vote for another.

    Did they consider expense when they instructed Deloitte to carry out the first I.I.?

    It seems to me as if instructing the Deloitte inquiry was a rather desperate and poorly thought out step in what has been ongoing omnishambles from the 6th floor at Hampden. The SPFL were basically burning money on something that wasn't ever going to serve for anything but the auditors bank balance.

    They really do seem to have been all over the place for some time now. In the medium-term, it might prove to be more expensive not having another Inquiry.

  42. reasonablechap 29th April 2020 at 22:07

          They really do seem to have been all over the place for some time now. In the medium-term, it might prove to be more expensive not having another Inquiry.


        A simple solution would be for both parties to provide a surety upfront, and the loser coughs….That should help concentrate the minds.

        As things stand there is no evidence that there is any evidence. 

  43. Corrupt official 29th April 2020 at 22:23

    reasonablechap 29th April 2020 at 22:07

          They really do seem to have been all over the place for some time now. In the medium-term, it might prove to be more expensive not having another Inquiry.


        A simple solution would be for both parties to provide a surety upfront, and the loser coughs….That should help concentrate the minds.



    Who are "both parties" CO.

    This is basically a civil war. Certain members of the SPFL (currently unknown other than Hearts, Rangers and Stranraer) would like an independent inquiry. I have no knowledge of what the terms of the inquiry are, if anyone does could you post it here.

    The board of the same SPFL do not feel another independent inquiry is required. They feel it would be a waste of money.

    However it is the same pot of money any fees will be paid from. This will not be clubs v SPFL. It's SPFL members v SPFL board. 

    Unless I am picking this up wrong.

  44. It's great that the blog is gathering significant momentum with varied opinion. These stifled times seem to have reawakened us –  the modern day last proletariats of football. 

    I find it astonishing that the MS(S)M have suddenly found 'digital transmission' despite their longwave 'emission' of the last 8 or so years. But in reality, we all knew that they'd already found their upper limit. 

    Of 42 'constituencies', the initial vote tallied 85% in favour. A landslide in democratic terms. Who could argue with that? Well, for one, the short lived club protested, as have the vast majority of Scottish 'written' hacks and most of the broadcast media, save a few.  

    Where was this clamour of calls for investigation when the biggest fraud in Scottish Football unfurled before our eyes and ears?

    A test is considered reliable if we continue to get the same result. The question I ask myself is how many tests will they insist upon? 




  45. Bill1903
    29th April 2020 at 19:40
     18 15 Rate This

    Makes me chuckle a bit that Doncaster is now seen as a great administrator after all these years of being public enemy number one. cool


    Personally, I have little time for Mr Doncaster; but, rather than instinctively play the man, I'd question if it is really helpful to get hung up on individual personalities?

    This is fairly simple for me.

    1. A pandemic is the type of crisis that the football authorities should have included clearly in its contingency plans. The SPFL and SFA absolutely deserve criticism for their lack of foresight. The authorities (and not only in Scotland) must take responsibility for their indecision and the rancour that has ensued from those clubs whose actions are (quite understandably) motivated by self interest. Are any of the positions adopted by various clubs and their supporters that surprising? Depressing, yes! But, it's hardly shocking.

    2. What you may find surprising, is the SPFL's Articles give the board complete power to deal with situations that are not covered by existing rules in any way it sees fit. It actually didn't need to put forward the resolution, but (probably because there was a single dissenting voice on the board) chose to try and build a consensus around the only viable option it considered available. If it was truly trying to force through its preferred option, would it have put the resolution forward at all? Since it technically didn't need to do so, why give itself the heartache? 

    3. Neil Doncaster is a director of SPFL Ltd. He, and every other director, is perfectly entitled to lobby the company members to support a resolution that the board had proposed. It would be a very strange situation indeed where a board recommended a course of action to its shareholders, but also had no opinion on it! That is just nonsense! Completely bonkers! Genuinely struggling to understand why this is thought to be, in any way, controversial.

