Resolution 12 & The Broken Bond


Celtic Shareholders who put forward a resolution to the Celtic AGM in 2013 are preparing for the 2019 AGM tomorrow and some of their conclusions are reproduced below. Celtic are planning to vote the current resolution of 2019 down after several years of kicking the can down the road after an agreement to adjourn the 2013 motion was agreed at that AGM.

Given the weight of evidence, and the prevarication that has gone on for this extended period of time, you don’t have to be a student of politics to infer that Celtic are failing their own shareholders over this.

There appears to have been, at best, a failure of SFA governance over this issue. At worst? Well that doesn’t really bear thinking about. That Celtic (and other clubs too) have been in possession of the evidence outlined below but have failed to act on it is a damning indictment of the quality of people running our clubs. Peter Lawwell’s words from 2008 about the integrity of competition seem hollow coming from the same lips as the man who has failed to pursue any kind of sporting integrity over upholding the rules of the game.

Of course we are talking about a fundamental difference in how people see the game. There are those of us who (some say naively) consider that upholding the aspects of fair play and competition are paramount, and those who see the commercial aspects of the game as the foremost consideration. A pragmatist might find a way to accommodate both, but there are apparently no pragmatists in boardrooms all over Scotland – just financial accountants.

It would be unfair to categorise the latter constituency as suffering from some kind of character defect of course. Doesn’t make you a bad person because short term financial gain is your thing.

But it puts you at odds with the paying punters – or at least some of them. As a Celtic fan myself, I’m not so sure that I can take any real joy from my own club’s success if I have come to the conclusion that they themselves are happy with a rigged competition. I am not so sure I can credibly throw stones at anyone who is caught cheating when I see that serious evidence of malpractice is being ignored and hidden under the rug by my own club.

I am sure there are those who feel the same as I do. Are there enough of us? Probably not, but the effect of it all from a personal perspective, is that it disconnects me from the process where common goals and objectives are shared between fans, players and clubs. That’s what clubs are for after all isn’t it?

In short, if the game is rigged, there is no common objective.

And consequently, many of us, deprived of that shared mission, that bond broken, will be forced to re-evaluate their relationship with their clubs.

We all have our own thoughts, but the urge to walk away forever is strong with me.

The Resolution 12 Story

In 2012, Celtic shareholders brought a resolution before the Celtic PLC AGM which asked the Celtic Board to refer certain matters to UEFA because they felt that the Scottish Football Association was compromised, no longer fit for purpose in relation to these matters, at least, and had failed Celtic and all the other football clubs in Scotland and in its duty as a Governing body, and it has separately failed UEFA as the Licensing Authority appointed by UEFA to grant licences to play in European Football in relation to Scottish teams.
The actual wording used was as follows;

“This AGM requests the Board exercise the provision contained in the Procedural Rules Governing the UEFA Club Financial Control Body Article 10 with jurisdiction and investigation responsibilities identified in articles 3 & 11 (Note 1), by referring/bringing to the attention of the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB), the licensing administration practices of the Scottish Football Association (SFA), requesting the CFCB undertake a review and investigate the SFA’s implementation of UEFA & SFA license compliance requirements, with regard to qualification, administration and granting of licenses to compete in football competitions under both SFA and UEFA jurisdiction, since the implementation of the Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations of 2010.”

The response of the Celtic Board was to argue that this resolution was NOT NECESSARY because the board itself had already recognised that there had been failings within the SFA Licensing process, and they were already in correspondence with the SFA in relation to much the same issue.

The difference between the board and the Resolutioners was that the board wanted to continue corresponding with the SFA rather than refer the matter to UEFA or anyone else, whereas the Resolutioners argued that the SFA were hopelessly compromised, were unfit for purpose, could not of themselves remedy the situation they had created, and so wanted to refer the matter to UEFA as an independent and overseeing body whose rules had been flaunted, broken, ignored and to be frank, completely manipulated as a result of SFA inaction and inactivity.

After much discussion between the board and the Resolutioners, it was reluctantly agreed that the resolution should be adjourned and to allow the SFA to be given the opportunity to demonstrate that they could operate as a proper Governing body should and to answer all and any questions put to them via the Celtic PLC board and , where appropriate, the Resolutioners and ,if necessary, their solicitors.
In the interim period, it has become clear to the Resolutioners that the SFA are not fit for purpose, just as they originally argued, and that they are not, and never could have been, the appropriate body to consider and determine the failings in the licensing system that the Resolutioners had complained of.

This is not merely opinion on the part of the Resolutioners but is the determination and judgement of a formally constituted judicial panel appointed by the SFA itself.
The Resolutioners complain that the SFA have failed, and continue to fail in the following areas;

  • They failed to oversee a fair and robust European Licence application process before and after March 2011 in respect of the appropriate season.
    They had failed to mount any sort of investigation despite being contacted by HMRC from 2006 onwards in relation to the unlawful activities of a member club – they should have had a watching brief and requested regular updates from HMRC directly but didn’t.
  • They failed to properly apply the necessary tests demanded by UEFA in considering licence applications, and subsequently, through their then CEO, sought to justify their licensing process and the grant of certain licences on a number of different contradictory grounds – none of which stood scrutiny.
  • They failed to monitor, update their records or make specific enquiries between 30th March 2011 and Mid May 2011 when the list of application grants was formally intimated to UEFA – and by which time there was widespread public rumour and speculation about the state of the tax affairs of a member club together with specific legal documents which outlined that there was indeed a tax bills due which would have disqualified that club from being granted a UEFA licence – had the rules been applied properly.
  • They failed to grasp the situation between March 2011 and August 2011 when the Sheriff Officers were seen arriving at the same club and had still made no enquiry.
  • They failed to carry out any monitoring duties at all post the grant of the licence, with then CEO Reagan telling Celtic that once a European licence was granted – which it was in April 2011 – all further compliance monitoring and any necessary action was the province of UEFA. This was later contradicted by UEFA themselves.
  • They failed to monitor through the June 30th and September 30th, two key datelines specified with the UEFA regulations, and there exists a damning e-mail from one SFA officer to the offending club which effectively says that he hopes UEFA will be too busy to notice the deficiencies in the latest submissions sent by the SFA to UEFA in respect of the club concerned.

Throughout, the SFA denied that there were any failures in their procedures, that licences had been correctly granted, there had been no breaches of the rules and maintained that their procedures had been audited and approved by UEFA during the period.

According to the official UEFA website, no such Audit actually took place with the same website confirming which Football Associations were in fact audited at the relevant time. There is no mention of any SFA Audit.

