Scottish Referees and VAR. Is it time for dialogue on the elephant in the cave?

With the introduction of VAR to Scottish football our football media, exposure to the on line, audio and print world has been akin to living in Plato’s Cave where debate/discussion  concentrates on the shadows reflected on the wall by the light of a fire: (PLATO ON: The Allegory of the Cave – YouTube )

The shadows take the following shapes.</p?

  • Was it handball?
  • What is handball?
  • Was it a penalty?
  • Was it offside?
  • What are offside rules anyway?
  • Do referees know them?
  • Do they apply them with any degree of consistency?

All are of interest as they are scrutinised, dissected and disputed, but they all ignoring the biggest shadow of the biggest animal in the cave:-  that of the elephant called ” trust”.

In the context of Scottish football, ever since the game became professional, referees in Scotland have never been trusted because of the demographic peculiarities of Scotland, a peculiarity created as a by-product of historical events in Scotland and its near neighbours Ireland and England.

With such a diverse populace tribal distrust of the other is a fertile breeding ground to grow and take life, like unattended weeds choke a garden.

In the Plato’s Cave allegory the commentator suggests the way out of the cave is by philosophical education and if you watch the video, one description of his guidance  on such education is “dialogue.”

So what is dialogue?

“ Dialogue is a conversation on a common subject between two or more persons with differing views, the primary purpose of which is for each participant to learn from the other so that s/he can change and grow. This very definition of dialogue embodies the first commandment of dialogue.

If we approach another party to either defeat them or to learn about them so as to deal more effectively with her or him, or at best to negotiate with him or her. If we face each other at all in confrontation–sometimes more openly polemically, sometimes more subtly so, but always with the ultimate goal of defeating the other, because we are convinced that we alone have the absolute truth, we are indulging in debate and not dialogue.

But dialogue is not debate. In dialogue each party must listen to the other as openly and sympathetically as s/he can in an attempt to understand the other’s position as precisely and, as it were, as much from within, as possible. Such an attitude automatically includes the assumption that at any point we might find the other party’s position so persuasive that, if we would act with integrity, we would have to change, and change can be disturbing.

The parties must be prepared to come to the dialogue as persons ready to put aside their own needs and wants, at least for a time. They must be ready to listen, without judgement, to the thoughts and feelings as expressed by the other person in the exchange. The parties must be prepared to accept that reaching agreement may not be achieved, although that might occur, but dialogue will lead to both parties, through a better understanding of the others’ needs and wants, to being able to live amicably with their differences.”

How, then, can Scottish football supporters as key stakeholders in the game  via their own club supporter organisations and the likes of The Scottish Football Supporters Association (SFSA)? How can the clubs themselves effectively engage in a meaningful dialogue?

There are 10 “Commandments in the Original Dialogue Decalogue by Leonard Swidler that can be read at

but the following two are particularly apt in terms of acknowledging the presence of the particular elephant in our own Scottish football cave in order to drag it out and into the light?


SEVENTH COMMANDMENT: Dialogue can take place only between equals. Both must come to learn from each other. Therefore, if, for example, one party views the other as inferior, or if one party views the other as superior, there will be no dialogue. If authentic relationship dialogue is to occur between the parties, then both must come mainly to learn from each other; only then will it be “equal with equal,”. This rule also indicates that there can be no such thing as a one-way dialogue.


EIGHTH COMMANDMENT: Dialogue can take place only on the basis of mutual trust, which must be built.  A dialogue among persons can be built only on personal trust. Hence it is wise not to tackle the most difficult problems in the beginning, but rather to approach first those issues most likely to provide some common ground, thereby establishing the basis of trust. Then, gradually, as this personal trust deepens and expands, the more thorny matters can be undertaken. Thus, as in learning we move from the known to the unknown. So in dialogue we proceed from commonly held matters, which, given our mutual ignorance resulting from possibly years of misunderstanding and possibly hostility in the relationship, may take us quite some time to discover fully–to discuss matters of disagreement.

Philosophy/dialogue is all very well but what can it do to bring about the required level of trust?

The advice above is via small steps and one small step but with huge benefits would be the introduction of transparency to the VAR process. This could be done in the reasonable short term by making conversation between referees and VAR assistant audible to all.

It is a technical approach but with behaviour changing consequences because observed behaviour changes that of those being observed. It need not be live during a game but at very least released within half an hour of a match ending. It brings in transparency which is the forerunner to accountability and would be a game changer.

Longer term strategy for culture change to improve professionalism of referees, which the proposal by Sentinel Celts   Calling Out Scottish Referees – SENTINELCELTS sets out should be part of a longer terms strategy for changing the culture of the referee service with the ultimate aim of making refereeing a very rewarding professional career   and be fertile territory for dialogue between all stakeholders, not least referees themselves.

712 thoughts on “Scottish Referees and VAR. Is it time for dialogue on the elephant in the cave?”

  1. I see the BBC’s Kenny Macintyre is tweeting that they tried to get the SFA Head of Refereeing on to discuss VAR but that it won’t be happening.

  2. Upthehoops 15th November 2022 At 08:20
    “… they tried to get the SFA Head of Refereeing on to discuss VAR but that it won’t be happening.”
    Not surprised, UTH. There seems to have been a major ball-up in the implementation of VAR,
    Apart from anything else, can it just be me, or is confusion more confounded by the SFA statement re the VAR decision in the Motherwell v Celtic game?
    The statement was issued on Friday 11 November and is at

    It says: “While the broadcast footage was only able to show a wider camera angle for viewers, Hawk-Eye technology is designed to calibrate an accurate offside decision from either of the two 18-yard line camera positions, with the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position.”
    What’s with this ‘had received the ball in an off-side position”?
    Have I been wrong all my life in believing that it is at the moment when the player with the ball MAKES THE PASS, not when the pass is RECEIVED, that the receiving player is to be judged on or off-side?
    When was the rule changed? Was it changed? Or is everybody up a gumtree as regards what the rule actually is?
    And surely, the Head of referee Operations or whatever is wholly answerable to the SFA and should be ordered to speak publicly about a system which so manifestly is not working as was hoped?

  3. Upthehoops 15th November 2022 At 17:59
    ‘..This is worth a read.’
    It certainly was, UTH!
    There is something that definitely needs looking at.
    But, somehow, I think the ‘Over to you, Michael Nicholson’ will be as steadfastly ignored by the Celtic Board as the Res 12 issue and the EBT cheating by SD’s ‘Rangers’ were.
    Those huge boils on the arse of Scottish Football simply must be lanced and any pus recognised and squeezed out before any kind of trust can be placed in Scottish Football governance.
    Otherwise, what’s the point of football teams competing on the field of play?

  4. If the majority of posters and readers cared to remove their green-tinted goggles for a few seconds, they might note that every single club in the top flight has been on the receiving end of several contentious VAR decisions since its recent introduction.

    Dozens, scores, perhaps even hundreds of baffling decisions have been witnessed at grounds the length and breadth of Scotland, yet only Celtic fans see fit to resort to rabid conspiracy theories.

    Would there be such a furore if the Jota offside imagery issue had instead happened to Dundee United, Kilmarnock or Ross County? Of course not. You’d all have ignored it as vaguely interesting but ultimately irrelevant.

    More worrying is that the author of the blog/article quoted above reported the fact that the assistant referee had flagged for offside, yet that author decided to ignore this crucial piece of information because it didn’t suit his conspiratorial agenda. The offside was judged just as it would have been prior to VAR’s introduction. Let’s be clear; Jota was offside.

    Surely the assistant referee wasn’t conspiring against Celtic too? In a game that Celtic won? That’s some hill to die on.

    Then the author of the article tells us that the SFA has always been anti-Celtic, and thinks that he ‘proves’ this by citing only two instances that directly affected them within a period of several decades. While the other two quoted instances involving Rangers indirectly affected Celtic, they also affected every other club in Scotland, not just Celtic.

    To be abundantly clear, I don’t trust the SFA (or the SPFL) and I take their word on any subject with a pinch of salt. They couldn’t organise a p!$$-up in a brewery.

    However, simple human error seems to have caused the issue; the same human error that afflicts players, coaches and match officials on a daily basis.

    For trophy-laden Celtic and their fans to portray themselves as constantly suffering victimhood is tiresome, not to mention utterly embarrassing to the point of being cringeworthy. In my opinion of course.


    My take on the Jota incident is that VAR has been introduced to improve the accuracy of important onfield decisions and no matter if the assistant referee flagged offside or not then VAR would step in and offer to correct any potential mistake. Same with penalties or violent red card conduct the on field verdict is not final, it is referred for proper confirmation. The author is concerned with highlighting the incompetence/arrogance of the SFA here once again. The simplest explanation is that VAR failed to do its job which the authorities probably thought would undermine confidence in its operation( no sniggering). I can understand the irritation of supporters of other clubs with what they perceive to be constant carping from some Celtic supporters but when the curtain was lifted more than twelve years ago and we all saw for ourselves the corruption and dishonesty of the establishment then trust has eroded and the obvious consequence is what we now see.

  6. Gunnerb 16th November 2022 At 11:19

    Believe it or not, I don’t disagree with a word of what you’ve posted and you and I agree on more than you might think.

    What I’m railing against is the constant ‘woe is me’ attitude of Celtic and its support who portray everything that happens to them as being the result of a massive conspiracy, when the reality is that every club has been affected by VAR and the SFA’s incompetence.

    Is the SFA conspiring against the other eleven affected clubs, or just plucky wee Celtic, who, despite everything, including alleged systemic bias, have hoovered up most of the domestic titles and trophies available to them in the past decade or so?

    Those conspiring against poor downtrodden Celtic clearly aren’t fit for purpose.

  7. Highlander,

    I don’t think we have to resort to conspiracy theories any longer given the actions of the authorities over the last decade. Certainly, the idea that folk in authority are “anti-Celtic” is not one that I have ever subscribed to, but the notion that they will do everything in their power to smooth the path of the Ibrox club is not something that members of SFM find beyond the pale.

    The “woe is me” tendency is there amongst fans of all clubs I think. Certainly loudest within the Celtic support, but that doesn’t delegitimise the problem, and I hope it doesn’t cloud the reality that Celtic fans are also aware that it is not only their club that can be hurt. Celtic may stand to lose out most as the biggest challenge to Rangers* trophy ambitions, but I reckon that is their misfortune suffered by being that biggest challenge. If Hearts (for example) were first or second in the league, I believe they would become the greatest victims.

    Of course there are the “I told you so” members of the Celtic support who will use a pro-Ibrox tendency to be by definition an anti Celtic one. Forgetting, as you say, that other clubs are the losers if “mistakes” are made in favour of any single club.

    The introduction of VAR, and the ridiculous conclusions that fans of (nearly) all clubs have had to suffer are making harder to characterise those incidents as mistakes though. The Jota incident is not dodgy in my opinion because “he was onside”. I don’t know if he was, but the attempt to cover up a singular failure of what is the one thing VAR can do with a good deal of confidence? That reeks of corruption to me.

  8. Highlander 16th November 2022 At 12:49
    ‘…when the reality is that every club has been affected by VAR and the SFA’s incompetence.’
    I think, Highlander, that you make a good point.
    VAR has added to the problems of the governance body of Scottish football.
    In addition to lying that TRFC is RFC of 1872, they now do not explain how the technology of VAR failed so badly as to allow a referee in Baillieston to tell the on-pitch referee to rule off-side!
    Every club can be affected both by the technical problems of VAR and by the hopeless, hapless dishonesty of the governance body which created the myth that a club in Liquidation is till participating in Scottish football.

  9. Elite Sports Group still pursuing TRFC

    From the Rolls of Court:
    “LORD BRAID – R Hamilton, Clerk
    Court 12 – Parliament House
    Wednesday 23rd November
    By Order
    between 10.00am and 12.00pm
    CA74/22 Elite Sports Group Ltd v The Rangers Football Club Ltd Burness Paull LLP Anderson Strathern LLP”

  10. Big Pink 16th November 2022 At 12:56

    I don’t disagree with a lot of your post, yet it comes across as missing the fundamental point that Celtic and their fans don’t take responsibility for their own failings, often preferring to fall back on hysterical conspiracies rather than accept blame.

    If, as you point out, Celtic have been the biggest losers in the football authorities’ alleged bias in favour of Rangers*, surely it was a dereliction of Celtic’s responsibility to do the square root of diddly squat when Rangers Football Club died and we had the big lie foisted upon us by way of the five way agreement?

    One joke from Peter Lawwell about an impersonator aside, Celtic didn’t just remain silent on the subject; they actively facilitated the greatest con in Scottish sporting history by their connivance.

    Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs and anyone else with aspirations of replacing Rangers at the top are also culpable, but none of them had the clout that Celtic had, nor as much to gain.

    Celtic did what they did, including failing to insist upon a robust investigation of Rangers UEFA licence for 2011/12, because they calculated that it was in their best long-term financial interests to do so.

    That’s not a conspiracy, it’s just a fact.

    I’ll butt out of the debate at this juncture because I’m conscious that my viewpoint differs widely from the majority of SFM’s readers and posters, but perhaps they might at least reflect that not everything is someone else’s fault.

  11. Highlander 18th November 2022 At 09:11

    “surely it was a dereliction of Celtic’s responsibility to do the square root of diddly squat when Rangers Football Club died and we had the big lie foisted upon us by way of the five way agreement?”