    4. As has been stated numerous times, the SPFL articles (and the Companies Act) provide 28 days for a written resolution to gain the requisite support. As long as the resolution had not been withdrawn, any club that initially voted against, could change its mind within those 28 days. Unless there is evidence of some criminality (in which case, it should be a matter for the police) the manner and reasoning for Dundee's change of mind is largely immaterial to its validity. It makes no difference if its original vote was considered 'cast' or not. The club supported the resolution a few days later – so well within the 28 days allowed. Unless it had chosen to withdraw the resolution, the SPFL would have had no legal authority to refuse to accept Dundee's later approval. It was clearly a resolution it wanted to get passed. Why wouldn't it wait for Dundee to make up its mind?

    4. In this case, none of the critical decisions appear to have been made by Neil Doncaster. With a single notable exception, the board as a unit appears to have driven the process.

    5. It is perfectly acceptable that members (and supporters) are free to question the stated aims of the board. But, if over 80% of clubs agree with a particular course of action, is it really ok that the minority try to maliciously undermine that decision? Is it ok to make false claims of improper process and potentially actionable statements on the professional integrity of individuals who are thought to have supported the majority decision?

    Of course Neil Doncaster is generally worthy of a bogey man tag. It's just that, in this particular drama, I haven't seen any indication that he is the major protagonist.


  46. reasonablechap
    29th April 2020 at 22:07
     4 17 Rate This

    The SPFL are pointing toward the expense of another Independent Inquiry (I.I.) as an important reason not to vote for another.

    Did they consider expense when they instructed Deloitte to carry out the first I.I.?

    It seems to me as if instructing the Deloitte inquiry was a rather desperate and poorly thought out step in what has been ongoing omnishambles from the 6th floor at Hampden. The SPFL were basically burning money on something that wasn't ever going to serve for anything but the auditors bank balance.

    They really do seem to have been all over the place for some time now. In the medium-term, it might prove to be more expensive not having another Inquiry.


    Following the publication of Partick Thistle's legal opinion, the SPFL would be duty bound to ensure that the circumstances around Dundee's vote did not provide a real risk that the overall approval of the resolution could be challenged.

    Don't think there was any choice, but to get its own legal opinion on the matter.


  47. Homunculus 29th April 2020 at 23:06

        I see what you are saying H, as it is essentially "some clubs" v the clubs collective body, (The SPFL).   By "both parties", I meant requisitioners for, and against. as essentially it will be voted for, or against. That is the only thing that will determine the next step. There will be a next step, or won't be, subject to the EGM outcome. 

        If evidence is produced, the SPFL board, (Doncaster and McLelland are particularly singled out) are guilty of wrong-doing, and the clubs collectively are responsible, as they are the ones the board represent.

            If however the requisitioners cannot provide evidence of wrong-doing, then the requisitioners are in the wrong, as they claim to have evidence of such. It should be up to them alone to shoulder the cost 

           There are laws in place governing how the members vote should be performed. The accusations are that the vote was rigged in some way, (undisclosed as yet). Rigging can only be achieved using unlawful means.  If conducted lawfully, it was not rigged.  Nobody would rig a vote just for the hell of it. There must be a beneficiary, or beneficiaries. It follows that Sevco claim to have evidence of that unlawful activity. 

        There are no costs to an inquiry, because if there is evidence of unlawful activity it is a police matter, and for the police, or its legal agency to investigate.  However I recall well from the Sevco school of business that an EGM comes at considerable cost, and it is that cost to which I was alluding. 

        With the evidence on the table at the EGM, if unlawful activity took place, I'm sure those who voted to terminate the leagues will be altering their position and voting for police involvement, as it is impossible for 81% of the membership to benefit on the back of the other 19%…Most must have been deprived or disadvantaged in some way deceptively.