The SFA claimed that not only was there nothing wrong with the grant of the licence, but that there was nothing for them to report during the post grant period as it was not their responsibility – and then added that even if something had been wrong, or was later found to be wrong with the grant, they could not report the matter to UEFA and could take no action because they were time barred from doing so.
Post the Craig Whyte Trial, where long held evidence was publicly noted and commented upon, Celtic and the SPFL publicly called for there to be a full independent Legal inquiry into all that had transpired during “the EBT years” and all aspects of how what had occurred, impacted on football Governance in Scotland.

The SFA rejected those calls and instead insisted on their own internal inquiry into the UEFA licence process for 2011/2012 – despite previously insisting that there had never been anything to investigate or report to UEFA who had entrusted them with the administration of their Licensing process.

The SFA wrote to every club in Scotland to say they were undertaking that investigation and later publicly announced that as a result of that investigation they had uncovered sufficient evidence to justify bringing formal charges alleging breaches of both SFA and UEFA rules.

This despite denying for a number of years that there had been any need for an investigation and despite reassuring Celtic that their licensing process was robust, had been conducted properly, and had not resulted in any incorrect grant of a licence.

The SFA appointed a judicial panel to hear those charges, determine whether they had been proven or not and then to hand out an appropriate punishment.

That Judicial panel have ruled that legally they (the SFA appointed panel) and the SFA itself cannot bring, hear, determine and act on those charges, nor consider the activities of the football club concerned in any judicial forum, because apparently the SFA had previously decided and formally entered into a contract which says that the SFA will not, and cannot, administer their normal Governmental and Judicial function (which would normally apply to any other club in Scotland and at any other time in the history of the SFA or UEFA) in relation to the acts concerned and the specific football club in question.
Instead, the Panel ruled that the charges concerned should be considered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport as a matter of contract and law – and could not be considered by an SFA appointed panel.
In other words, it has been judicially determined that the SFA cannot as a matter of law enforce its own rules or those of UEFA in relation to one club, and have signed away their entire right to oversee proper football Governance and the implementation of SFA and UEFA rules in this instance.

Further, that contract must have been known to all the appropriate SFA officers who decided and took part in the inquiry that led to the SFA bringing the disciplinary charges – Stuart Reagan, Andrew MacKinlay and Tony McGlennan – and when the SFA rejected Celtic’s call for a fully independent inquiry.

In effect, those same officers mounted their own internal inquiry and brought proceedings which they knew, or ought reasonably to have known, which would end in a legal dead end.
Such a course of action amounts to professional incompetence on a monumental scale – at best!

Further, subsequent SFA officials, assured the officers of Celtic Football Club that following the decision of the Independent Judicial Panel there was no reason why the SFA would not take the matter to CAS and in turn used the officials of Celtic Football Club to relay that message to the Resolutioners in the knowledge, and with the intention, that Celtic PLC shareholders would rely on those assurances and would act accordingly. Those actions and those assurances should now be the subject of a wholly separate inquiry.

Since those assurances were made to Celtic officials, Solicitors acting on behalf of shareholders have written to the SFA on no less than three occasions requesting clarification on what the SFA is doing, whether or not the decision from the independent tribunal advising that the matter should go to CAS will be implemented, and requesting a proposed timetable when this will happen. All such letters have been ignored or avoided by the SFA.
Subsequently, the current CEO of the SFA has stated that whether or not the matter should go to CAS will only be determined prior to Christmas 2019 – some 18 months after the ruling by the independent judicial panel.
This position is a complete volte face from what the SFA told Celtic officials immediately after the 2018 panel hearing.

The conclusion to all of this can only be that the SFA is not fit for purpose and that the governance of Scottish football is so bad, so broken and so far removed from normal judicial and corporate business practice that it must be looked at by an independent body if the matter is not referred to CAS.

Further, all of this must be made public, must be out in the open and must be properly disclosed otherwise any future investment in any club whether by private individuals, stock market listed entities, banks, loan houses, credit houses or whatever is predicated on the wholly fraudulent notion that the SFA will consistently apply its own rules or those of UEFA.

Celtic, as a respected member of UEFA, should not and cannot, stand back and allow this shambolic governance to continue unchecked and without external examination as to do so would be doing a total disservice to UEFA, and such a course of action would potentially make Celtic a party to the entire shambolic administration we have seen thus far.

The resolutioners have stated consistently since 2012 that SFA governance is not fit for purpose and have requested that this entire matter should be referred to UEFA as the overall governing body for European football and as a footballing authority who has entrusted the SFA to oversee the fair application of its rules in Scotland.

Despite what is now accepted as continued and regular SFA failure, that request has met with obfuscation and resistance.

However persistence beats resistance and no matter what the outcome of the 2019 Celtic AGM this is an issue which will not go away and is worthy of consideration and determination in a more formal legal forum.


  1. That naughty Craig Whyte has been at it again, to promote his book.

    Traynor will be apoplectic! blush


    From The Sun;


    Secret recording hears Whyte and Rangers administrators blast stars such as Naismith, Davis and Lafferty in crisis talks


    Douglas Walker 6 Dec 2019, 22:20


  2. In checking my inbox the other day I noticed that Cardiff City are appealing against the decision that they have to pay Nantes 6 000 000 euros (in respect of the late Emiliano Sala's  transfer).

    That led me on to other areas of FIFA disciplinary stuff and I came across this, of which I had never heard or read a word.

    " 1. The FIFA Disciplinary Committee [ in their judgment of 20 September 2019]found the club Rangers FC responsible for the infringement of the relevant provisions of the RSTP related to third-party influence (art. 18bis par. 1) and to the obligations of clubs (art. 4 par. 2 of Annexe 3). 
    2. The FIFA Disciplinary Committee orders the club Rangers FC to pay a fine to the amount of CHF 10,000.  " (about £7600)

  3. I've had a quick look at the hundred and odd page, multicoloured uber amended pleadings in MASH v GASH and decided that unless I get really, really bored I am not going to read it to follow the history of the case ab initio.

    I would advise anyone thinking of doing so to first read or re-read SDI Retail Services Limited v The Rangers Footbal Club Limited, 2019 EWHC 1929 (Comm). It's a lot shorter; it answers a lot of squirrel questions; it lays out judicial determinations on facts and it states the legal position. The decision dates from 19th July this year and follows four days of evidence and submissions on 15th to 18th April this year so anything prior to these dates can be binned.