    Cannot agree with you that Celtic are guilty of facilitating the big lie, between the media, SFA and Rangers they know what they ammended to suit was a lie and it is their lie that has continued and all of us know what liquidation means the death of a business with a club incorporated into a business. The company house files do not lie, What Celtic failed, and failed to do, to the astonishment of their shareholders, as with other clubs failed to do was pursue compensation for both European money and domestic money, Celtic did not have to do anything regards company business, with them it was business as usual in football albeit letting their fans and shareholders down by not demanding the SFA be brought to book for allowing cheating and bringing their own game into disrepute. We the ordinary punter and shareholders know exactly that Rangers of old were doomed when the tax man refused a CVA. Ask the punter who lost his relegation bet.

  12. Bigboab1916 18th November 2022 At 18:31

    Sorry boab, but your reply smacks of exactly the sort of ‘thou shalt not criticise Celtic’ attitude I referred to earlier.

    Of course the SFA, media and Charles Green’s new club were instrumental in concocting the fiction that an incorporated club could survive liquidation, but they wouldn’t have an earthly chance of carrying it off thus far if Celtic and the other clubs had insisted in putting integrity before financial expediency.

    All our clubs, with the notable exception of Raith Rovers under Turnbull Hutton, turned a blind eye to the reality that Rangers had died because they feared the repercussions of a future without the much vaunted blue pound.

    If you seriously think that Celtic didn’t play a major part in the whole charade, then frankly there’s little point in debating the matter, because you’re as deluded as the Ibrox hordes who insist their original club survived liquidation.

  13. “I’ll butt out of the debate at this juncture blah blah…”

    Yiv said that kind of thing before H – but you seldom do! (as indicated by your withering response to Bigboab1916.

    How about you show a bit of self-discipline, stick to your word and jist ‘haud yir wheest’ fur wance?
    Just let go when you say you will.

    WRT to the honest mistakes made in the new VAR rooms, I’m just delighted that my team has overcome the adversity and won every domestic game in which it has been a bone of contention. So for me… no real probs there – just more unjust hurdles to overcome.

    I will assume that your disengenuous reference to the Ibrox (and presumably Parkhead) ‘hordes’ (not, in common usage, in any sense, a complimentary word) was intended as an insult.
    Finally, as you might say …

    “I’ll butt out of the debate at this juncture…”

    Ah really will. Nuff said!

  14. Highlander, I’m not sure it’s fair to say that Celtic-minded posters on here are “missing the fundamental point that Celtic and their fans don’t take responsibility for their own failings, often preferring to fall back on hysterical conspiracies rather than accept blame.”

    Looking at fan sites of all clubs, most fans have a dim view of VAR’s implementation and have many comments/threads not only on VAR adversely impacting their team, but also on how little adverse impact it has had on TRFC’s fortunes. Indeed, as far as I can see, the TRFC fan sites are the only ones NOT to have much in the way of anti-VAR comments/threads (which perhaps tells its own story?). That sort of anomaly, together with the more obvious statistical tables posted recently on 1. the number of penalties given against all clubs in recent years AND 2. the stats on fouls given against versus time in possession all seem to show a trend toward advantaging TRFC. As TRFC are seen as Celtic’s main rivals, it stands to reason that Celtic fans will comment on that perceived unfairness. That doesn’t mean that Celtic fans don’t see other clubs being disadvantaged in the same way by the football establishment, be that referees, authorities or press. It just means that Celtic fans expect that (fans of) other clubs will fight their own corner by calling out decisions that go against them. The couple of Celtic sites I look at cannot understand why Hearts/Hearts fans did not make more noise about the handball penalty they were not given in their recent 1-0 defeat. (NB I am struggling to find video footage of that incident anywhere now!)

    From what I see, Celtic fans are more than happy to look first at their own club when it comes to not pushing back, whether that’s on the 2012 issues, or anything since, right up to recent VAR decisions. I would say the majority of Celtic fan-site members blame their own board(s) for not doing enough to counteract the Survival myth, the 5-Way agreement etc. Most do not trust the Board in the slightest and seem disgusted that the Board took a deliberate business-based decision to hitch their wagon once again to the ‘Old Firm*” rivalry which continues to make money for them. Fans pretty much hate them for that, hence the ‘Not half of anything’ slogan. This attitude of keeping just ahead of TRFC is seen by fans as holding the club back from becoming what it might in Europe for example.

    I think Celtic fans recognise their own club’s culpability. Don’t get me wrong, there are still many who believe the Board shouldn’t have stood up without support from other clubs because the Press would just have made it a Celtic-TRFC thing and there are many who think the Board have done well in keeping the club profitable/solvent for so long unlike Rangers and TRFC, but the majority feel powerless to change the views of the Board in the same way as they feel powerless about forcing change at the SFA etc.

    Far from refusing responsibility and preferring instead “hysterical conspiracies”, I see Celtic fans as blaming their own club for not being strong enough and pointing out some issues that are starting to become statistically evidenced.

  15. Nawlite 18th November 2022 At 20:06
    ‘.. I would say the majority of Celtic fan-site members blame their own board(s) for not doing enough to counteract the Survival myth, the 5-Way agreement etc.’
    Yes, Nawlite.
    There was one club that cheated the whole of Scottish Football in lying to the Governance body about what it was paying its players [ha, and I still laugh at that old duffer who opined that having a lot of money by not paying tax doesn’t give a football club any sporting advantage]
    There is suspicion that that same club may also have lied and had the connections necessary to get away with the lie, in order to get UEFA monies to which it not was not entitled.
    There was a clear need for independent investigation of the circumstances.
    The Governance body refused.
    Such a refusal gives rise to other suspicions.
    Neither Celtic nor the other clubs are to blame for SDM’s cheating or any other possibly criminal cheating.
    But they are to blame for allowing the Governance body to be judge and jury in its own case!
    And what we have now is a living lie at the heart of our ‘Sport’, a sport governed by a suspect Governance body too cowardly to investigate for truth’s sake; or too ill-principled to care about truth.

  16. A different perspective on perceived bias from discussions down south on the EPL. There is increasing comment on the way that the BBC and other broadcasters analyse borderline decisions, particularly whether a player has made the most of contact. Specifically the suggestion is that some players are deemed “clever” (KDB recent penalty as an example) whereas other players are deemed to have dived/bought the penalty. And whether you play for a “big team” or, more shockingly, the colour of your skin influences the discourse through the analysis.
    And of course VAR is highlighting this as generally speaking more penalties are awarded.
    It will be interesting to see whether this perceived bias continues after the WC or whether the broadcasters address it (if indeed it is shown to be a problem).
    (and I do appreciate that this is the Scottish FM site so apologies for the diversion!)

  17. In among the big boys again .
    From Gianni Infantino’s speach
    “There will be many fan zones where you can buy alcohol in Qatar and fans can simultaneously drink alcohol. I think if for three hours a day you cannot drink a beer, you will survive.

    “Especially because the same rules apply in France, Spain, Portugal and Scotland.

  18. Paddy Malarkey 19th November 2022 At 10:52
    ‘..“Especially because the same rules apply in France, Spain, Portugal and Scotland’
    Ha,ha, PM.
    I don’t think there can be many Scotland fans in Qatar complaining about alcohol restrictions?

  19. But what Infantino didn’t say was that alcohol will be available in the stadiums in the corporate hospitality areas but not for the normal fans … so not just the SFA/SPFL that treats the fans as an inconvenience….

  20. Wokingcelt 19th November 2022 At 14:04
    ‘…But what Infantino didn’t say was that alcohol will be available in the stadiums in the corporate hospitality areas but not for the normal fans … so not just the SFA/SPFL that treats the fans as an inconvenience….’
    To be scrupulously fair, Wokingcelt, whatever the story in Qatar, I think it’s not the SFA or the Clubs in the SPFL that are the cause of inconvenience to fans. They are under the heavy cosh of Legislation, regarding what they may do.
    Of course, as with many pieces of legislation, the interests of ‘influential people’ [ i.e. monied people in any aspect of society] are always taken into account by legislators, most of whom, of course, are looking after themselves or those who serve their interests.
    So, there may legally be some scope for them with money to be accorded special arrangements, like drinking behind curtained-off windows or whatever.
    Nothing new in that, of course.

  21. Re all the recent discussions regarding conspiracies and paranoia the old saying ‘just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you’ springs to mind.

    I recently spoke to a retired ex-Scottish Professional player who told me he actually overheard a conversation between two Referees who were regaling each other with tales of deliberate decisions they had made to disadvantage Celtic. The conversation took place within his club’s stadium. So incensed was he that he challenged them and reported the matter to his club Chairman. The upshot was he was threatened with disciplinary action by the club, and with no other witnesses the matter could go no further. This is not a recent story but it happened at a time most members of this forum will remember.

    The notion that some have that the bigotry and prejudice which has blighted life in Scotland for decades could never find its way into Refereeing circles is preposterous. I have no idea if it happens currently, and I hope it doesn’t, but it’s certainly not an impossibility.

  22. Oh what fun, listening to English and others on ‘Sportsound’ very, very bravely having a go at Infantino and his predecessors in FIFA about the corruption in world football and the hypocrisy and duplicity and blah blah blah. Journalistically ready to challenge and fight for the truth from a safe distance, when they and their paymasters are afraid to tell the plain truths
    that Rangers FC Club of 1872 ceased to exist as a football club entitled to play in Scottish Football on entering Liquidation in 2012,
    that its sporting history ceased at that time and cannot possibly be added to
    that TRFC is not, could not possibly be, the same club
    and that RIFC plc’s claim to be the holding company of RFC of 1872 is false.
    Honest to God, cheating football clubs is one thing: journalistic support for that cheating is something else much more serious altogether.

  23. John Clark 20th November 2022 At 14:43

    They are hypocrites of the highest order. The entire charade that happened in 2012 was as corrupt as anything ever seen in world football, and they were/are all absolutely fine with it.

    I was out last night with some friends I haven’t seen for years. It cropped up in the conversation what did we think would have happened if Celtic had did everything ‘Rangers’ did, and Rangers had been the honestly managed cub instead. We concluded that while a ‘Celtic’ would most likely be participating in the Scottish Leagues, there is no way it would be able to lay claim to the honours won by the liquidated Celtic, and also that some of the honours won by the liquidated club would be struck from the record books. The media would have been at the absolute forefront of ensuring that happened.

    As Celtic fans we are of course biased, but we honestly believe that’s what would have happened.

  24. Regarding the discussions about VAR it is worth pointing out that Celtic supporters have been complaining when their team has won the match. They therefore cannot be a accused of being poor losers or sore grapes etc. The best time to make your views known about bad decisions is when you are the victor.

  25. Just for fun I looked tonight at the judgment of Lord Brodie in the petition of Mike Ashley for judicial review of the SFA’s Appellate panel’s decision against him in 2016.
    I attended the hearing of that Petition and made notes, but did not put them on the SFM, because I was not satisfied with them, and maybe there was a restriction on reporting.

    Anyway, the judgment is at

    And I refer you simply to para 4, where it says as part of the acknowledged facts, “RFCL [i.e. Rangers Football Club Limited] is a full member of the respondent [i.e. the SFA] and is a ‘a club’ within the meaning of Article 13.1″
    and to Para 5 where there is this ” RFCL was formed (as Sevco Scotland Ltd] in 2012″
    There is absolutely no doubt: TRFC (or RFCL] did not exist before 2012
    and, incidentally, it is in my notes that I see references to what ‘makes a club’…
    Great fun.
    [, quite unconnectedly I have to say that VAR got it right in the Ecuador game, although it took me ages to understand!]

  26. John Clark 21st November 2022 At 00:08


    It was interesting to see the outrage on social media as soon as the Ecuador goal was disallowed. ‘Corruption’, ‘give the cup to Qatar now’ etc. Yet not only was the goal offside, VAR was able to prove it. What a pity in Scotland we were recently told to accept beyond doubt that VAR proved a goal was offside with zero proof given. SFA take note, but expecting the SFA to come into line with the developed football world is maybe too big an ask.

  27. Paddy Malarkey 21st November 2022 At 11:29
    That’s the £5 million operating profit down the Swanee, then.

  28. Now that the Rangers board have finally acted and fired CVB, surely the week or so spent dithering was used to interview candidates. This would show some form of forward planning in their ranks, or, are they hoping that a new manager can come in and acquaint himself with the players, backroom staff, etc and set a course to hopefully, in their minds, overtake Celtic. What about the next transfer window, what about preparations for the re-opening of the season. Who would be fool hardy enough to take on this seemingly enormous task.

  29. RIFC and TRFC boards seem to be very reactive to the bleating of their fans (Oz , Gio) , so maybe they will roll out a shortlist of candidates and let the fans choose . Charge them to vote , of course ,

  30. Had a chat last week with friends of the newco. Asked if fans would be patient enough to write off at least two seasons (a la Gerard) ….seemingly not. Small sample size and emotionally compromised but all agreed forthcoming season ticket would be a difficult sell.FFP and various ongoing litigation suggests to me the current board might be willing to allow less anointed individuals to carry the torch.

  31. Vernallen 21st Nov 14.28

    surely the week or so spent dithering was used to interview candidates.
    Are you saying that we (Rangers) should have interviewed prospective candidates when GVB was still in place?

  32. Albertz11 — 22nd November 2022 — 11:18
    I believe that most forward thinking organizations who are in the process of contemplating making a change would have a ready list of candidates and some preliminary contact would have been made. I also believe that any progressive organization would have an up to date list of potential candidates and be aware of their thoughts on making any move ( not necessarily to Rangers). It takes time in normal circumstances for someone to make a move at the managerial level in the world outside of football, but, football managers appear to have little loyalty when someone knocks on their door and to give notice appears to be an alien subject. In the world outside of football it would be difficult to understand that a change in management would have someone fired on a Monday and the job search start on the Tuesday.

  33. Vernallen 22nd Nov 19.54

    You have gone from ” to interview candidates ” to what i consider a rather more familiar process when choosing a succesor.