        If the inquiry requisition is voted down, it really is because there is nothing to see here. The requisitioners should pick up the EGM tab.

        Alternatively it can be recovered via fines added to the disrepute charges. 

        As to the terms of inquiry, Sevco laid out 7 points in a statement, with the 7th being pretty much a catch-all, but to my mind there are only two. Lawful or unlawful. 




  48. CO

    Pretty sure that requisitioners always pay for their EGM.

    Just hope they’ve paid in advance! 💥

    EDIT: Actually, on reflection, I think that it is only the costs related to a written resolution that are borne by the requisitioners.
    As this is a (virtual) meeting, the company pays the costs.

  49. (Apologies to JC's blood pressure in advance!)

    Following Regan's breathtaking quote yesterday,

    today we have Doncaster confirming that Scottish football has now officially entered The Twilight Zone, ( :spooky music: ).

    From the DR today;

    "…(CEO Doncaster said),

    If anyone feels there has been improper behaviour then they should bring it to the public’s attention and raise it with the chairman of the SPFL for a proper investigation.

    That simply hasn’t happened…"


    2012 simply didn't happen for Doncaster or the SPL then…? 


  50. In 1996 there was a huge, real scandal in Scottish football. The head of the SFA deliberately delayed the registration of a player for Celtic which meant the player was not available to play against Rangers in the Scottish cup semi-final. Celtic had to go down the legal route to prove this after the SFA twice said everything was above board. Did that real, legally proven to be right scandal lead to major sea change in Scottish Football governance? No it it didn't. Were the media enraged at this scandal and did they demand major sea change? No they weren't, and no they didn't. Did the media fully support the senior SFA man involved? Yes they did, even to the point of saying many times over the years the country could do with him in charge at times, and they also delivered fawning eulogies on his death. That is only one example of media double standards depending on the club involved. 2011 and 2012 have delivered several chapters alone. 

    I mentioned yesterday I have had the paranoid accusation thrown at me my whole life. Clearly I was never paranoid enough. 

  51. Hirsute Pursuit ….

    Is it ok to make false claims of improper process and potentially actionable statements on the professional integrity of individuals who are thought to have supported the majority decision?

    Of course Neil Doncaster is generally worthy of a bogey man tag. It's just that, in this particular drama, I haven't seen any indication that he is the major protagonist.


    At this stage, I don't think you can use the word false without suitable qualification. Rangers have clearly said (via Sunday statement) that they will provide the clubs with the evidence well in advance of the GM.

    Neil Doncaster has become more the Invisible Man than a bogeyman. An invisible man, who reportedly earns in the region of 350K or so, from a board who are deeply concerned with finances. An invisible man who, as CEO of the SPFL, has played a major part within the ongoing farce, when 350K worth of leadership was required.

    Regardless of what happens in the next few weeks. I think numerous SPFL clubs might consider it time for a fresh face as CEO. I think many thought he wouldn't see 2013 in the role but here he is in 2020, at the helm of a league without a sponser and in the midst of a mess of their own making.

    ps. wrt the Dundee vote. IIRC the legal opinion of Partick Thistle (QC and junior counsel) considered the resolution to have lapsed when the Tayside club sent the initial vote. Only legal opinion but worthy of inclusion.

  52. reasonablechap

    The SPFL are pointing toward the expense of another Independent Inquiry (I.I.) as an important reason not to vote for another.

    Did they consider expense when they instructed Deloitte to carry out the first I.I.?

    It seems to me as if instructing the Deloitte inquiry was a rather desperate and poorly thought out step in what has been ongoing omnishambles from the 6th floor at Hampden. The SPFL were basically burning money on something that wasn't ever going to serve for anything but the auditors bank balance.

    They really do seem to have been all over the place for some time now. In the medium-term, it might prove to be more expensive not having another Inquiry.


    Hirsute Pursuit

    Following the publication of Partick Thistle's legal opinion, the SPFL would be duty bound to ensure that the circumstances around Dundee's vote did not provide a real risk that the overall approval of the resolution could be challenged.