    So far as Mr Blair of the non-denial denial is concerned one of the witnesses in April, ie a couple of months ago, was "James Don Blair, Rangers' Secretary" and he is included in a list of witnesses described by Judge Persey as "unhelpful and unsatisfactory".

    Paragraph 10 of the decision tells us all what Judge Persey thought of Mr Blair's evidence. Despite Mr Blair being a Man Learned In The Law Judge Persey takes the ink to point out it took Mr Blair eight Witness Statements before he came to a settled conclusion on what his position actually was. Sadly, Judge Persey held "This is all inadmissible." and goes on to fillet Mr Blair's role.

    Could have been worse? It was.

    Paragraph 22 narrates the Elite/Hummel Agreement concluded on 30th March 2018.

    Paragraph 24 narrates Mr Blair making later statements about this Agreement which Judge Persey pithily but politely dismisses with "This was untrue."

    I don't know every word in the latest document but I don't need to unless I need reminding of the smoke and mirrors, twisting and turning, up is down approach taken by T'Rangers in almost every matter; an approach which even in their most ambitious moments would cause Boris, The Donald and Prince Andrew to blush.

  4. LUGOSI 7th December 2019 at 11:09

    '…I've had a quick look at the hundred and odd page, multicoloured uber amended pleadings in MASH v GASH .'


    Nice one, LUGOSI. 

  5. John Clark 7th December 2019 at 10:57

    That led me on to other areas of FIFA disciplinary stuff and I came across this, of which I had never heard or read a word.


    It was reported in the MSM at the beginning of last month, but barely raised an eyebrow.  I wouldn't put it down to anything more than an unfamiliarity of the complexities of international transfers, a situation that could easily impact any other clubs, rather than one that could only happen to TRFC.

    I was more struck by the assertion that under the FIFA Disciplinary Code, the club "Rangers" or "Rangers FC" is a "legal person". It's a pity that the Scottish football authorities and LNS don't share the view that a football club is necessarily a legal entity.  

  6. easyJambo 7th December 2019 at 11:55

    '…the assertion that under the FIFA Disciplinary Code, the club "Rangers" or "Rangers FC" is a "legal person".


    The point being (for the benefit, eJ, of our SMSM and other 'deniers') that it is a football club , and not any 'holding company' that may own it, that dies if or when that football club  goes bust and in consequence of that loses its entitlement to membership of its national association. 

    RFC of 1872 became insolvent and entered liquidation….. Wavetower ( known as The Rangers Football Group Ltd since 12 May 2011)  is still alive and kicking, 7 years after it bought RFC of 1872 and ran that club into Liquidation.

    It is legally impossible for TRFC, newly created in 2012, to be regarded as being the same club as the club that is in Liquidation.

    No matter that one QC 'learned in the law' amused us all in Court when he babbled on  about 'the essence of things' , 'the what-it's-all-aboutness' , 'the fans', 'the traditions', 'the history' and so on, RFC of 1872 is as dead as the Monty Python parrot.

    Its extremely loyal fans have attached themselves to TRFC.

    But of course, the majority of them must know that their wishing  that TRFC were the Rangers of 1872 simply cannot make it so, any more than any of us can wish a departed loved one back into life. 

    Not even the Celtic plc Board's disgraceful behaviour  in  allowing TRFC to claim to be entitled to share the 'Old Firm' trademark in place of RFC of 1872 can make  TRFC into the other cheek of the 'Old Firm'.

    Nor can all the ridiculously repetitive SMSM hype about tomorrow's 'Old Firm' match.(In which connection, let me applaud Tam Cowan for his entertainingly sarcastic remark about the pubs in Venezuela being stowed out with folk desperate to see that match on TV.)

    Honest to God.

  7. easyJambo 7th December 2019 at 11:55

    '..I wouldn't put it down to anything more than an unfamiliarity of the complexities of international transfers, a situation that could easily impact any other clubs, rather than one that could only happen to TRFC.'


    Yes, no doubt about it, what used to be 'club secretaries' now have to be very sharp lawyers indeed, so you are right in what you say about the complexities of international transfers. 

    But I think there would be an expectation that James D Blair , as sharp as they come, ought to have been on top of those complexities, serving as legal adviser to a club well accustomed to international transfers.

    Seriously, though, I myself was bemused, if not flabbergasted,at the extent to which football essentially a sport, has become a legal minefield!



  8. Just hope it's an entertaining cup final today – and that the referee has a good game as well – and that the best team wins.


    It could – and should – be a positive advert for Scottish football.


  9. StevieBC 8th December 2019 at 12:06

    '..Just hope it's an entertaining cup final today'


    Let's have no sectarianism (whether 'religious' or 'political') ,no 'red mist ' physical assaults on the pitch, and no feckin eejit supporters endangering people with fireworks, and  no ludicrous 'honest mistakes' on the part of the officials.

    And of course, no post-match street , pub, or domestic violence,  and just normal volumes of work in the A&E rooms. 

    Pipe dream?


  10. It could – and should – be a positive advert for Scottish football.


    Let's have no sectarianism (whether 'religious' or 'political') ,no 'red mist ' physical assaults on the pitch, and no feckin eejit supporters endangering people with fireworks, and  no ludicrous 'honest mistakes' on the part of the officials.

    And of course, no post-match street , pub, or domestic violence,  and just normal volumes of work in the A&E rooms. 


    OK I'll break the silence!

    Didn't see it all but not a classic (OK conditions were very Scottish!)! Best team lost and hopefully ref paranoia hats are binned!! UTH? No idea how busy Glasgow's emergency services were tonight JC?



  11. bordersdon 8th December 2019 at 20:40

    You called me out on the Ref today Bordersdon. Firstly I will say Rangers were the better team, however it reminded me of when Tommy Burns was the Celtic Manager. Everyone in Scotland was fine with the same pattern of play in those days. What's the problem now?

    I will also say Alfredo Morelos has to be the biggest cheat to play in Sottish football in decades. As for the Ref, Morelos had at least 8 fouls, and was spoken to about diving about 3 times, but no card ever shown.

    Happy, happy days! I have celebrated many Celtic cup final victories, but I will steal a comment from Mr Gerrard to celebrate this one. Today 'Celtic found a different way to win'. 

  12. UTH


    I think my point on refs was, as I have consistently said, that you win some and lose some decisions. Not a fan of the Lanarkshire "mafia" theory!

    Anent Harvey couldn't agree more.

  13. bordersdon 8th December 2019 at 20:40

    '…OK I'll break the silence!'


    A stunned silence at that, bordersdon! 