  34. A11 22 Nov @ 11.18

    ‘Are you saying that we (Rangers) should have interviewed prospective candidates when GVB was still in place ?’

    ought to read

    ‘Are you saying we (Sevco/TRFC) should have ……..?’

    Anyway – are YOU categorically saying they haven’t?

  35. Albertz11

    Splitting hairs a little bit. What is an interview , what is choosing a successor. You still have to have discussions in some form and these discussions could eliminate candidates quickly. However it would be interesting to pose such a question at the upcoming AGM. What was the interview process, who was involved, etc. It just appears the board took a long time to reach what should have been a fairly simple decision and to leave an iin coming manager in a somewhat shaky position.

  36. Fishnish 22nd November 2022 At 22:21
    ‘…An ersatz club… anyone will do..’
    Yes, any unprincipled jackanapes ready to work for a club that claims to be what it is not will do!

  37. From Scottish Sun – save clicking links .
    Rangers sued for £9.5MILLION by Hummel as judge orders club to disclose kit sale figures

    RANGERS football club are being sued by a former kit supplier for more than £9.5million in lost sales.

    The figure is detailed in paperwork lodged by briefs representing Elite Sports Ltd, the company behind Hummel sportswear.

    Lawyers representing the Danish company started proceedings yesterday at the Court of Session in Edinburgh to have sales figures released to them.

    It’s understood the loss is connected with sales at stores on Argyle Street in Glasgow, a store in Belfast and online.

    The court was told how Rangers entered into the contract in September 2018 and a decision by a court in London just six weeks later resulted in the Glasgow club “not performing” in the agreement.

    During the hearing, David Thomson KC, who was representing the sportswear firm, told Lord Braid that his client is still unaware of “exact sales figures” but the judge has now passed an order forcing the Ibrox side to disclose sales figures.

    He said: “In September 2018 the parties entered into a contract for Elite Sports to supply Hummel kits and replica kits and had worldwide rights to distribute Rangers related products.

    “The decision in London by Mr Justice Teare in October 2018 resulted in the business not performing its obligations as part of the contract.

    “It is clear to me that Rangers entered into this contract and have failed to perform.

    “We are seeking loss of profit suffered by the pursuer for season 2018/19, 20/21 and up to and including September 2023.

    “At this stage the exact sales figures of shirts sold are still unknown and all we have is an estimate.”

    In October 2018 it was ruled Rangers breached the terms of an agreement made with a company in the Sports Direct group.

    In that judgment Mr Justice Teare concluded the Ibrox club made a new agreement with Elite Sports Ltd, believed to be worth £10million, without giving Sports Direct a chance to match that firm’s offer.

    Despite this ruling the Gers started a new contract with their current kit supplier, Castore, in October 2020.

    Court papers show Hummel is seeking £9,517,249 from the Glasgow club.

    Gavin McColl KC who represented Rangers said: “The contract with Castore is different and they have a greater scope of rights than the pursuer in this case.

    “There are fundamental differences between these companies.

    “Firstly Castore is a sportswear manufacturer whereas the pursuer operates shops on behalf of companies so they are not comparable businesses.

    “It would be like me starting an artisan Gin company and demanding to see the accounts of Gordon’s Gin.

    “My submission is that this action should be refused.”

    Judge Lord Braid said: “I accept Mr Thomson’s submission that it is relevant to look at what the market was and the sales figures for Castore.”

  38. Paddy Malarkey 23rd November 2022 At 17:15
    ‘…Court papers show Hummel is seeking £9,517,249 from the Glasgow club’
    I had been hoping to be able to attend this morning’s session, but I had things to do before we ‘jet off’ to Oz tomorrow to see the gran’weans and didn’t make it.
    Nice spot, PM.
    TRFC’s and RIFC plc’s track records in litigation are not terribly impressive and suggest to me that there is a pig-headed desperation that possibly resists the wiser advice of their legals.
    They had better hope that the estimates of Castore’s sales are way too high and are not a huge underestimate!
    £4 or 5 million to GEE-oh and his crew, and a possible £9 million or more to ‘Elite’ might mean a bargain-basement new coach is all they can afford!

  39. Was there any reference to the Hummel action in the latest accounts from TRFC? The board was surely aware of the pending court case and able to estimate the financial cost of another loss in legal-land. I was led to believe such a contingent liability has to be recorded by the auditors in the notes.Or is it mentioned somewhere without quantifying the amount and I have missed it?

  40. A sports goods firm suing Rangers for £9.5 million has gone into administration the day after details of their legal bid emerged. Elite Sports Group Ltd is seeking the sum from the Ibrox club, claiming the Gers breached a contract which allowed the firm to provide the Glasgow team with kits.

    Elite are the exclusive brand partner to Danish sportswear firm Hummel and it has instructed lawyers to go to the Court of Session in Edinburgh. On Wednesday, they won a bid to force Rangers to disclose sales data to them.

    However, the company has been placed into administration. Keiran Maguire of the respected Price of Football podcast announced the news on Thursday morning, saying: “Elite Sports Group, the Hummel distributor for Southampton, Millwall, Coventry and other clubs, goes into administration. Fans who have placed orders online using debit cards may lose out.”

  41. Gunnerb 24th Nov 11.42

    Page 59 of the 2022 Accounts.

    The Club is currently involved in a number of other legal disputes. The Directors’ best estimate of the Club’s liabilities in
    respect of these claims is also shown in the table below. Uncertainties relate to whether the disputes will be resolved as
    they progress, settled on an amicable basis ,or if not, whether the Club is successful in whole or part in defending the claims.
    The amounts provided may be less or more than the sums at which matters are ultimately resolved. The Directors have not
    disclosed further information on the basis that they believe that this would be seriously prejudicial to the Club’s position in
    achieving the best outcome on these matters

    • I know nothing about accounting law, but I would have thought the need to play cards close to the chest would apply to any forthcoming litigation. However it seems sensible in that situation to make contingencies on the basis of worst and best case scenarios with a note to that effect?

  42. Just a few random musings …

    ‘Are you saying that we (?) should have interviewed prospective candidates while GVB was still in place?’ (All. 22 Nov @ 11.28′)
    So…presumably his sources informed him that Michael Beale was just at Ibrokes to watch the match and have a ‘pie and a pint’?

    I’ve been impressed so far so far in this World Cup by the referees (a class above ours?), who seem disinclined to bother much about theatrical players overacting and exagerrating ‘injuries’ – “play up and play the game’ so to speak”. It also looks as if they’re adding a significant amount of time on for timewasting. They’re also allowing a lot of ‘robust’ tackles (Frank McLintock eat your heart out!). I watched the thoroughly enjoyable Cameroon v Switzerland game this morning, and wondered that (had the SFA’s ‘honest’ VAR officials – McLean, Collum, Dickinson spring to mind -been officiating) Switzerland might well have got a penalty late in the game (handball of course!).

    Gunnerb 24 Nov @ 11.42
    Respected Scottish football writer in his excellent, and hugely, funny book ‘Away wi’ the goalie’ had a chapter entitled ‘The day the ball was burst’ – which has always, for me, brilliantly summed up the collapse and demise of Rangers FC (1872-2012), so with the news about the lawsuit from Elite, methinks another ‘ba might jist hiv been burst’!

  43. A11 24 Nov @ 11.42

    You’re certainly a trier, I’ll give you that

    “The Directors have not disclosed further information on the basis that they believe that this would be seriously preducial to the Club’s position in achieving the best ouitcomes in these matters”. Whit!!??

    This is, of course, bull**** gobledegook designed to confuse, but to me, at least, this roughly translates as:-

    ‘We realise the need to try and cover up, and hide, from all and sundry, including our own follow followers the ‘parlous’ nature of our finances”

    Different outfit – same old crap! Honest, FFP and transparency my a***!

  44. Albertz11 24th November 2022 At 12:31

    Thank you for drawing my attention to the relevant section. The little reading I have done on the issue of recording liabilities in best practice (GAAP) leads me to think a ‘difficult’ conversation might have taken place with the auditors regarding this section of the accounts. Confidentiality should not preclude estimates in accounts for future liabilities as it impacts on investors or finance houses accurately assessing the viability of companies with regard to investing or providing loans. In this case it has painted a picture of apparent return to profit that is a tad disingenuous.

  45. Gunnerb 24th Nov 14.02

    There is a provision for other legal disputes for £1.25 million in the 2022 Accounts.

  46. Have any clubs that have suffered more than the normal number of injuries given any thought to taking

    FIFA to court due to the compressed schedule of games probably being a major factor.
    Barry Ferguson seems to believe the a run of 5 wins will narrow the gap in the title race. Is he anticipating Celtic losing some or all of their games. Truly some astonishing comments in his columns from time to time.
    Why is it a dress code for Rangers to have brown brogues and blue suits. Not the normal match of shoes to suits, but, what is ever considered normal at Ibrox recently.
    Wasn’t Dave King involved in the deals with the company now suing Rangers. Stand to be corrected on that but it does seem to follow form.
    Will the new Ranger manager be able to whip some of the less conditioned players into shape, instill a new found confidence, and get new contracts in place in the next two and a half weeks. And on top of that sort out any incomings and outgoings of players.

  47. Well, here we are [Mrs C and I] in Brisbane, relaxing after watching the Tunisia v Australia game.
    Not a particularly classic game by any manner of means, but we were happy with the result.

    Refereeing approach seemed to be consistent with the approach of earlier games.

    I hope that this approach will be adopted by European referees so that the game will get rid of the cheating little bast.rds who can turn a tackle on them into a bodily assault of such force as to cause their bodies to roll seven times in ‘pure agony’.

    What despicable little cheats they are! [ God, how I despise one particular bastert for his histrionics a few years ago]

    And, needless to say, how much more I despise the cheating basterts in Scottish Football governance who betrayed their office by cobbling up the most absurd lying nonsense that a football club which under their own rules was admitted into Scottish Football only in 2012 is the very same club from which under their own rules they had had to withdraw membership of the SFA when it entered Liquidation.

    One can talk about the ‘corruption” of UEFA and FIFA
    One can ask similar questions about the SFA.

    And one can ask related questions about the running dog lackeys of the SMSM.
    RFC of 1872 died in 2012.
    They all reported truth then for one day at least, James Traynor in particular!
    They all have denied the fact since!
    I am no Galileo, who said that whatever the authorities of the time said to the contrary ‘ the earth still moves round the sun’
    But Rangers of my grandfather’s day is dead.
    And all the lies in the world cannot change that fact.
    And our SMSM-type journalists who buy into a lie are worse than any football cheat tax-evader or diving football player or football governance rat.
    And that’s saying something, when there are real journalists who are prepared to risk their very lives and many who have actually died in pursuing Truth

  48. Paddy Malarkey 26th November 2022 At 19:23
    ‘…Not football related but I don’t think you’ll mind .’
    I certainly don’t mind, PM.
    Good guys are good guys whatever the sport they play, and I was immensely impressed by Doddie’s mental and emotional strength in face of that terrible health condition. I hope that I will be as upbeat as he if or when I find myself in similar circumstances of facing pain and death.

    Until I came to live in Edinburgh rugby as a sport never attracted my interest.

    I blame that on the PT teacher in the school I attended in 1955. One day he took us out to the playing fields somewhere near Bishopbriggs or Kirkintilloch where a school called something like Alan Glens or some such played rugby.
    He made absolutely no attempt to try to explain what the game of rugby was about. We were east end Glasgow kids who played football in the street and had seen a rugby ball only if Pathe news at the Black Cat cinema had a clip of some New Zealand rugby team hammering an England team, or some such.
    To this day I don’t know what he could have been thinking of except perhaps to earn some brownie points in the hopes of getting a job in Alan Glens for his efforts in promoting rugby!
    When I came to live in Edinburgh I had work colleagues as working class as I involved in rugby as in the Borders, like the rugby enthusiasts in working class Wales.
    That gave me a different perspective and an understanding of the game pretty much as the televising of American football did about that sport.
    I still wouldn’t pay to go to a rugby match or an American football match but would happily accept a free ticket and enjoy the experience!
    May Doddie as a good guy rest in peace.

  49. I’ve noticed that in the majority of photos of potential new Ranger’s manager that any jacket or top he has on still has the unknown 5 stars on them. Even a couple of photos with players have the same 5 stars. However, recent photos show no stars. Has this ever been explained. Surely there is a good reason for both sides one for the stars and one for no stars.

  50. It’s midnight here. 7 minutes ago there is this in the Scotsman:
    ‘Michael Beale could be appointed as the new Rangers boss as early as Monday afternoon.’
    Has it happened?

  51. HirsutePursuit 28th November 2022 At 19:13
    Thanks, HP.
    [I’ve changed to Australia time now!]
    It will be interesting to see to what extent Beale really was the skilful hand behind Gerard’s success as was widely believed.
    I suspect that if Ross Wilson persuaded the board to engage Beale his own future at TRFC will be dependent on Beale’s efforts!

  52. Are some people destined to repeat mistakes they have made in the past. An untried and perhaps an over hyped manager given a three and a half year contract. They just removed themselves, expensively, from a similar deal. Wasn’t it just yesterday that Beale was quoted as saying he need confirmation of a transfer budget, and Parks has replied with a limited budget and perhaps more based on player sales. I find it interesting that one of the former Ranger stalwarts is rather lukewarm on the appointment as well. Was there a thorough interview process during the Aberdeen visit. If so, wouldn’t that be considered tapping up.

  53. Vernallen 29th November 2022 At 01:34
    ‘…If so, wouldn’t that be considered tapping up..’
    Tut- tut, Vernallen!
    As if a ten-year-old club that claims to have won 55 titles over 149 years would stoop to any form of underhand practice!
    Besides, the unwritten rule in Scottish Football governance is that no questions whatsoever may be raised about the ‘Integrity’ of RIFC plc/TRFC let alone any action be taken.