    Don't think there was any choice, but to get its own legal opinion on the matter.


    In recent communications, the SPFL have repeatedly pointed to finance as a major factor to consider when faced with a decision/vote on whether to go for an Independent Inquiry or not.

    I agree that clarity is required, the Deloitte Inquiry was so narrow in scope that it provided more questions than answers.

    I would have thought that in frugal times, the SPFL lawyer, Rod McKenzie was more than capable of coming up with what were the simplistic findings of Deloitte.

    At that point, the clubs didn't know of or expect an Independent Iquiry. IMO the Deloitte move seemed to be more a tactic to take some heat out of the ongoing situation, at least in the eyes of member clubs. It didn't work.


  53. Corrupt Official

    I wonder if your username allied to your obviously considered opinions suggest where this all might be heading towards. Is it co-incidence that Doncaster was at the SPL when you first used it on here? angry (disclaimer: the above is a joke)


    IMO there is already a big enough mess out there for SPFL clubs to think very carefully about the positions of those at the top of the board further down the line, when the time is right.

    However, I agree that one way or the other, the evidence now plays a pivotal role in the next Act and potentially how the whole thing might rumble on.

    Recent days have seen the SPFL prepare the ground for a response to when the evidence is revealed. Now it's probably about lobbying clubs one by one and trying to get commitments ahead of the clubs receiving the dossier


  54. Could this be the final throw of the dice for sevco a scorched earth battle plan to take down as many clubs as possible sure seems like it. 

  55. Just going back to Maclennan’s Q&A.

    the mystery club Over 7 years ago where memories seem strangely hazy, and the apparent certainty with regards to Gretna….why in the former case was it necessary to predicate the loan on a wealthy guarantor and in the latter case we managed to lose money on it (which to be fair probably explains the need for the guarantor in the former case I mentioned)


    Why were we extending more than the likely end of season fee payment which both clubs were likely to receive?  I’m not aware of any creditor stupid enough to send the gross (the full fee payment) to an insolvent recipient on nothing more than a promise of getting an interim loan paid back?  You just send the net at the end Shirley?

  56. Paddy Malarky

    I think most fans of the diddy clubs view CFC and TRFC as two cheeks of the same rse , shtt*ng down on the rest of us from the top of the table , the only difference season to season is which sits higher . We are tolerated only because they couldn’t survive without a competition but are still viewed with contempt …..


    From a business perspective (IMO)

    Both big clubs need each other

    Both big clubs need provincial clubs

    Provincial clubs need big clubs

    A governing body needs them all.

    What happens if one or both of the big clubs leave the league (for whatever reason) is very significant downsizing. 

    ps. I apoligize for the dawn bombardment (not a howitzer!) but I blame lockdown.



  57. Ex Ludo

    The good ol’ Daily Record picking sides and framing the current SPFL dispute as a revolt. It’s dèja vue all over again


    The DR is the choice of the SPFL for obvious reasons.

    Keith Jackson, who for years has been effectively for hire in a role of rent-a-pen for any individual, club or governing body that become a useful source, has recently been batting for the SPFL. Whilst the publication have been pushing the customary a tit for tat, clickbait battle further down the page.


  58. reasonablechap


    My user name was chosen to reflect the fact that I have human frailties and will get things wrong at times! 

    I am staggered at the thought that any reasonable person could consider Keith Jackson is batting for the SPFL!

    Am I wrong on this occasion? 

  59. It’s guaranteed that there is going to be a huge dung pile of nonsense written and said across the SMSM – between now and the 12th May – as the SPFL and TRFC compete to hijack the narrative for their own purposes.

    And all this proves – yet again – is that the standard of Scottish football governance is shockingly poor.

    The fans have known this for many years: why don’t the clubs listen and take action to improve how Hampden operates?

1 2 3 11

Comments are closed.