    Is there a historical precedent for what we witnessed today in terms both of the number of great saves by the  goalkeeper of a desperately unco-ordinated shambolic Celtic and the number of squandered decent chances (and half -chances) by a TRFC firing on  all cylinders to create the chances? 

    I've been around for a fair number of years, and have seen many a surprising result. But I can't recall a game where the losing team lost in spite of 'annihilating'the team that scored one goal out of only two attempts!

    I of course won't pretend that I'm not happy to accept the win, and give credit to the desperate, individual defensive work that prevented an equaliser. 

    But if coaches all over Europe and beyond are not studying the tape of today's game for seasons to come, I'll be astonished!



  14. bordersdon8th December 2019 at 21:52


    What kind of world would it be if we all had the same view? Personally I am a huge 'fan' of the Lanarkshire Mafia theory.  No matter how honest Refs try to be, the system is broken when there is such an exclusive nature to the grade 1 selection process. It is also hugely broken when over 80% of current grade 1 Refs support Rangers. That suggests there is a huge problem needing to be addressed.


  15. John Clark8th December 2019 at 22:21

    Was the Celtic 2-1 defeat of Barcelona not similar  to today's  cup win? 

    Speaking of 'similar' it is just over a year ago Morelos scored in a similar offside manner from a free kick  to Jullien today in a 2-1 win over Hearts on 2 Dec 2018. This was after having already got away with a questionable offside free kick v Hearts a few months earlier.

    On that basis I'll not be expecting any complaints from Mr Gerrard regarding today's game winner. .

  16. wottpi 8th December 2019 at 23:05

    '…Was the Celtic 2-1 defeat of Barcelona not similar  to today's  cup win? '


    Mmmmm… I don't think Celtic were as overall shambolic v Barcelona as they were tonight.

    In the Barcelona game they were certainly on the backfoot virtually throughout, but, as I recollect, not as absolutely shambolically  as they were tonight. And they scored twice ( I cannae remember whether they had more than two attempts?)

    I take your point, of course. There have been many games where victory has been snatched from the jaws of defeat. 

    I would simply say that tonight was an almost inexplicable, unprecedented, example of that. 

    [And ( Mrs C disagrees with me on this) I think the selfishness/football unintelligence  of Morelos in trying on one occasion to score from a difficult angle when a team-mate was in position to receive an achievable pass to give him a clear shot at goal was one reason why TRFC did not equalise. The other was his ineptitude as a penalty kick taker] 



  17. My final point on yesterday's game for those who are interested. A video has appeared on Twitter which clearly shows when the free kick was taken which led to the Celtic goal, the Rangers player Helander ran between Julien and Ajer as the ball was struck and played all the Celtic players onside.  That is all that matters – at the point the kick was taken. Despite this we have journalists like Tom English saying it was a 'yard offside'. Just like they are ignoring Morelos dragging his studs down a Celtic player's achilles. He should receive a retrospective ban for that but won't. He was allowed to foul and dive with impunity yesterday. 

    The media in this country are shameful. I hate to see people losing jobs but they don't half hasten their own demise. However it is good to know so many of them are having a really bad day today. 

  18. JohnClark@23.52 yesterday 

    I would tend to invert your take on the game yesterday and suggest that from a *Rangers point of view defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory. IMHO the awful weather influenced how the game was played yesterday. There were numerous instances of players slipping on the surface and it was entirely predictable that a set piece would decide the game.

    In other news and perhaps more apropos to the broader church that is SFM, the John James site is suggesting today that a meeting took place in London with a specific remit of getting the Murray family involved again with *Rangers. It’s not an outlandish suggestion as many of the assets of the collapsed empire of SDM ended up in the hands of his family, so why not *Rangers too (two)?

  19. For my tuppenceworth , I think the TRFC player between the two taller ,and definitely offside  CFC players , played Julien on , and the ref assistant got it right .  And blatant seems to be word of the month .  No excuses now for not trialling VAR at the Cup Final this season . Jags fans are looking forward to being part of this historic moment !

    PS did no one think to caution Mr Gerard and his players on the wisdom of using " Our day will come " as a rallying call .

  20. Since it's so quiet , I think Leicester are doing so well in the EPL because they have no European involvement . Liverpool paying for their success last season . Big game on Boxing day .

  21. I don't think it matters where the three 'offside' players are standing when the free-kick is taken. It's not an offence in itself to be in an offside position & it's a subjective judgement for the officials whether they're 'active' or not at the precise moment the ball is played & it wasn't flagged or whistled up.

    The free-kick was about thirty-five yards away from the cluster which included Jullien & Helander. The ball was flighted towards the middle of the penalty area where Goldson attempts to head clear. If the ball falls to Jullien off Goldson's deliberate contact, then offside isn't an issue. It's a misdirected attempt at a clearance, which means there is no 'offside'. If Goldson misses (ie doesn't touch) the ball, then I think Jullien was offside, becoming 'active' when the ball fell to him. I've watched the event unfold from several angles & I'm unable to decide whether Goldson does or doesn't get a touch on the ball.

    Perhaps the referee or his assistant had a clear view & decided that the defender did play the ball? It seems the most-likely explanation.

  22. Quite a few sides would have fancied their chances against a Celtic team playing in that manner yesterday – at least till they went down to 10 men.

    However, CFC won thanks to:-

    Poor finishing by Sevco; world class (are you there Kris Boyd?) goalkeeping, and an enormous amount of RESILIENCE.

    The SMSM must surely have been preparing (or had already written) Celtic's successful trophy winning epitaph – especially after the penalty and red card decisions. Their 'tea wiz oot' by then.

    The 'media music' in the coming weeks will no doubt be along the lines of "just turn up, play the same way  and Celtic can't be so lucky again". However, it should be noted that Celtic will be a different proposition then.

    Other points:-

    On VAR whinging. Gerrard should be careful what he wishes for, as this should eliminate 'honest mistakes' – unless the adjudicators are otherwise inclined! (surely not). See also Paddy Malarkey above for his take on 'offsidegate'

    Regarding FF's performance, Chris Sutton on BT Sport, much to the chagrin of Alex Rae and Ally McCoist, said it was only 'payback time' for some outstanding Goram, Klos and McGregor heroics over the years. This was met by the aforementioned AR and AMcC with stony faced expressions, but humourously indulged and supported by Gordon Strachan .

    As for Tom English's use of the word behemoth, my understanding is that this was a hell of a creature which would take some overcoming! I, as a CFC supporter, hope so!

    There ends some of my take on yesterday's proceedings and aftermath.