  54. From the Scotsman online edition By Angus Wright
    6 minutes ago
    48 minutes ago

    “Rangers and the organisers of the Sydney Super Cup are embroiled in a legal battle after the tournament’s promoters filed court action against the Ibrox club for withdrawing from the competition…local team Western Sydney Wanderers and are looking for £1.7million in compensation. ..The Scotsman understands, however, that Rangers will launch a counterclaim against the organisers over breaches in contract…”
    God, was there ever a more litigious upstart of a football club?
    They signed up for the Sydney thingy without a thought about how their own fans would feel about playing a very secondary and subordinate part in the proceedings.
    And now they are being bitten in the financial for their unwise, unthinking and hopelessly incompetent buggering about looking for a few easy bob to help pay the bills.
    This adds to the unflattering image of them being a club riven internally by dissension among the board members amid fears of the same kind of financial melt-down as was suffered by the club they falsely claim to be!
    Really, the holding company directors ought to be ashamed of themselves and be embarrassed at the general hames they have made of things.
    I’m glad I’m not a shareholder in RIFC plc or in a provincial bus company.

  55. You may have noticed that the site has been revamped and is now ad-free. The nag screen pleading for assistance will be shown once every few days, and the home page is the “About” page for the minute. You can access the latest blog via the “Blog” menu item where a list of all available blogs will be available in date order.

    We will probably change the homepage to a kind of “News” and housekeeping page when we get bedded in

    The new site design should be easier to navigate and work with we hope – particularly with mobile devices. There will most likely be a few snags to iron out, not least of which is the crazy stuff happening to the Avatars. Hopefully we will get that sorted in the next couple of days.

    Any comments, observations or cries for help, please let me know 🙂

  56. Vernallen 29th Nov 13.24

    Wasn’t it just yesterday that Beale was quoted as saying he need confirmation of a transfer budget
    Can you please tell me where you seen this as i must have missed it?

  57. John Clark 29th Nov 11.49.

    Rangers are raising a legal counterclaim against Sydney Super Cup organisers who are taking action over the club’s withdrawal from the event.

    The Ibrox club have cited numerous breaches of contract related to communications for the competition, its marketing and issues over payments. They are also looking to cover the loss of potential earnings that would have been made on the tour.

    Sources suggest there’s disappointment over lost fees amid what is perceived to be various failures by the organisers. Those close to the Govan side are confident of their position and are not expecting to have associated costs hit the club’s balance sheet.

    Various reports from Australia cite legal action taken by TEG Live POty Ltd and Left Field Live Pty Ltd in Federal Court last Friday. They claim the friendly matches against Celtic and Western Sydney Wanderers were terminated wrongfully and are seeking £1.6m in compensation.

    The tournament was announced unexpectedly early by Celtic on March 1st, catching their rivals off guard. It was immediately controversial with fans of both clubs taking to social media to give their verdicts. Rangers confirmed their involvement a day later.

    Quickly, it became clear that Celtic manager Ange Postecoglou’s return to his homeland was going to be a significant element of the event’s marketing, a strategy that was felt to be at odds with what was positioned prior to the final agreement.

    Rangers withdrew less than a month later citing issues with the event’s organisers.

    A statement read: “Rangers can confirm the club will not be participating in the Sydney Super Cup in November 2022.

    “After it became clear the tournament organisers were unwilling to fulfil their commitments to Rangers, we have, with immediate effect, terminated the club’s agreement with the organisers.”
    The event went ahead earlier this month with Everton coming into the four-team competition instead.

  58. Morton on a roll in the league and now an early Christmas present for the directors with an away cup draw to Celtic. With the 2013 Morton hero ( Dougie Imrie) now the GMFC manager could lightning strike twice!

  59. Color me astonished but the media slavering over Mick Beale coming with a positive message and plans for the players. What did they expect him to do, rehash the last few weeks, harken back to the Cl, or as they seem to do at Ibrox live in a European final land. It will be interesting to see how long the honeymoon lasts with both fans and media. A few results similar to the last couple before GVB got the axe and questions will be raised. The AGM will no doubt focus on Seville, stopping 10 in a row , and getting to 56. Oh, lets bring back Billy Gilmour., but he is not injury prone so where is the interest.

  60. “announced unexpectedly early”?

    Is it Celtic’s fault? And if so, will they be getting sued also? 🙂

  61. Anyone got any insight into the PTFC “fan ownership” fiasco?
    Been thinking about a Podcast covering it …

  62. Can I also point out that there may be some changes that folk don’t like, either additions or omissions to the workflow we are all used to.
    Please flag them up if the user experience is being hampered in any way.

    Also the stats tell me that around 60-something percent of readers access the site via mobile phones. Therefore the site designer was tasked with making it more mobile friendly than the previous build.

    Can everyone posting let me know how they usually access? PC? Mobile? Tablet?

  63. Westcoaster
    Just noticed that you had been blocked on the site by the anti-spam bot a while back. Apologies for not responding sooner. No idea where the alert went to. Only noticed when doing some house-keeeping.

  64. Albertz11
    29th November 2022 at 13:17

    “After it became clear the tournament organisers were unwilling to fulfil their commitments…”
    Do you have any insight or guesses as to what these commitment failures are ?

  65. Gunnerb

    “After it became clear that the tournament organisers were unwilling to fulfil their commitments”

    Reading between the lines, what they seem to be saying is:-

    “After it became clear that the tournament organisers were unwilling to run the tournament to suit us and not those pesky noisy neighbours”

    However, I suspect you won’t get a response to that specific point because:-

    a) the poster has no idea (I too would love to be presented with a logical and honest explanation)
    b) neither does the reincarnated club’s ‘economical-with-the-truth’ Board (if they had any idea they would have said so)
    c) the SEVCO statement quoted is, in short, nonsensical

    In the case of anyone infected with the WATP condition, ‘wordsmithing’ is just another way of lying/denying (liquidation anyone?). That’s what they, and the poster in question, do when someone ‘calls them out’.
    So, in the case of the Australian Tournament, I say “Man up and face the truth – yiz wur jist jealous o’ CFC and Ange being the main attraction’ How childish and pathetic!

    BP – have we lost the TU/TDs again? (they’re a good gauge on how our posts are received by others)?

  66. bect67
    1st December 2022 at 11:59
    I thought the problem was that the clubs negotiated separately with the organisers , then one found they were being paid less than the other and soothers were soon airborne . There was also concern over the use of the “Old Firm” moniker in advertising the event .

  67. bect67
    1st December 2022 at 11:59
    There has been much made recently of verbal agreement failures in Scottish football. I wonder if TRFC had similar assurances regarding the Australian trip. It will no doubt boil down to written signed contracts but lawyers have been known in the past to interpret black as actually a deeper shade of white. Fun times ahead.

  68. Alberetz11 — Nov 29–22–13:03

    Believe the article was in the DR the weekend before official signing was announced.

  69. Just for the record it is now 15.31 on Friday afternoon here in Brisbane. was temporarily blocked when I couldn’t remember my SFM password (so long ago was it that I was last required to use it!) and made a ball-ups of trying to create a new one and get it accepted. My fault, of course, pressing wrong buttons at the wrong time frantically.
    BP (thanks BP) got it sorted for me when I was forced to ask for help late last night Brisbane time.

    I noticed in Wednesday’s rolls of court the following entries in the ‘calling list’:
    CA 104/22 APT Investments Ltd v Rangers International Football Club plc

    CA 105/22 Norne Astalt v Rangers International Football Club plc

    What is of immediate interest is that Norne Astalt is one of the group of 4 shareholders (whose combined shareholding is 8.5 million) was blocked and untradable because the RIFC board is not satisfied on the question of who are the ‘beneficial owners’.
    The ‘ATP Investments Ltd’ may it seems be either an Australian company that was dissolved or a Singapore company that is still in business.
    It is possible that directors or former directors on the RIFC board may be or may have had an interest, or have an interest, in one or other or both companies.
    I have not had time to pursue my research and may of course be entirely wrong.
    But the question has piqued my interest.
    Are RIFC trying to get their hands on these shares in order to have some to sell to raise few bob, and APT and Norne are resisting through the Courts?

  70. @JohnClark 2 Dec 5.55

    Am I mistaken in thinking those bringing the case are named first and those defending second. Certainly the case for the Elite Group hearings still on the rolls. Could it be Norne Asalt are pursuing RIFC for money tied up in shares, that are now pretty much worthless any way if they weren’t worthless for not having voting rights. Is it also possible, since it seems more than coincidental, that ATP are behind one of the other shareholders who were “frozen”

  71. Oh and you could throw in reputational damage, given RIFC pretty much accused them of money laundering.

  72. tykebhoy
    2nd December 2022 at 10:24
    ‘…Am I mistaken in thinking those bringing the case are named first and those defending second.’
    No, you’re not mistaken:
    the ref number begins with CA, which means it’s an appeal. So Norne Astalt is appealing against a decision that went against them earlier.
    Which suggests to me that RIFC may have convinced a judge that they had some claim on the shares since the suppose owners would not identify themselves. (I suppose there must be some legal power related to laws about money-laundering and such that may allow a plc to call in shares because the owners won’t say who they are.
    Speculation on my part, of course.
    But getting 8.5 million shares back for nothing which could be offered again to the market would be worthwhile doing.
    I’ve no knowledge yet of the original judgment which is being appealed against.
    I’ll try to find it.

  73. paddy malarkey
    2nd December 2022 at 15:09
    ‘…Meet the new boss …’
    Lawwell says
    “I will be offering my support and guidance to the board and executive management team to ensure we continue to drive the club forward and protect and promote the interests of our supporters.”
    He did a helluva lot of nothing to support the Integrity of Scottish football or the interests of shareholders by accepting without question the refusal of the SFA to institute an independent inquiry into the Res 12 matter.
    To my mind he aligned himself with those in football governance who created and sustain the blatant untruth that TRFC is Rangers of 1872, putting filthy lucre above principle.
    Personally speaking, guys like that are no different from the SDMs of the sporting world.
    Bad cess to him.

  74. Westcoaster
    2nd December 2022 at 23:24
    ‘…DR article from 2018 where Norne Astalt and ATP Investments Ltd are referenced.’
    That was a very helpful reminder of what lies behind the ‘calling list’ entries, Westcoaster, and of what lies surround the whole dirty doings at Ibrox and Hampden from SDM’s days to the present.
    Integrity in Scottish Football?
    I think not.

  75. Have the reporters at the DR reached the saturation point in their coverage of Mick Beale. Hardly any articles on the readily quoted new boss. One question they might want to ask is how come in your first appointment there were five stars on the sweaters, track suits, etc, but in your second go around there are none. Will the players enjoy being fitted out in blue suits and brown brogues as the Rangers return to the tradition of wearing suits to games. I’m sure the fashion aware guys will be happy. It could be another revenue stream as some clothier will want to attach himself to the club as an exclusive provider. How will the second week of training be and what gems or pearls of wisdom will be uncovered. The real test comes on the 15th.

  76. I’ve been fiddling about on BAILLII trying to find the judgments against which Norne Astalt and APT Investments appear to be appealing
    Haven’t found them yet.
    But as a wee entertainment for myself, I idly fiddled about looking at other court cases.

    I was struck by this case as possibly having been the origin of the nonsense that it was the ‘holding company’ that was liquidated and not the club
    From the Court of Session judgment pages:
    “6 June 2012
    [Note: this is a corrected transcript of a judgment delivered ex tempore on 29 May 2012.]

    [1] This is a petition for judicial review by the Rangers Football Club plc, a company presently in administration. That company presently operates Rangers Football Club (to whom I shall refer as “Rangers”).”
    That, to my mind, is simply a load of bolloks!
    It was Rangers Football Club plc that held the share in the SPL that gave it an entitlement to membership of the SFA, not some other ‘holding company’!
    Was that where the rot began, following the weasel words of the criticised Administrators about CG ‘buying the assets and business’ as if the football club had been bought whole and entire by a new owner who ponied up the millions to pay all its huge debts?
    I rather suspect that to be the case.
    But as ever I will be happy to be proved wrong.

  77. vernallen 3rd Dec 13.44

    Rather than constantly referring to the various puff pieces the DR churn out how about giving an opinion on yesterdays front page re- match fixing allegations, and to be clear that’s all they are at present.

  78. The post of 13.53 should have referred to sports gambling and not match fixing. Brain freeze and multi taskinging to blame.

  79. Highlander
    18th November 2022 at 19:32 | Edit

    Not only did Celtic not raise any objections to the 5WA when given the opportunity it is inconceivable that they were unsighted on its contents until the completed document arrived for their acceptance.

    It’s a matter of record (as is all the chicanery ) on

    Celtic have now let the fox back into the hen house with the appointment of Peter Lawwell as non executive Chairman which has been met with despair/anger by many Celtic supporters.

  80. Albertz11 3rd December 2022 –13:59 — 13:53

    I agree that sports gambling has got out of hand. The sports networks on this side of the ocean have got out of hand on advising of upcoming games with the over/under spread on goals/points/ etc. They even offer the option of betting mid games on outcomes, scores, scorers, etc. With the number of upsets at the WC it would be interesting if someone did some digging on the betting patterns in those games. However getting back to the feel good, puff pieces, it comes down to lazy journalism and the attempt to add a feel good factor for the followers of the former club known as Rangers. One question for Ross Wilson who else was interviewed or was this another appointment in the shower room.

  81. vernallen
    3rd December 2022 at 22:54
    “..One question for Ross Wilson who else was interviewed or was this another appointment in the shower room.”