    Oh my days! (copyright Jeremy Frimpong)

  23. Ex Ludo 9th December 2019 at 09:24


    In other news and perhaps more apropos to the broader church that is SFM, the John James site is suggesting today that a meeting took place in London with a specific remit of getting the Murray family involved again with *Rangers. It’s not an outlandish suggestion as many of the assets of the collapsed empire of SDM ended up in the hands of his family, so why not *Rangers too (two)?


    He seems very certain 

    Infrequent Commentator says:

    December 9, 2019 at 4:25 pm

    If this is true, there has to be money making angle.. Murray has been detached for too long to appear without an upside.

    JJ: 100%. Incontrovertible.


    I await this development with huge interest. I would have said I would be extremely surprised if David Murray wanted to be involved with the new club, after what had happened with the previous one. Surely he has learned his lesson. He can't possibly be this "new investment" the PLC are talking about. 

    Then again, I have no inside intelligence or sources. Just my take on what seems likely. 

  24. Well, Gerrard is going to earn his salary if he can successfully lift his squad after losing the cup final in such a fashion.

    His players must be mentally scarred, in the short term – and privately, they can't be looking forward to playing CFC again in a couple of weeks – and at Parkhead.


    If the Blue Room can keep fire fighting and find the funds off the pitch – then there doesn't seem to be much point in changing anything on the pitch.

    They're still within touching distance of the title – even if they lose at Parkhead.

    And then there's still the Scottish Cup…


    But, after such a painful defeat, any divisions or frustrations within the TRFC squad – or within the team management – could be magnified, and boil over.


    As the manager, Gerrard will have to apply his man management skills effectively, to keep the show on the road.

    …and we have recently seen that Gerrard is no longer prepared to just go along with the PR p!sh that Traynor is churning out – and Gerrard is confident enough to publicly scoff at the Level42 nonsense.


  25. Regarding the offside debate, as far as I can see, the chap on the Facebook clip has totally ignored the actual rules in his desperation to justify the award of a seemingly offside goal. Despite his protestations to the contrary, the hands and arms of all players are not considered when determining offside.

    That said, it may well still be possible, if a little unlikely, that Helander is level with the two Celtic players he is sandwiched between and we are told that officials should err on the side of the attacking player if players appear to be level.—offside

  26. StevieBC 9th December 2019 at 20:08

    '…and Gerrard is confident enough to publicly scoff at the Level42 nonsense.'


    Gerrard is not his own man.

    He bought into the Big Lie that he is somehow the manager of Rangers of 1872, the Rangers of my grandfather's time.

    Even to wearing in the technical area, and against his declared preference, the suit and tie to 'maintain  the high standards' ….of a 7 year old club that lies about its origins and deceitfully piggy-backs on the achievements of a now extinct club!

    Gerrard is not and never could be on my Christmas card list.

    Great and gifted footballer as he undoubtedly was in his time he sold his soul to untruth and deceit.

    And so far, so unsuccessfully.




  27. Highlander 9th December 2019 at 20:51

    Regarding the offside debate, as far as I can see, the chap on the Facebook clip has totally ignored the actual rules in his desperation to justify the award of a seemingly offside goal. Despite his protestations to the contrary, the hands and arms of all players are not considered when determining offside.


    As the host of Radio Clyde said last night to Alex Rae, who nominated it as the Refereeing blunder of the week, "it was such a tight call given the position of Helander that you can surely see how difficult it must have been to make in the blink of an eye?" Rae responded like you would expect a Rangers fan in a pub to respond, not how you might expect a paid pundit to respond, but that's another story. 

    Anyway, I have had my say and everyone else is entitled to have theirs. There are many ways to win a football match, and playing manfully for almost half and hour with ten men is one of them. Also, when your goalkeeper shows himself to be a top player in his position and your opponent's so called star striker does not, it is a major contributory factor. 

    The media anger about it all says everything. God only knows what they will say if Rangers go out of Europe on Thursday, or have they even realised that only Celtic have already qualified, not the O*d F*rm'.


  28. I'm out and about at the moment, but I understand that the latest BDO report to creditors has been published. I will have a read through it when I get home. 

    £1.88m to Wavetower?

  29. The latest BDO report to creditors can be found here

    The two main points in the report are the size of the HMRC claim and a settlement with Wavetower.

    HMRC's claim, currently stands at £67.6m, with scope for further reduction if BDO can successfully argue against HMRC's "grossing-up" methodology.

    The settlement with Wavetower, which we had suspected had happened in August of this year, is confirmed. The settlement figure appears to be reported as £1.880m, with other references to two equal payments of £962,500 having been made.  The sums don't add up, but are close enough.

  30. Re. BDO Report.

    A quick, very amateur, sketch at the report appears to show a total "pot" of around £30m of which just under £20m has been burned by BDO and Legal Fees/Costs. 


    The Wavetower payment c.£1.88m part of agreed £2.8m figure and while BDO say this brings this (Wavetower claim?) to a conclusion, Wavetower may have different ideas.


    More interestingly, it would appear they are pursuing D&P who have not co-operated, (shock horror) with their requests for further information. Litigation ongoing.


    Looks like it's going to be some time yet before the original Rangers eventually die and unless D&P have to stump up for alleged failings, the remaining c£7.5m "pot" will continue to fund BDO fees for the foreseeable…


  31. Another snippet from the BDO report relates to the debenture holders now being time barred from making claims if they haven't already done so. From the figures supplied, only a little over 20% have made claims.

    The Joint Liquidators were also aware that the Company had potential liabilities to Bondholders totalling £7.7m. Claims totalling £1.571m have been received from Bondholders to date, on which a first dividend has been paid. Following discussions with our legal advisors, the Joint Liquidators now consider that they have made every effort to seek out and admit these claims, and any future claims will now be legally time barred under Scots Law. No further claims will therefore be admitted from Bondholders or any other creditor who has not previously intimated their claim.

  32. paddy malarkey 10th December 2019 at 12:21

    '..We're back to company that owned Rangers '


    How can these BBC people live with themselves, being party to such drivelling, untrue nonsense.

    May they (i.e the senior people who insist on broadcasting untruth) be regarded by all as little different from Dr Josef Goebbels in attitude.

    Certainly, that's how I regard them.

    If they can lie [ and it is a lie] and mislead about a matter of sport, what other lies might they be prepared to propagate? 



  33. John Clark 10th December 2019 at 12:51

    JC , at the start of the season , they said that Thistle were one of the favourites for promotion , and I believed them !

  34. The BBC piece is another piece of inconsistent utter p1sh;

    "With that bill hanging over the club, it struggled to find a buyer when Sir David Murray put it on the market."


    But you said it was the company that had the debt!!!

  35. Mr McClelland said that if a £20m tax bill had been agreed during his tenure it would have been relatively simple for the Ibrox club to find a credible buyer.


    Was the original demand not for around this figure, maybe £24m???

    But they refused to pay it, continued operating the scheme and ran up further liabilities until their demise. Talk about parallel universes…

  36. Out and about at the moment, Seen the final in a Bar that was more one side than the other. The more side were very vocal in their determination to win (I believe like me they must have realised this would have been their best chance of a Trophy, this will have been their strongest team, after Jan i can see it weakened, so this was their best chance of a trophy. They played well in the first half and celtic played so poor.
    There best chance. playing a poor playing celtic.
    Playing on a surface that would not suit celtic’s passing game. Played against ten men celtic. Got awarded a penalty and could still not win
    Oh! when the goal went in i was the vocal one amoungst the cries of despair, and as i pointed out to one of the many. The cream always rises to the top.

  37. upthehoops @ 07.10

    Your perception of the media’s alleged angry reaction to Celtic winning despite clearly being second best on the day, adding insult to injury by scoring the winner in contentious circumstances is interesting.

    On the one hand, I concede that the new club, like its predecessor before it became defunct, seem to get an inordinate amount of decisions in its favour when playing my lesser-spotted diddy club. However, there is some logic to the argument that a team built utilising players that its accounts demonstrably prove it can’t afford, is going to have far more of the ball than a team with only a fraction of that playing budget and which is living within its means. Having more of the ball, particularly in advanced positions. naturally leads to more fouls/penalties being awarded.

    I personally don’t subscribe to the paranoid claims of a certain blogger that 27 out of 32 senior referees are masons who will do anything to assist their brothers at Ibrox. Nobody has ever thought to ask him to explain how he (or his well-placed ‘source’) obtained such stunningly precise statistics. I wonder if he phoned the match officials home addresses individually, clip-board in hand, or if there is a list of referees and assistants pinned to a noticeboard in Hampden, detailing matchday availability, contact phone number, which school attended and details of any secret society membership. Or perhaps I’m naïve and the head masonic honcho openly divulges personal details of his brethren when asked by random strangers on a forensic mission to uncover systemic bias in Scottish football. Maybe it’s even simpler than that and 'your humble correspondent' can spot a third-knuckle handshake from four hundred yards. It is unconscionable to rightly berate the media for its blatant rewriting of history, before doing similar yourself.

    What I will acknowledge is that officials often don’t help themselves thanks to huge inconsistencies and basic errors. On the one hand we had Wullie Collum and his assistants exonerating themselves from accusations of bias towards Rangers* by awarding a potentially offside goal to Celtic, yet those same officials somehow failed to see the need for a card despite foul after foul and simulation after simulation by Colombia’s angriest man, including cheating which led to the award of a dubious penalty and a debatable sending off.

    UTH, my only advice to you about the media’s slewed reporting is – don’t read it or listen to it. If you think the hype surrounding the Ibrox club is high just now, just wait until they actually win their first major trophy, if they live long enough to achieve that. There is little point in denying that the gap in quality between them and Celtic has closed substantially in their do or die quest to prevent ten in a row – a paltry two-point gap at the top of the league plus respective League Cup final performances demonstrate this clearly. I absolutely dread to think how insufferable it will become if the new club actually achieves anything of note, because we know it’s going to be hyped to the rafters as the greatest moment in global sporting history.      

  38. On re-reading the BDO report, I think the settlement figure for Wavetower may only be £962,500.

    It does appear as if there were two payments, one in the last six month period and the other in the previous six month period. However, I think that the date headers on the columns in the report are wrong (or at least they are inconsistent with previous reports), leading to the confusion.

    In previous reports under "Statement of Affairs" there are two columns, one which lists the outgoings over the last six months and the other which gives the cumulative total for the liquidation to date (since 2012).

    The dates on this report are 31/10/2018 to 30/10/2019 (I think it should read 01/05/2019 to 30/10/2019) and the other reads 31/10/2012 to 30/04/2019 (should be 31/10/2012 to 30/10/2019).

  39. On the business in Court Room 8 in Parliament House this morning:

    Mr McKinlay, Advocate representing Mr David Grier in his action for damages against the Chief Constable,  informed Lord Doherty that Parties had agreed the wording of an Order that, if his Lordship was content, they would ask his Lordship to grant.

    Basically, although Clark and Whitehouse are not party to proceedings in Grier's action against the Chief Constable, there's some stuff common to the separate claims of all three. The Order sought was an Order allowing the exchange of information ( e.g. witness statements) in  one or  both  of the Clark and Whitehouse cases that might have a bearing on the Grier case.

    Lord Doherty closely questioned Mr McKinlay about Mr Grier's consent to this,  and after a little bit of hesitancy while McKinlay spoke to his assisting solicitor, Mr McKinlay satisfied Lord Doherty that Grier was content.

    Ms Maguire QC representing the Chief Constable could at first only assure the judge that the Lord Advocate was content in relation to the Chief Constable's  case, and it took a smart phone call by her assisting solicitor to the Lord Advocate's office[ while Ms Maguire was addressing the judge] to enable Ms Maguire ( a tug at her gown and a hurried whisper) to confirm that the Lord Advocate gave his consent in relation to the Clark and Whitehouse cases.

    On the basis of this agreement,  Lord Doherty intimated that he would grant the Order sought.

    Proceedings lasted scarce a half-hour.

    eJ and Mulholland the free-lance journo were the only two lay persons present apart from me myself.

  40. Rangers chairman Dave King’s status as “fit and proper” will be discussed by the Scottish FA at their next board meeting after he was sanctioned by the Takeover panel.
    Does anyone know if this was ever discussed?
    If it was, what was the outcome?
    Will the public be made aware of any conclusion to these discusions?

  41. paddy malarkey 10th December 2019 at 20:04

    Is Rule 31 to do with contracts ? 


    No, but I could give you odds that it’s betting!

  42. '.easyJambo 10th December 2019 at 20:44

    No, but I could give you odds that it’s betting!


    paddy malarkey 10th December 2019 at 21:14

    '..Chances are , you'd be right..'


    Aye,very good, chaps!broken heart

    On that link provided by paddym there are I think five  players on charges of betting on football matches going back a number of seasons.