    There was global interest in managing the most successful club in football. We have courteously acknowledged this and maintained the privacy and confidentiality of applicants as our support would expect and understand. We always wanted someone who understood what it meant to manage this club and Michael Beale has show himself to be ….

  82. gunnerb 4th dec 2022 01:18

    The PR department was certainly ahead of the curve on that question with a well prepared and a little too officious sounding response. It would be interesting to know if it was delivered with a straight face, tongue in cheek or the occasional stutter to make it appear it came off the top of his head.

  83. There are a few functions I’d like to restore to the site – like the TUs and ability to edit comments – but I will proceed with caution as I want the basic stuff testing successfully before I add the garnish

  84. Big Pink
    4th December 2022 at 23:54
    Added the personal message function to the blog. See top menu

    Is there an issue with the personal message function atm ?(constant error something went wrong -retry )

  85. Following my test post of 7 december 0532 I am happy to say that the glitch that prevented me from posting has been sorted out by Big Pink.
    I am grateful to him for his understanding that an auld geezer like me has a wee bit difficulty with blogs and access and stuff that my just about to be 10-year-old twin granddaughters are experts in!
    Who knows, maybe he’s an auld geezer as well, who depends on his kids or grandkids for his technical expertise!

  86. Yippee! My test post has appeared. My thanks to BP apologies if my woeful lack of techy savvy might have caused the problem!
    (I have a problem also with my TUI cashcard account, trying to reset my forgotten password and ‘memorable date’)
    It’s now 10.12 and we’re off to Wellington Point with the two older granweans and the dug.Sun splitting the rocks.

  87. The latest report from BDO.

    As at the date of our last update on 10 December 2021, HMRC’s claim as it then stood was as follows:
    £ 000.
    EBT claim – held 48,881
    Small tax claim – admitted 3,079
    Small tax claim – held 1,000
    Craig Whyte era – admitted 10,273
    Inheritance Tax claim – held 1,281
    We are pleased to advise that since the last report, we continued extensive and collaborative
    discussions with HMRC to reach a negotiated resolution in relation to the remaining elements of the
    After significant input from BDO’s Tax Dispute Resolution team, together with our legal advisors, we
    were able to reach a composite settlement of £56m for the whole of the HMRC claim.
    Formal settlement documentation will ensure that HMRC will not raise any further claims in the
    The agreed settlement with HMRC reflects the outcome of the Supreme Court decision in 2017.

  88. gunnerb
    8th December 2022 at 08:27
    “However, a statement on behalf of the seven directors is strongly critical of the board’s opponents.
    “Although all members of the board were re-elected at last month’s AGM, a section of the fanbase, encouraged by a false narrative about fan ownership and ongoing negative commentary, has not moved on,” it said.”
    I can’t be alone in wondering what the ‘false narrative about fan ownership’ is.
    I am distressed to hear that a generous gesture by a rich man should now indirectly have brought about dissention in what I thought was a forward-looking, enlightened club?
    Although I’m not an immediate PT fan, I did have some indirect familial connections with the club many years ago and feel that I can express that distress while not taking sides but expressing the desire that truth be told as to actual fact.
    Unlike what happened in the Rangers liquidation situation!

  89. Interesting site PM and noticed the ROI women’s team being fined I presume for the singing of Celtic symphony song after their victory over Scotland. I wonder if this will have ramifications for the domestic scene.

  90. Albertz11 – 8th Dec 10.32

    I’ve pasted the link to the full report Albertz11. This is obviously a pertinent section.

    “This composite settlement represents an agreed reduction to HMRC’s initial submitted claim in the
    liquidation. As a result, all other unsecured creditors should receive dividends totalling
    approximately 5.3p in the £ more than they would have otherwise received. It also negates the need
    for further protracted litigation which could have been costly to the liquidation estate.
    The Joint Liquidators have been in consultation with the Committee and it was agreed that the
    composite settlement of £56m was a positive outcome for the creditors.”

    HMRC have clearly considered the cost benefit in pursing this further. With creditors only receiving a total of 14.3p in the £, the difference between their claim and “settlement” would only have realised a further £1.2m for the taxpayer.

    To put the comment “further protracted litigation which could have been costly to the liquidation estate” into perspective the legal costs are itemised on page 2 – over £14m!! Add this to BDO’s fees, £6.5m, and climbing and it’s easy to see why HMRC have brought this debacle to an end. Overall HMRC will receive only £8m from Rangers estate and in reality that was only possible from funds coming into the “estate” from legal action against Collyer Bristow (£24m) and the successful claim against the Administrators! (£4.7m+£2.8m in costs), not from the Rangers “estate” per se.

    “7. Conclusions
    We have attended to all statutory requirements throughout the course of the liquidation to date.
    The Joint Liquidators expect to pay the final dividend in the next 6 months and subsequently be in a
    position to close the case on consignment of any unclaimed dividends. Therefore, it is likely that the
    next report to the creditors in this matter will be the final report.”

    From the Conclusions it would appear we are getting closer, after 10 years!, to a completion of Rangers’ liquidation.

  91. Thanks Westcoaster and Albetz11 for highlighting the latest BDO report. That word ‘liquidation’ though ..ooh , Westcoaster! How very dare you?


    “On Tuesday, the club’s board devoted significant energies at their AGM to detail how recent impressive revenues have not provided the slush fund presumed. Little more than a day later, came the publication of the latest report from joint liquidators of the oldco Rangers, BDO. The firm tasked with acting for the creditors left hugely out of pocket when the previous incarnation of the Ibrox club went bust in June 2012. Detailed in that report, definitely, is the eye-watering extent to which this Rangers used the public purse, not revenues, as a slush fund by way of maleficence.

    Rangers, under former owner David Murray, were propelled headlong towards liquidation when HMRC caught on to their misuse of an Employee Benefits Trust scheme. EBTs, as they are known, were utilised from 2001 to 2011 to avoid paying tax and national insurance on player and staff salaries funnelled through them. Following a typically protracted legal toing-and-froing, these were deemed to have breached tax legislation by a Supreme Court ruling in 2017.

    Now, BDO, have finally reached agreement with HMRC on the tax denied to the Treasury coffers by Rangers. First, and principally, during the Murray era, and then after Craig Whyte bought the club from the Edinbugh-based businessman for a £1 in May 2011 and proceeded to withhold tax. A sale rushed through because Murray was then coming under severe pressure from Lloyds Bank as his empire had racked up a mountainous debt that the bank largely was on the hook for.

    HMRC had set out the liabilities from the oldco Rangers – which now goes under the name RFC 2021 P.L.C (formerly the Rangers Football Club P.L.C, “the Company”) in Liquidation, in the BDO report – as £64.5m. This was the accumulation of a £48.8m claim from the EBT scheme, £4m from the small tax case, £10.2m from the Whyte era, and £1.2m from an inheritance claim. The small or, as it became known, ‘wee’ tax case related to another tax avoidance scheme concerning player bonuses uncovered during Whyte’s due diligence, and to which Rangers straight away admitted.

    BDO have now reached a “negotiated resolution” that has resulted in a “composite settlement” of £56m for the whole HMRC claim. Or, if you prefer, almost 87% of what the tax authority sought to have lodged.

    This conclusion to an interminable saga is significant since there were some bizarre moves three years ago to promote the notion that gross miscalculation by HMRC over EBTs had prevented Murray attracting a buyer beyond the dubious turnaround specialist Whyte to spare the old Rangers from liquidation. Yet, even without Whyte’s arrival on the scene and his subsequent mismanagement, Rangers would still have been left with a near £50m bill to HMRC. A liability they could never have satisfied and, as this demand hadn’t crystallised in 2011, never found an alternative buyer to step forward back then. Especially when there was an additional £18m bank debt Lloyds demanded be repaid before sanctioning any sale of the Ibrox club.

    It doesn’t affect the finances of the current Rangers – under a different company structure – that creditors are in line to receive just over 14p in the pound over the car crash that the club’s finances became before they hit the wall. But these absolutes should surely end any further misguided attempts to present a scenario in which Rangers could have avoided liquidation and the need, essentially, to reform in 2012.”

    While journalist Andrew Smith still indulges in linguistic gymnastics to avoid saying outright that Rangers Football Club died the death of liquidation, he at least dispels the myth that Rangers could’ve somehow paid their debts and he rightly cites David Murray as the major architect of Rangers demise.

  93. Great post Highlander – in addition to the points raised in Smith’s article Oldco would still have been liable for penalties and interest on the various elements of the final figure had they limped on. There was not an earthly chance Rangers could have paid. Liquidation was inevitable.

  94. Highlander
    8th December 2022 at 17:18
    ‘…Andrew Smith still indulges in linguistic gymnastics..’
    He has less moral courage , I think, than whichever sub-editor it was who wrote the headline to Smith’s piece
    “Rangers liquidators finally settle tax case as eye-watering EBT figure shows club could never have been saved”
    Could never have been saved.
    Smith ought to have added what he knows to be the truth, namely, that Rangers Football Club was not in fact and law saved. It ceased to be a football club.
    A monstrous lie was concocted, which lies like a festering, suppurating and corrupting canker in the very bowels of Scottish Football and making a mockery of Sport and Sporting Integrity.

    And Smith and his journalistic ilk have never had the guts to call it out in terms.
    Despicable as are the ‘governance ‘ liars and money-grubbing suits, cop-out journalists are worse by far.

  95. Westcoaster
    8th December 2022 at 19:34


    There was a pathetic attempt by the Times Newspaper in 2019 to say that HMRC had made a mistake and that Rangers could have been sold without the need for liquidation, with a tax bill of around £20m. This prompted HMRC to break with convention and publicly refute the allegation by writing to the Times. By that time of course the entire Scottish Media had seized upon the report and Rangers were portrayed as victims of a spiteful HMRC who had an agenda against the club. Now we actually have the club’s liquidators settling on a final figure of £30m more. Why oh why can’t the media just admit David Murray is responsible for the downfall of Rangers and why oh why do they think it’s okay he keeps his Knighthood? Also, why oh why do the media still celebrate the trophies that were won on the back of all that unpaid tax? Let’s not forget also that Murray shifted £50m of Rangers debt into other areas of his company, which also had large amounts of debt written off. The one remaining question for me is just how much in total did they get to spend that they shouldn’t have, both by illegally witholding tax, and being given a blank cheque from a bank which had to be bailed out by public money? Remember too it was a bank who tried to put Celtic out of business. It’s quite incredible that the public had to pay for many Rangers successes, but that’s exactly what happened, and no-one in authority seems to care. That tells me it could easily happen again if circumstances were to lend themselves to it. What a servile nation Scotland is regarding one particular football entity.

  96. upthehoops
    9th December 2022 at 07:59
    ‘…What a servile nation Scotland is regarding one particular football entity.’
    Small correction, UTH!
    Not one but two particular football entities: the liquidated football club known as Rangers Football Club founded in 1872 that lost its membership of the SFA due to the tax-cheating SDM and CW, and the ten-year-old The Rangers Football Club that begged to be admitted into the SFA and was admitted as a new club by a rotten Governance body which cobbled up the ludicrous lie that the new club was the same club from which that body itself had withdrawn membership.
    Dear God, the stink of the most servile, lying governance body of a SPORT hangs disgustingly over Hampden, and will not be removed until people of integrity and courage call out the stupid lie, in emulation of the late Turnbull Hutton, God rest him.

  97. There have been a few issues of mails going straight into the bin. My apologies for that. Reason was WP default security being turned up to eleven. Hopefully now sorted, but let me know if issues persist.

  98. Just to say that I want to acknowledge the patience with which SFM sorted out my calls for help when my posts did not appear now and again over the last couple of days.
    I think the problem has been sorted but I have been asked to post now as a wee test to make sure.

  99. my post of 11.47 uk time (21.47 Brisbane time) has appeared, so all is well. My thanks again to the techies at SFM.

  100. John Clark
    9th December 2022 at 09:53


    It’s actually hilarious to see the various media reports today and their desperate haste to talk of the ‘operating company’. The very fact they feel the need to repeat it so often is telling.

  101. The “L” word got a mention on BBC Scotland tonight – although they noted at the end of the report that the current “owners” of the club would not be affected 🙂
    In comedy terms, its the equivalent of a running gag I suppose.
    “It is I, The Rangers!!!”

  102. Big Pink
    9th December 2022 at 23:34
    ‘…The “L” word got a mention on BBC Scotland tonight…’
    It would be nice, BP, to think that the BBC Board [and the Regulator Ofcom]which replaced the not-fit-for-purpose BBC Trust in 2017 is now ready to face up to the fact that BBC Scotland yielded to (partisan?) pressure from the Trust’s Editorial Standards Committee and obeyed [Jawohl, mein Fuhrer] the order to propagate a lie: something which even in war time they tried to avoid (at least as far as the public and the then ‘free world’ were led to believe)
    To refresh your memories have a gander at

    “In various reports, reference had been made to “old” Rangers being placed in liquidation, with the assets being sold to Charles Green’s consortium, which subsequently “re-launched” the “new” club in Division Three.

    The complainers objected to this, maintaining that it was only the company which ran the club, and not the club itself, which was liquidated.

    They also claimed that the use of such terms was a result of “anti-Rangers” bias by BBC Scotland.

    In its ruling, the ESC said that where the BBC had made the distinction between an “old” and “new” Rangers, as opposed to the “old” and “new” company, it “had not used clear, precise language and due accuracy had not been achieved such that the guidelines on accuracy had been breached”.
    BBC Scotland, which argued in its evidence that it had achieved “due accuracy”, said it noted the findings.
    It said: “A football club, once incorporated, is indistinguishable in Scots law from its corporate identity.
    If the club was separate it would need its own constitution, committee members, trustees, etc.
    Rangers Football Club does not have that because it is incorporated.”