    I wonder what evidence the Compliance Officer has for any of these charges? Is it from whistle-blowers [no, not referees!] among their team-mates? Or the bookies that the charged players allegedly placed their bets with? Or self-confession? 

    I bet ye that in a fraction of the time that will be taken up by these hearings the President or CEO of the SFA could if he was so minded find out and tell us ,with proof , whether RFC of 1872 lied to either or both the Licensing Committee and UEFA.

    I suggest that their refusal to do so strongly implies that they believe revelation of the true facts will show the SFA Board up as scoundrels.




  43. John Clark 10th December 2019 at 22:04

    I wonder what evidence the Compliance Officer has for any of these charges?


    You've lost me there JC. Who is this Compliance Officer? indecision

    I've got vague recollections of a Compliant Officer (not) dealing with issues presented to them but that's about it. 

  44. A quick Google search reveals not a lot about the Compliance Officer. A petition was raised at the start of the year by the fans of one particular club to have her removed from office. Maybe it succeeded. 


  45. Ex Ludo 11th December 2019 at 04:09

    A quick Google search reveals not a lot about the Compliance Officer. A petition was raised at the start of the year by the fans of one particular club to have her removed from office. Maybe it succeeded. 


    Something has succeeded. Morelos is now free to do whatever he likes, with the final on Sunday being another case in point. He should already have been offered a two match ban for deliberately raking his studs down an opponents achilles to his injury. 

    I do expect though we will hear from the Compliance Officer sometime soon. Let's not forget that despite what happened at the recent Celtic AGM, the SFA have already charged Rangers over aspects of how they obtained a European Licence in 2011. That charge has never been rescinded, and the SFA's own disciplinary process found a case to answer and now says it should now be handed over to CAS. That part the Celtic Board have never had an issue with. Yet the SFA has now sat on it for an eternity. However their CEO has previously said a decision will be made before Christmas. It won't go to CAS of course because the 5WA would get a public airing if it does, and could well be shot down in flames by CAS. So when we next hear from the Compliance Officer, my money is on a mealy mouthed statement about how the fabled 'senior counsel' advised them against it, and that it is time to 'move on'. The fact they found guilt in the first place will not be mentioned I am sure.  Once that is done and dusted they can join forces with the media to will Rangers on to hopefully take the title. 



  46. If anybody is in any doubt as to the quality of John James's sources and how forensically he dissects information, his latest piece mentions several times that Hearts' new boss recently left Burnley.  Swap the first vowel for an 'a' and put an 's' after the 'n' for the correct club.

  47. upthehoops 11th December 2019 at 07:19

    '…the SFA's own disciplinary process found a case to answer and now says it should now be handed over to CAS. That part the Celtic Board have never had an issue with.'


     If my memory serves, uth, "..The part that the Celtic Board have never had an issue with "…..was the part that would not have caused them any problem!

    Celtic plc's attitude since 2013, and made crystal clear at the AGM last month (by Lawwell's affronted and needlessly aggressive "What are you suggesting?" question to a speaker from the floor) was and is  one of determined resolve to avert their eyes from the possibility that shareholders  might have been  shafted by dishonesty on the part of RFC of 1872 in collusion with  the Licensing Committee  and with the connivance of members of the SFA board . 

    Plenty of people believe there are serious questions to be asked and answers to be honestly and thoroughly sought.

    And  the SFA 's refusal even to begin to investigate does not provide much encouragement to believe in their commitment to Truth in governance.



  48. John Clark 12 Dec at 12:12


    John, I have stated in previous posts that the Celtic Board have granted the SFA an open door to push at in terms of doing nothing. However the SFA's own Disciplinary Panel have told them they should be going to CAS. If they don't then why have the process in the first place?

  49. I wonder if there are any Celtic shareholders willing to charge the club with negligence re the potential loss of Champions League money.  If funding would be a problem I'm sure plenty of supporters would come forward to help fund any action.

    Perhaps Auldheid would be able to give some info re this. 


  50. So after a defeat by celtic and the ibrox club missing out on a lucrative money opportunity of their first major trophy, (and the prospect of going no further in europe) the ibrox club are said to be in talks to give some old players new deals and give Steven Gerrard a new contract. If this increase in wage bill starts in January?

    Have the ibrox club gone mad? Did they not read the accounts? Do they forget Mr Ashley is just round the corner? Do they remember Memorial walls?

    Or do the ibrox club see the monster coming over the hill and are trying to get the best compensation available for manager and players?

  51. CO, I suppose that TRFC / Traynor is very limited in producing any good news stories at all after Sunday.

    'Talking about' contract extensions sounds very positive.

    A wee uplift before an important EL tie.


    Absolutely, for the mature players like McGregor, Defoe, Davis it's a no-brainer: sign any extension on offer.

    But, for Gerrard it doesn't make sense, IMO.


    Unless he was getting a massive pay rise, then it would make sense to sit tight for now.

    A new contract just increases any compensation payable by another club wanting to take him on.

    If he wins the SC this season – or even the league title – that is the time to renegotiate.  Assuming he still wanted to stay, of course.

    Still think he'll be gone before the end of January.

  52. And here we have the latest Sevco apologist and whinger, Gordon 'naebudy listened tae me' Smith (now a visionary) spouting the latest drivel about the League Cup Final outcome…

    "Rangers would've gone on to win had the goal been chalked off for offside" – whilst conveniently omitting any reference to the fact that Mikey Johnston could/should have scored to put the result beyond reasonable doubt. Maybe the bookies should check with him in future before deciding on their betting odds. 

    I've never likes sour grapes (soor plooms aye), but there seem to be plenty of disgruntled folk like Smith who do (why is that? after all WATP).

    I'm actually enjoying the all round squirming regarding the game and…

    Oh my days – are getting better!!

  53. bect67

    I think the problem for a lot of TRFC fans is that in their heads , they'd already won the cup and were looking forward to Neil Lennon's meltdown that would wreck CFC's season , and deliver the the league title and maybe even a treble . Easier to see why TRFC players are po-faced . A lot of them are getting on a bit and have no medals to show for their careers (nearly wrote carers there !).

  54. StevieBC 11th December 2019 at 19:22
    Still think he’ll be gone before the end of January
    If results go against him in the next few weeks i believe he will be gone. And if results go against him, and he does go, who do the ibrox fans turn to for guidence?
    King the main focal point has departed into the shadows. Would Robertson or park welcome the attention? None seem to crave the limelight like king did.
    bect67 11th December 2019 at 20:54
    “Rangers would’ve gone on to win had the goal been chalked off for offside”
    …………………How does he know that? Celtic played better with ten men, maybe they could have gone on to win, Maybe if celtic had another shot on target they would have scored again, maybe if the ibrox club had another 100 shots on target the wall would have shut them out.
    I’m actually enjoying the all round squirming regarding the game.
    They know they will never get a better chance, that is why the cries from the four corners.
    paddy malarkey 11th December 2019 at 21:50

    I think the problem for a lot of TRFC fans is that in their heads , they’d already won the cup
    With a £50 mill striker what could go wrong.

  55. Up betimes this morning, civic duty performed an hour ago, and I will be travelling into Glasgow a little later for a Wetherspoons' lunch and a few beers with a couple of former colleagues and friends of some 48 years.

    As I open my 'Scotsman', I nearly choke on my coffee and bruschetta as I read this sentence on the leader page, in red ink:

    " …..Our job at the Scotsman is to report the facts and demand the truth"

    I have absolutely no confidence that a newspaper which tells lies in matters of Sport (eg that TRFC of 2012 are RFC of 1872 and entitled to the honours and titles of that club which, being now in Liquidation is unable to participate in Scottish Football) will tell the truth in the much more important business of national Politics.

    The 'Scotsman' continues "  We have survived for more than two centuries precisely because we can be trusted. And every day we endeavour to retain that trust."

    Well, an empty boast if ever there was one! Rangers of 1872 died after 140 years, and died because it lied. 

    The 'Scotsman' is virtually on its deathbed, and its death will be hastened by its part in the propagation of the biggest sporting lie that Scottish Football has thrown up in its history.

    Speed the day.

  56. Dear TRFC fans,

    Want a 'feelgood' story to ease your angst after Sunday & a potential 'squeaky-bum' tie against Young Boys? Well, there's one in the Herald:

    Yes, that's right! According to Alan Temple (who he?), UEFA has given you a 'top' referee, Felix Brych, for tonight. In fact, he's been 'hand-picked'! What could be better? 

    What's that? You're worried he may not be au fait with the TRFC house-style? You don't think he'll be swayed by the crowd? You're worried that Germany is too close to Switzerland (he's from Munich, barely a goal-kick away from Berne at 435km distance!)? You're worried that he has a history of making 'big' decisions in games, regardless of who's playing? You're worried he's 'card-happy' having issued eight red cards & fifty-nine yellow cards in the eighteen games he's refereed this season?

    Yep, UEFA's ‘hand-picked’ him alright! Perhaps not so 'feelgood' after all!

  57. Mibbees our resident, Hearts Bampots can add further…


    but, I hadn't heard of their new German manager Stendel, before now.

    And it seems that Budge took her time to get her preferred choice.

    On the face of it: a brave decision to try a new direction?


    Are the Hearts fans generally in favour of the appointment?

    [Can't say that I've seen too much coverage in the SMSM…]

  58. StevieBC 12th December 2019 at 11:43 Mibbees our resident, Hearts Bampots can add further… but, I hadn't heard of their new German manager Stendel, before now. And it seems that Budge took her time to get her preferred choice. On the face of it: a brave decision to try a new direction? Are the Hearts fans generally in favour of the appointment? [Can't say that I've seen too much coverage in the SMSM…] ——————

    Most Hearts supporters seem very pleased with his appointment, one or two were even advocating him as soon as Levein got sacked/demoted. Don't know much about him myself, but he had moderate success – and failure – with Hanover96 then gained promotion from League 1, finishing in second place ahead of Sunderland, for Barnsley. Barnsley supporters appear to love the guy, and were gutted when he was sacked earlier this year when his depleted squad struggled after their board sold all their best players (an old story, I'm sure, for many a manager). Many Barnsley supporters online still appear to love the guy. 

    His style appears to be to play what he calls 'geggenpressen', a high pressing game, and it will obviously depend on how well the current squad can adapt, and what he can spend on players already well versed in the style, for him to impress and silence his critics.

    As for the coverage from the SMSM! They've hauled out the usual suspects to deride him, mainly using the old chestnut – he won't/can't understand Scottish football – even Speirs criticised him, but mainly because of his unkempt appearance (he'd just completed his first training session and probably hadn't had time to don his 'Rangers' class suit and brogues). His English, though not bad, came in for criticism, too, although that might have more to do with his apparent lack of 'overawedness' with the 'Old Firm' and Scottish journalists.

    So, basically, it's fingers crossed time for us Jambos, and fingers crossed for the SMSM, but for completely opposing reasonsindecision

  59. StevieBC 12th December 2019 at 11:43

    From what I can see the general mood is positive.

    A good deal of Hearts fans appear happy with trying (once again) something different.

    Cathro didn't work, but neither did the tried and tested homegrown experienced manager,  Levein.

    The home grown market (UK) looked pretty uninspiring from those named as being in the running. Motherwell's Robinson was probably as good a shout as any, but other than that there was no stand-outs from home or abroad.

    Barnsley fans appear to love the guy and felt he wasn't supported by the club when they got promoted from League One. In that experienced players left but replacements were all young guys and the  squad was therefore not equipped for Championship football.

    The guy has a win rate of 50% and 47% at Hannover 96 and Barnsley respectively. Doesn't seem too shabby and he apparently likes an attacking high pressing style. 

    The worrying thing is he seems to have started both previous managerial appointments well,  then went on a run of  poor results that saw him lose his job. How much that is down to Stendel is up for debate.

    My fear is it could be another 'George Burley' type flash in the pan.

    Of course Hearts fans are already pointing out all the usual suspects in the MSM will be more than happy to question the appointment , question his lack of knowledge of Scottish football etc. A thing that never really happens with the likes of Warburton, Gerrard etc. 

    The hope around Tynecastle is that he is a relatively young manager from a different footballing culture who might mix things up a bit in the SPFL and he has no inbuilt fear or inferiority complex in relation to  Celtic and T'Rangers.

    All that should be looked on as a positive for our game but it remains to be seen if and when the usual suspects in the SMSM start calling for the same usual managerial suspects (who have generally failed in developing Scottish football for years) to get back into the dug out, dismiss the outsider and lay into Hearts for trying again to break a failing long-term mould.

    Mr Stendel has his work cut out but it will be interesting to see how things pan out. 

    Herzlich willkommen, Herr Stendel – Vorwärts und aufwärts


  60. angry Had the above post in draft but didn't post as I was heading out on a errand and also to vote.

    Therefore didn't see his post but glad to see AJ and myself appear to be on the same page.

Comments are closed.