    But then, shades of Peter Thomson perhaps intervening, to its shame and disgrace it meekly complied.
    No sin is unforgiveable, of course, and it is open to BBC Scotland to approach the BBC Board and Ofcom to re-open the matter of being required to broadcast untruth and insist on being freed up to return to sanity and truth.
    Let’s hope that someone on Pacific Quay may have the moral wherewithal to do so.
    (It’s now 22.28 here in Brisbane)

  103. I was a little bit pleasantly surprised by the language used today in the BBC website regarding the BDO-HMRC settlement. To quote: “The Supreme Court ruled against the club in 2017.” No mention of holding companies or operating companies, just “ruled against the club”.
    So if deluded enough to think it is the same club as is currently playing out of Ibrox then you presumably expect that Douglas Park and friends need to find £56m pronto!
    But the article then suggests that because the “club” is now owned by a different company then it will have no impact on the team playing out of Ibrox, showing a complete and utter lack of understanding of tax law with regard to taxable entities.
    Hey ho – there was me getting my hopes up!

  104. A little off-piste… As a Scot living in England, the vitriol cast on the referee from the England-France match last night has been strangely reassuring that it’s not just a peculiar Scottish chip on the shoulder when it comes to refereeing decisions.
    Personally I thought the ref had an ok game – missed a foul on Kane outside of the box, presumably thought Saka went down too easy in the build up to opening goal and used VAR for the 2nd penalty. But the English press blaming the ref for the defeat despite same ref awarding two penalties. I can’t think of another team that would complain after getting two penalties…

  105. My apologies folks. Lost a few comments due to a database failure today. Nice to see my old mucker Paradisebhoy back onsite 🙂

  106. There are 21 days until the next Celtic-Rangers match. I believe there are a horde of former Ranger players out there who will have the opportunity to voice their opinion on over taking Celtic with the 9 point lead disappearing as if by magic. The usual suspects at the DR and other outlets will be combing their rolodexes digging up names and numbers to fill column inches with their unbiased commentary. Will the outlook change after Thursday’s game or will it be ramped up even more. Will Mick and his magic wand have transformed this disjointed team in the space of two weeks.

  107. Paradisebhoy
    11th December 2022 at 23:39
    ‘…Professor Brian Howieson details why Rangers are the same club ‘
    Slight correction, Paradisebhoy, if I may:
    The plain fact is that TRFC are not RFC of 1872.
    Howieson is like a flat-earther by deluding himself and confusing others by attempting to deny a truth. Academic standards? Not by a long chalk.
    (posted at 17.30 Brisbane time)

  108. Paradisebhoy
    11th December 2022 at 23:39

    Ibrox season ticket holder in ‘same club’ claim shocker!

    I couldn’t suffer listening to the entirety of Professor Howieson’s verbal diarrhoea in one sitting. I’m still unclear whether that’s down to the content or his nauseous delivery.

    ‘The company operates the club’ mantra gets shoehorned into his dialogue numerous times, in the same way as we were bombarded with ‘going for 55’ from the club, fans and media the season before last. It’s as if they childishly believe that if they repeat the lie over and over again it will somehow become true.

    You’d like to think that somebody who purports to be an academic might attempt to look at both sides of the debate in order to provide balance, notwithstanding that his book is clearly targetted at one specific demographic.

    If he’d glanced at Rangers Football Club’s Articles of Incorporation dated 1899, for example, he’d have known that company and club became synonymous (the same thing) from that point onwards. It is impossible to concoct a company-operating-a-club relationship from that factual record of events.

    Similarly, if he’d cared to read any one of thousands of items of literature produced by Rangers themselves throughout their 140 year history, he’d have been in no doubt that the company WAS the club. A quick glance at any match programme will show the manager of Rangers Football Club Ltd as Scott Symon, Willie Waddell, Jock Wallace, Graeme Souness or Walter Smith.

    Surely Rangers themselves would know to differentiate between an operating company and its separate club if such a relationship existed? Yet Rangers themselves considered these revered figures to be managers of a meaningless operating company?

    It really has become tiresome a decade after the barely lamented, self-inflicted death of Rangers Football Club to find moon-howlers like the Professor finding new ways to convince us that the world is flat.

  109. Highlander
    13th December 2022 at 10:33.
    ‘..’The company operates the club’ mantra gets shoehorned into his dialogue numerous times.’
    For the benefit of the casual or new visitor to SFM a quick glance at the documents relating to the setting up of RIFC plc will show that that new plc claimed and claims to be the holding company of the RFC of 1872, the most successful football club in the world, company number SC004276
    An even quicker look at the Rangers FC’s website shows that that is not the case and never has been.
    The club of which RIFC plc is the holding company is in truth TRFC, company number SC425159.
    They know that to claim now to be the holding club of the Rangers of 1872 would possibly put them at risk of sanction for making a false claim in order to induce prospective shareholders to buy into the new plc.
    In my opinion they did make a false claim in their Prospectus in 2012 and got away with it for reasons which we can only speculate about.
    The RIFC plc board simply has to keep propagating the myth or face serious questioning, I think, about the legality of their, or their predecessors-in-office, actions and the business that they run;
    the running dog lackeys of the SMSM also have to maintain the fiction, having bought into an untruth and sedulously propagated it;
    and the liars in Scottish Football governance will, as it were, burn in the hell of their consciences knowing that they are betrayers of their office.
    (posted at 22.32 13 Dec Brisbane time)

  110. This morning (Wednesday 14 December) I got up at 04.55 to watch the Argentina v Croatia game. It was well worth the effort, for Messi was brilliant.
    I have never been any kind of supporter of Argentina (definitely not an England supporter either, but Maradonna was a cheat with his ‘hand of God’ goal) and I was sort of hoping that Croatia would pull off a surprise victory
    But like everybody else I appreciate beautiful football.
    And again, I found the refereeing to be pretty consistent with the general (high) standard so far.
    The France/Morocco game should be interesting: former colony of France with all that that entailed, Morocco (according to Australian TV an hour or two ago) is carrying the banner for the entire Arab world including Palestine.
    Who do we Scots want to win?
    Why of course the better team on the day!
    ( posted at 22.01 Brisbane time on Wednesday 14 December)

  111. I’ve just read this:
    A supposed verbatim comment by Beale:
    “You can see what he could grow into. He’s the exact type of player that we want at this football club. I don’t know the exact fee, I don’t know where we’re going to go and get it from, but if we can do it, I would definitely sign Malik Tillman, yes.”

    I find that to be an extraordinary observation for a new manager to make, unless he’s obeying orders from his Director of Football Operations.
    If that is the case, that also would be extraordinary in that it would suggest that the Director of Football himself does not know what his budget limits are.
    Surely the RIFC board must have some kind of idea of how much they can afford to allot to prospective player purchases and at least make sure that no off-message utterances are made by a new manager?
    ( posted at 23.27 Brisbane time on Wed 14 Dec or thereabouts!)

  112. John Clark
    14th December 2022 at 12:02

    And again, I found the refereeing to be pretty consistent with the general (high) standard so far.


    Sadly tomorrow marks a return to the appalling sub standard refereeing in Scotland. We have already seen that instead of VAR providing clarity, it has just added another layer of arbitrary decision making and inconsistency. As for expecting the correct amount of time to be added for time wasting, substitutions etc, I think it’s reasonable to assume fans in Scotland will continue to be cheated in this regard, despite the lead shown at the World Cup.

  113. Does the Scottish media have no shame. To allow Barry Ferguson sprout his tripe about suits, brown brogues and tradition is beyond the pale. Why is the rule only in place for home games and not road games. Is there a different standard in place for road games. It was mentioned that jogging suits were more suited for road games due to travel. I spent many hours travelling by bus for hockey and we managed to travel in casual clothing and as we approached our destination changed into suits and ties ( no brown brogues). Does a businessman have one set of rues for working at home office and a different standard when travelling to outlying offices. This story could have appeared in a Mrs. Brown’s Boys sketch and have far more effect. What’s next in the tradition line, hair cuts, facial hear, earrings be monitored or banned.

  114. A pity that on Sunday, the Celtic fans travelling to Aberdeen for the match will probably miss WCF. No way they’ll be back to Glasgow area in time.

  115. From an Aberdeen site.
    Confirmed match details. FIXTURE | Aberdeen v Celtic. VENUE | Pittodrie. DATE | Saturday 17th December 2022. KO | 12.30pm.

  116. Yeah, how daft am I?
    Somebody told me the match was on Sunday and despite the fact that it seemed an odd time to play, I just accepted it.

    Carry on folks – nothing to see here 🙂

  117. Returning to the original post, despite some flaws inherent in the system, would folk agree that the operation of VAR has been good at the World Cup?

    Also notice that VAR didn’t play any part in the Rangers* v Hibs game at Ibrox.

  118. Big Pink
    16th December 2022 at 08:50
    “…would folk agree that the operation of VAR has been good at the World Cup?”
    I read that ” England, Argentina and Portugal [are]all making their dissatisfaction clear in crucial games”
    And so is Morocco.
    But as far as I can see, the decisions they are complaining about are not in VAR’s brief!
    As I think I may have mentioned before, reference to VAR is limited to a few areas and not to EVERY refereeing decision.
    So, refereeing ‘blindness’ to offences committed outwith the scope of VAR are not looked at by VAR.
    So it’s the same old same old with dirty tackles, handballs in the middle of the pitch, nudges in the back at corner kicks and so on….
    I have seen only 4 or 5 WC games, but as I think I may have already mentioned in an earlier post, the refereeing standards have been high end in the areas of the VAR brief.

  119. And from the Court of Session Rolls we have this:

    “LORD CLARK – C Munn, Clerk
    Court 6 – Parliament House
    Tuesday 20th December
    Preliminary Hearings
    between 9.30am and 10.00am
    COS/CA104-22 ATP Investments Ltd v Rangers International Football Club Plc
    COS/CA105-22 Norne Anstalt v Rangers International Football Club Plc

    Oh, what fun!
    Guys who don’t want to be known as shareholders in RIFC plc taking legal action against that very plc!
    May they all waste their money in legal fees!

  120. BP – overall I think VAR at WC pretty consistent, although not sure about the decision in the France-Morocco game which looked like a penalty to Morocco but instead player got booked for something else – yet to hear an explanation for that one and can’t figure out the rationale based on the rules.
    As for the TRFC v Hibs last night, the continuation of the lack of consistency in Scottish refereeing is the only consistency we have in Scottish refereeing…

  121. bigboab1916

    16th December 2022 at 23:21

    Well someone in ‘the newsroom’ at The Scotsman needs a good talking to as I am constantly being told it is the holding company that is in liquidation.

    “….Green’s consortium bought the assets and business of Rangers Football Club plc as it entered liquidation.’’

  122. gunnerb
    17th December 2022 at 11:18
    ‘…Well someone in ‘the newsroom’ at The Scotsman needs a good talking to as I am constantly being told it is the holding company that is in liquidation.’
    They certainly do, gunnerb!
    It was Ranger FC of 1872 foundation that was the business that is now in liquidation.
    It was Rangers FC of 1872 that was a shareholder in the then SPL that went bust.
    It could not meet its multimillion pounds of debt and the Administrators (useless tosspots in my opinion and guilty in the Court’s eyes of taking decisions that no ordinarily competent Administrator should or would have taken!) could not bring them out of Administration by finding an outright buyer prepared to take on the debts.
    It therefore had to surrender its share in the then SPL and ceased thereby to have entitlement to be a member of the SFA.
    The Administrators therefore had to sell the assets to try to get the creditors something.
    CG bought a stadium and associated physical assets.
    He did not buy the football club and did not buy the players or the non-playing staff- each of whom was legally entitled to walk away because their employer had gone bust but had then had to re-contract with CG’s SevcoScotland/TRFC as their new employer if they wanted to stay at Ibrox.
    Some players chose not to. (Did some admin staff opt to walk away?)
    TRFC is not RFC of 1872, but a new football club created in 2012 and it is the RFC of 1872 that is in Liquidation.
    ‘The Scotsman’ in buying into the ridiculous myth that RFC of 1872 is still competing in Scottish Football is making a mockery of its founding ‘Conductors” pledge to report truthfully.
    And is therefore making a liar of itself …in a mere matter of ‘Sport’!
    God alone knows what it will NOT lie about in more important matters of national or international politics if it can so readily bend in the wind to accommodate, say, a lying football club?
    What price Integrity in Scottish journalism?
    Nix, in my opinion when it supports a manifest lie in a matter of trivial ‘sport’.
    Not one SMSM source has tried to explain in detail how a liquidated business is supposed to be still in business without having paid the debts that caused it to be liquidated.
    Or why it was that TRFC had to be admitted into the SFA in 2012 as a new club if it was indeed RFC of 1872.
    Or why the then SPL having done the right thing requiring RFC of 1872 to surrender its share and the SFA having done the right thing by cancelling RFC of 1872’s membership should then create the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872:
    In a sworn secrecy like some nefarious criminal bond!
    Honest to God, truth and honesty and sporting integrity sold for the sake of filthy lucre
    Am I right or a meringue?

  123. More fun and games:


    LORD CLARK – C Munn, Clerk
    Court 6 – Parliament House
    Tuesday 20th December
    Preliminary Hearings
    between 9.30am and 10.00am
    COS/CA104-22 ATP Investments Ltd v Rangers International Football Club Plc CMS Brodies LLP
    COS/CA105-22 Norne Anstalt v Rangers International Football Club Plc CMS Brodies LL

  124. More fun and games:


    LORD CLARK – C Munn, Clerk
    Court 6 – Parliament House
    Tuesday 20th December
    Preliminary Hearings
    between 9.30am and 10.00am
    COS/CA104-22 ATP Investments Ltd v Rangers International Football Club Plc CMS Brodies LLP
    COS/CA105-22 Norne Anstalt v Rangers International Football Club Plc CMS Brodies LL

  125. my post at 17.05 refers
    Even more fun:
    LORD HARROWER – S Alexander, Clerk
    Court 7 – Parliament House
    Tuesday 20th December
    Starred Motion
    between 9.30am and 10.00am

    CA144/21 Imran Ahmad v The Lord Advocate Pinsent Masons LLP SGLD
    Oor Imran in there with best of them!
    oh, what SDM/CW brought about!
    The death of RFC of my grandfather’s time and the incidental enrichment at taxpayers’ expense of some people because of inept and incompetent action by police and prosecution authorities!
    That we should be so ill-served both by our sports governance body and the legals!
    Could only happen in Scotland.?

  126. When it comes to the governance and (presumably) the success of Scottish football to whom do we pose the following question:
    “Croatia is a country of 4 million people and has a lower GDP per person than the UK (I can’t immediately see the Scottish GDP figure). In the last seven World Cups it has managed to finish 3rd on three occasions. Scotland, with a population of about 5.3 million people, has qualified for one of these occasions and failed to get out of the group (consistent with our track record of failure). Would you agree that by comparison this represents a complete failure by the SFA to cultivate, promote and develop football in Scotland?”_

  127. wokingcelt
    17th December 2022 at 23:02
    ‘…Would you agree that by comparison this represents a complete failure by the SFA to cultivate, promote and develop football in Scotland?”
    I would be inclined to agree, certainly.
    But much worse than honest incompetence is the dishonest and dishonourable support and propagation of a huge sporting lie for the past ten years.
    A dead fish rots from the head.
    Efforts at every level to develop and enhance football as a sport are meaningless if the very essence of Sport is compromised by its governance body.

  128. ‘Gary Lineker explains why BBC One didn’t show Qatar World Cup closing ceremony’
    Aye, very good!
    I wish some compromised people in office at BBC Scotland would explain why they buy into the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872.
    Lineker should be made aware (and will be!) that the BBC in Scotland in relation to football is as worthy of condemnation for its propagation of sporting untruth as Qatar may be in relation to human rights issues.
    Truth is truth.
    Lying basterts in Scottish football are just as bad in intention as lying governments in foreign countries, the only difference being that the consequences of their lies are not so fatally drastic.
    A liar is a liar.

  129. Paddy
    Not possessing a legal mind, I guess that the legal definition of what constitutes malice is what its all about.

  130. paddy malarkey
    20th December 2022 at 13:18
    Para 11 of the judgment has this fiction:
    “In due course, the administrators sold the Club to Sevco Scotland Ltd, a company
    owned by Charles Green”
    The Administrators merely sold some of the assets. They most assuredly did not sell the CLUB!
    They FAILED to find a buyer prepared to meet all the debts that the football CLUB owed and sold off the assets to try to get some monies for the creditors!
    Wavetower is still alive and was never in any sense the ‘holding company’ of RFC of 1872!
    It was RFC of 1872 that lost its share in the then SPL and in consequence lost its membership of the SFA and ceased to exist as a football club entitled to participate in Scottish professional football.
    Such appear to be the influences at work in the matter of the death of RFC of 1872 that a fiction finds its way into a Court of Session judgment and stated as a matter of fact!
    Looks as if the ‘ the what-it-stands for’, the ‘what-it’s-all-aboutness’ warblings carry some weight!
    Honest to God!
    What are they like!

  131. paddy malarkey
    20th December 2022 at 13:18
    ‘…David Grier loses his appeal .’
    Para 11 of the judgment buys into the myth that RFC of 1872 was sold whole and entire to a new owner, CG.
    Honest to God, what are we to make of that?
    Other than that it’s the ‘what it’s all aboutness’ of ‘Rangers’ that allows it to be both in Liquidation and still participating in Scottish professional football?
    Honest to God, what are they like?

  132. Big Pink
    20th December 2022 at 14:20
    ‘..Not possessing a legal mind, I guess that the legal definition of what constitutes malice is what its all about’
    a bit like the ‘club’ being the ‘what-it’s-all-aboutness’, perhaps!

  133. three times this week I had occasion to tell one of my favourite jokes, separately to 3 unconnected Australians.
    It’s the Christmas joke about the guy who goes into the off licence, orders 6 bottles of whisky, six bottles of vodka, 6 bottles of gin, a few crates of beer and lager.
    The shop assistant remarks as he tots up the bill ‘expensive time, Christmas, eh, whit?’
    The guy replies ‘ Aye, it is. An’ if it wisnae fur the weans I widnae bother’
    Sadly, only one of the three really laughed!
    Maybe it’s the way I tell them!

  134. The chairman of Scottish Championship club Raith Rovers, Steven MacDonald, has been widely quoted calling for the Scottish Premiership to be expanded. A subject that has seen some debate in the past on SFM with differing opinion. The idea of expansion is difficult in that the game in Scotland has to be sold as an attractive product to broadcasters, as has been notoriously evidenced when RFC were put into administration and subsequent liquidation, how desperate the governing bodies were and still are to preserve the ‘jewel in the crown’. Football supporters can be very parochial and fickle at times and unwilling to countenance anything that is not of immediate benefit to their club. Something that I believe is displayed by both the Celtic and The Rangers fans fearful of the other claiming lasting ascendancy. This mindset preserved by the unfortunate voting majority needed to change things in the SPFL. Do I long to see Celtic playing Dumbarton in mid December or Aberdeen travelling to QOS in early January? Not especially but the Aberdeen Celtic encounter earlier this week was a painful watch and if an expanded league would afford a more expansive approach by the clubs when faced with supposedly superior opposition then it might make for a more attractive watch and sell.

  135. The Aberdeen v Celtic game was the way it was as one team made no attempt to play attacking football. Their manager had decided that his team had no chance of winning against a superior team and didn’t even try, playing for a draw or a lucky breakaway. I can’t imagine in an expanded league that Dumbarton or QOS, for example, would play any differently frightened that if they did they might loose by a large score.
    Our league is the way it is to try to have some level of competition but unfortunately the financial gap is such that there is limited competition for the top spot. Some of the less well off teams would be very reluctant to have home games against the better supported teams that brings them much needed revenue reduced and replaced by ones against teams from a lower division. All in all I don’t see an extended league standing a chance of getting off the ground.

  136. gunnerb
    22nd December 2022 at 17:21
    Ballyargus 22nd December 2022 at 22:20
    Part of the answer must surely lie in some system of handicapping. Even in the world of business there are some controls to try to prevent absolute monopolies in the markets, and many other sports have some kind of system aimed at creating a ‘sporting chance’
    But the starting point would have to be a change in the voting structure that gives certain clubs a disproportionate say.
    Better minds than mine must be able to devise a way of encouraging real sporting effort to win rather than merely avoid defeat.

  137. From Andrew Smith in today’s ‘The Scotsman’
    Rangers manager Michael Beale has intimated that a significant revamp of his squad through incoming transfers will require to wait until the summer.
    Smith quotes Beale :
    ““Some players coming back will be like new signings,” said the Ibrox manager. “I am not saying there won’t be anything in January, I am just not going to commit to it because I don’t know what is available in the market. I have one or two players in my mind that we wouldn’t be able to get in January I think would make us stronger in the future. We have to get to the end of the season first, and I realise nothing is guaranteed in the game. I think we will look at one or two and the next ten days or two weeks might make our mind up one way or the other…”
    for the rest, see

    I ask is that an attempt at realism from Beale to dampen down unrealistic expectations?

  138. Ballyargus
    22nd December 2022 at 22:20
    “The Aberdeen v Celtic game was the way it was as one team made no attempt to play attacking football.”

    Take your point Ballyargus and probably not the best example to support the idea but an expanded league could offer lesser opponents a free shot without concerning themselves about relegation. Maybe even consider a twenty team professional franchise, after all precedent has been set.

  139. A very happy and healthy Christmas to all of you – as well as a thanks for your continued support and for the friendships built over the last decade.
    Here’s hoping that some of the gloom of the last couple of years starts to lift in 2023.

  140. Compliments of the season to you all. Hope everyone had a lovely day yesterday.

    I thought it would be worth pointing out that today I received an e-mail from one of the main movers in the Resolution 12 issue, saying the matter with Celtic is now closed with a degree of satisfaction. Celtic have also paid the legal fees which the Requisitioners in turn have donated to the Celtic Foundation.

    For those who have not read the announcement by The Celtic Foundation you can read it from the link embedded in this blog by Phil McGiolla Bhain who has added a bit more information.

    Of course the SFA and oldco Rangers are still off the hook for the 2011 licence award, but it’s now safe to say UEFA will never allow such a thing to happen again, and it appears Celtic were main players in ensuring the new rules were put in place.

  141. upthehoops
    26th December 2022 at 10:28
    ‘…and it appears Celtic were main players in ensuring the new rules were put in place.’
    They may have been, uth, but only at the price of accepting the Big Lie when the SFA decided it was ‘expedient’ not to have an independent investigation and were and are prepared to lie to protect a lying 10-year-club that claims the honours and titles of a club that is in Liquidation because it lot its membership of the SFA when it share in the then SPL had to be surrendered.
    In my book, ‘expediency’ is a word used by liars as justification for their lying.
    You know , ‘better that

  142. Couple of posters (Paddy Malarkey and John Clark) having difficulty in getting their comments on here. I’ve been having this problem since we changed the site, and I am in the process of diagnosing the issue.
    I’ve made a few tweaks and hopefully it should be sorted. I will however keep an eye on that and will take action if it persists.

    Cheers folks

  143. It it is ever frustrating that the ‘Big Lie’ remains extant. I feel Celtic should at the time have explained even privately to the requisitioners that they felt the shareholding of Celtic plc would benefit more by an ersatz rangers than none. I will say though that the current amendment to financial fair play and its ongoing effect is something of value when considering the historic lax governance of the SFA and still know TRFC to be TRFC.

  144. gunnerb
    26th December 2022 at 16:35
    Could anyone seriously believe that the 500 hundred million RFC of 1872 fans would turn their backs on CG’s new creation, admitted into Scottish professional football in 2012?
    Telling the truth that RFC of 1872 no longer existed except as a fond memory would not have caused any reduction in the support of those who had been fans of RFC of 1872.
    Ibrox stadium would still be full of ‘Rangers’ supporters.
    The supposition that the mere fact that the SFA records would and should have reflected the truth that TRFC could not possibly be the dead club that is RFC 2012 in liquidation would not have had any financial implications for the rest of Scottish football.
    In my view, there was a dirty rotten and disgraceful dereliction of duty on the part of the SFA for reasons unconnected with the dread of financial loss but connected in some way with the Res 12 issue and the ‘expediency’-motivated refusal to have the Res 12 matter independently investigated.
    And I think that the Celtic board ought, OUGHT, to have been principled enough to force the issue.
    And all their Brother Walfrid feed the poor, pay the legal costs of the Res 12 requisitioners to the Supporters’ Trust is so much hypocritical lying tripe!
    In my view, the acceptance of untruth makes oneself a liar.
    And from that perspective, the Celtic board are in there with the Boards of TRFC/RIFC plc.
    Bad cess to them.

  145. 23.30 here in Brisbane.
    I note what is said in this link:
    Whatever about the reporting of ‘political’ history, BBC Scotland certainly was ordered by the now defunct BBC Trust to propagate the myth that somehow RFC of 1872 foundation did not cease to be a member of the SFA following its Liquidation as a business unable to meet its huge debts.

    They were ordered to tell the untruth that it was the ‘holding company’ of the football club that went into Liquidation, and not the football club.
    That is untrue.
    And the BBC in Pacific Quay knew it to be untrue but to their eternal disgrace and shame
    slavishly obeyed orders to lie!
    I am entitled to ask: what other orders in more serious matters than ‘sport’ have they obeyed to distort the truth? Or NOT to seek out the truth about the 5-Way Agreement or the reasons why the SFA refused to institute an independent investigation into what may have been a crime?

    BBC Scotland certainly has mucky hands in the ‘Rangers’ liquidation matter.

  146. At 38 minutes past midnight Brisbane time (after an evening of Brisbane pub entertainment which featured a group named ‘Tartan Shamrock’ playing a mixture of Scottish and Irish stuff very well indeed) I note from Companies House pages this:
    “30 Dec 2022 Group of companies’ accounts made up to 30 June 2022
    This document is being processed and will be available in 10 days”

    We might find then something that ‘explains’ Beale’s cautious damping down of transfer spending hopes.
    I have seen nothing to suggest that RIFC plc is other than struggling to balance its books and is finding that it’s a buyer’s market when it comes to off-loading players on whom they sort of seemed to depend as sources of transfer riches.

  147. It’s now after midnight here in eastern Australia, so I can wish SFM and all who run it, all who read it and all who post on it a very happy new year made even happier I fervently hope by the devoutly to be wished restoration of Sporting Integrity in the sphere of Scottish football governance.
    D’ye think?
    There can be no satisfaction for anyone in a rigged ‘sport’ where truth is not told by those who are charged with the very governance of the sport.
    We all know from childhood that cheats, whether an individual drug-taking athlete or cyclist or shot-putter or swimmer, or the Board of a new football club that claims the sporting honours and achievements of another entirely different football club that died, win in the end.
    The very cheats themselves know that they are dishonourable.

  148. my post of UK time 14.54 refers:
    the second last line should of course have ‘do not’ before ‘win’!

    • Belated New Year wishes to all of us. I believe 2023 is the year of SCOTVAR. New means of imposing stupidity and incompetence on us all, but still the same old aims and ambitions. 2012 won’t be repeated, but only in terms of consequence- not the root causes.

  149. Well, what a rubbishy game of football to have sat up for here in Brisbane time! It was no ‘show the rest of the world how to play football’ for sure!
    I at one stage remarked to those around me that Ange could get on his bike back to where I am at the moment (Australia) if that’s the best he can do with a team which throws away an early one-goal lead to an opposition that was there for the taking and then indulges in the same shoddy panicky passing and woeful defending that was the hallmark of TRFC in the first half.
    It was a poor game by any objective measure, and not worth the watching as a sporting spectacle.
    In my opinion.

  150. But not to worry BigBoab – here comes Richard Foster with his Vardict show to wave us all along with nothing to see here.
    Either Willie Collum doesn’t know how to operate the VAR remote control or the mandate for its use is fundamentally flawed.
    Without VAR the TRFC penalty decision was understandable and the Goldson decision shocking.
    With the benefit of VAR to uphold both decisions is truly unbelievable. In the EPL in both cases the ref would have been called to the monitor and told to think again.

  151. Big Pink
    3rd January 2023 at 08:37
    ‘…I believe 2023 is the year of SCOTVAR. New means of imposing stupidity and incompetence on us all, but still the same old aims and ambitions’
    David Robson in ‘the Scottish Sun’ today’

    reports former referee Steve Conroy as saying that “…it shouldn’t be decided by those in charge of VAR if it’s a penalty or not, that should be left to John [ i.e.The on-pitch ref, John Beeton in the case in question], so he can make up his own mind”
    I could not agree more.
    What I don’t know is whether the on-pitch referee MUST agree to accept the suggestion that he may wish to come to a screen to view replays?
    For all I know, the referee on pitch might be able to say ‘no, I’m perfectly happy that I made the right decision, thank you’
    In respect of the Goldson handball who is the baddy? Do we know whether Collum flagged up to Beeton that there was a controversial incident and was told to bugger off by Beeton? Or did Collum choose not to flag up the incident?
    Who is the ‘baddy’ if baddy there be?
    Because sure as fornication Goldson’s double handball prevented a goal, and was no ‘reflex action’
    The reflex action would have been to turn the head or duck! Goldson wanted to stop the ball, not protect himself.
    BEETON has to explain himself if he refused the suggested look at replays; COLLUM has to be questioned if HE himself did not flag up the incident.
    But of course, the question might be asked whether there was collusion? Nothing to see here, kind of thing?
    And that I even ask that question is because I believe that a damnable thing was done when the Governance body in its handling of the death of RFC of 1872 destroyed completely ANY trust in its integrity and truthfulness.
    If they can lie about a plain legal and sporting fact that a football club died when they themselves took away its membership of the SFA, then they and their minions may also, perhaps, lie when it comes to the use/misuse/non-use of VAR.
    Stands to reason.
    And happy New Year to you, Big Pink.

  152. bigboab1916
    3rd January 2023 at 12:07
    ‘…Well here is a surprise..’
    I agree.
    But Andrew Smith is on safe ground as long as he does not call out the lie manufactured by Scottish Football’s governance bodies that TRFC is of new creation in 2012 is RFC of 1872!
    It’s easy enough, relatively speaking, to waffle on about regrettable unacceptable racist, religious, or politically biased and/or socially unacceptable behaviour of fans.
    But Smith like the SMSM in general, has not as a journalist, called out the stupid lie that TRFC is continuity RFC of 1872!
    Or even attempted to explain why he thinks it is not a lie!
    Why not?
    Until he does so, I treat anything he writes as my dad’s generation treated anything coming from the Third Reich or as I do today from the likes of Putin.

  153. wokingcelt
    3rd January 2023 at 12:32

    But not to worry BigBoab – here comes Richard Foster with his Vardict show to wave us all along with nothing to see here.

    I felt a familiar chill through my bones as I watched Stuart Dougal explaining to Richard Foster that black was white and that wasn’t a penalty. He obfuscates, deflects and eventually says that Goldson did not make his body bigger, even though his hands were above his shoulders and to the left of his head. It’s George Orwell or Franz Kafka, take your pick.

  154. paddy malarkey
    4th January 2023 at 12:56
    “…See where this goes – genuine holding company involved, though.
    Juventus face legal and sporting allegations for financial irregularities and false accounting, put in place to embellish their books’
    As the world and his wife know, there was a now defunct Scottish Premier league club which went defunct through liquidation because of naughty business related to ’embellishing their books’

    The taxman eventually caught up with that club’s lies and claimed so many millions of tax debt that the club could not repay that the club went bust.
    But before it went bust that club is alleged to have obtained UEFA monies to which they were not entitled by telling porkies to the SFA and UEFA.
    The SFA simply decided not even to investigate the allegations on grounds of ‘expediency!
    What or whom were they protecting in their decision not to allow an independent investigation of how they had been deceived over many years as to the rates of pay of many of that club’s star players?
    Where were our ‘journalists’ when such serious questions were being asked?
    Where was the BBC at Pacific quay who are happy to report on the investigations into a lying football club in Italy but continue today to propagate the lie that TRFC of 2012 creation is the RFC of 1872 and failed to ask how in hell the connection between RFC of 1872 and people at Hampden was not subjected to independent investigation?
    If only to clear the air and remove suspicion?
    ( 23.36 here in Brisbane as I write after a splendid day with the grandkids paddle-boarding and such on the Gold Coast)

  155. My post at of 13.37 UK time refers,in which I posed the question ‘we know whether Collum flagged up to Beeton that there was a controversial incident and was told to bugger off by Beeton? Or did Collum choose not to flag up the incident? Or did Collum choose not to flag up the incident?’
    I read today that Collum did not flag up the incident. He therefore must be presumed to have made the decision that Beeton need not be troubled with the task of looking at replays.
    Very, very convenient.
    Honest to God, that Scottish Football has come to this state! That the technology of VAR should fail so dismally!
    The whole point of the VAR technology was to give the on-field ref replays of potentially serious decisions.
    If the VAR in Baillieston chooses not to suggest that there might be something to look at
    he is in effect the guy making the decision, not the ref on the pitch!

  156. The referees union in play I think. If Willie Collum had suggested that the Sakala slip and Goldson’s fingertip save might need John Beaton to take another look then the on-field ref is under enormous pressure as rarely has a pitch side review resulted in anything other than reversal of original decision. A host of friendly media outlets now trying desperately to stand up the errors with a myriad of differing offerings such as no obvious reason for VAR to be involved or perverse interpretation of the handball rule. VAR has proved to be an unmitigated disaster in Scotland and has merely highlighted the incompetence of officials and let’s not forget that the clubs are paying for this poor quality service. I thought at the start of this ‘innovation’ that it would have been more cost effective and certainly more trustworthy to farm out VAR to a party that already had the tech and experience to best serve Scottish football. No surprise that parochial pride and obstinacy from the SFA meant this was never going to happen. As for Celtic or indeed any other club seeking clarification ? A complete waste of time.

  157. gunnerb
    4th January 2023 at 21:20 [ posted at 01.25 Brisbane time, Friday 6 Jan]
    ‘….As for Celtic or indeed any other club seeking clarification ? A complete waste of time.’
    I would say, gunnerb, that expecting the current Board of Celtic to challenge seriously why Collum did not suggest to the on-pitch referee that the Goldson handball incident might be looked at is, I think, a bit unrealistic, given that they chickened out of insisting on an independent investigation into the possibility that a now defunct club known for cheating the taxman may also have cheated them out of millions of pounds of UEFA money!
    In my opinion Collum failed to act in accordance with his brief, which is not to make decisions in controversial matters but to call to the on-pitch referee’s attention the filmed and slow-motion replays of the incident.
    And there is not a referee in the world who would NOT think the Goldson incident raised questions!
    In my opinion Collum failed to do his simple duty. He should be questioned about that failure, and his answers should be made known to us.

  158. ‘Celtic’s SFA complaint over Rangers (?) VAR call analysed as every club feels ‘hard done by’
    Well, that’s according to Football Scotland quoting Marvin Bartley.

    EVERY club – really?! Without exception? Gie’s a brek!

    I can think of one outstanding example to debunk the above claim – The Other Side FC from Govan (courtesy Michael Beale) which should not, I would suggest, feel in any way aggrieved since it has benefitted (100%?) to the detriment of opponents regarding VAR calls/non calls.

    While I’m on – any update on the full scale/ no stone unturned investigation by TRFC into the latest assault on a a Celtic player (Greg Taylor)?

  159. bect67 5th Jan 16.52
    Benefitted ?. Surely you mean that after years of erroneous Red Cards, wrongfully disallowed goals & Penalties not being awarded Rangers, thanks to VAR are finally competing on a level playing field.
    First penalty in a Old Firm game at Ibrox since Oct 2007 and only the 4th in all competitions in 16 years and all hell breaks loose.

  160. Should clarify that my previous post should have read ‘First penalty in a Old Firm league game since Oct 2007’.

  161. I assume McCoist was speaking with his tongue firmly in cheek when he complained about Alister Johnson commenting on the state of officiating in Scottish football. How dare someone so new to the game have an opinion on what appears on the surface to be a blindness to anyone in blue. Did not the former Ranger manager, Steven Gerrard, minutes after his first game lament the fact that the officials seem to have a bias against his team. A little balance in the commentary would not hurt. And on another topic, why is a number of major sports organizations, baseball, football, basketball, and hockey have VAR in place and you hear very little moaning about the calls or lack of calls. Is that perhaps because the officials are better trained and not cowed by the fans in the stadium, arena, etc.

  162. vernallen 6th January 2023 at 22.35
    ‘…Is that perhaps because the officials are better trained ..’
    Other sports, vernallen, are not run on the basis ‘expediency’ , where expediency means betraying sporting truth to protect one favoured competitor!
    The SFA found it ‘expedient’ to refuse to have the Res 12 matter independently investigated, and then created the myth that TRFC is the Rangers of 1872.
    If the governance body can do that and get away with it, they are morally weak enough to stoop to any skulduggery!
    With untruth at its heart, Scottish Football is a charade.
    ( posted Saturday 7 th Jan at 11.44 Oz time)

  163. Just watching Salah score for Liverpool against Wolves with a goal that starkly proves once again that VAR is used wrongly in Scotland…..and , it could easily be argued, used wrongly to disadvantage Celtic. Salah’s goal – which VAR okayed, is the EXACT same situation as Abada was in when he scored against Livingston. He was in an offside position when a long ball was played in his direction, but the defender – Boli (I think, in Salah’s case) and Boyes (in Abada’s case) – tried to head it clear, misjudged it and the ball fell to Salah/Abada, both of whom scored.

    You may recall every journalist in the land happily confirming the crappy explanation that Abada was offside because Boyes ‘was not in control of the ball’. The ruling for Salah’s goal tonight in the EPL was allowed – as we all expected with Abada’s goal – because the defender had deliberately tried to play the ball. The commentator and pundit were aware that this was the rule and that the goal would have been ruled out if the ball had inadvertently bounced of the defender by accident. Intent is the key thing in such situations and in both Salah’s and Abada’s goals, the defender had intent to play the ball but messed up! I hope Celtic have time to use this piece of FACTUAL evidence in their complaint to the SFA.

    I’m not on any Celtic sites so could someone please copy this or report it to Celtic sites just in case they missed it? Thanks.

  164. Nawlite
    7th January 2023 at 21.37
    ‘…I hope Celtic have time to use this piece of Factual evidence..’
    I hope so, too, nawlite.
    But have they the bal.s to do so, given their refusal to act on factual evidence before in a matter of greater consequence than a daftly framed offside rule?

    The English agree that it’s a badly framed rule but accept the evidence , honestly provided by the Video Assistant Referee who has looked at replays of the technology
    Our question is why was the tech evidence not brought to Beeton’s attention?
    Will Celtic really pursue that question?
    I think they will not because it is ‘expedient’ not to rock the boat,
    and compromisers and temporisers who have a history of swallowing lies tend to be too craven to challenge untruth.

  165. It’s 21.41 on monday 9th jan here in Queensland.
    Having to use my phone for this which is a bit of a pest ‘cos I’ve no idea whether I can ‘cut and paste’ on it from any source as I can on the lap-top.
    Upthehoops, are you having difficulty posting?

  166. My post of 30 December 2022 refers.
    The ten days have passed And RIFC plc’s accounts are now on Companies House pages.

  167. RIFC plc:
    ” As at 30 June 2022, there are loans with investors amounting to £12.2 million, other commercial loans of £3.4 million, whilst the Group also has lease agreements totalling £1.4 million.
    As at 30 June 2022 the Group held £13.1 million within cash and bank balances”
    I read that as meaning that if all loans and monies owed at 30 June had been called in at the same time RIFC plc would not have been able to pay up.
    Anymore than Rfc of 1872 were able to pay the debts they owed, and accordingly were liquidated.
    But I am no accountant.

  168. John Clark
    9th January 2023 at 11:42

    Upthehoops, are you having difficulty posting?


    I haven’t been trying to post John. Assuming this as a test then I can confirm I am indeed able to post.

  169. tykebhoy 9th Jan 19.46

    This is of course the same Andrew Smith who was the editor of the ‘Celtic View’ for a number of years, so hardly going “off piste”.
    Choosing the subject matter & time scale to prove a viewpoint is rather lazy but somewhat predictable journalism from the individual concerned and comes as no surprise to be honest.

  170. Upthehoops
    9th Jan 2023 at 11.42
    ‘…I am indeed able to post’
    Thanks for that, Upthehoops.
    Might only be me who can’t log in or reset password on the pc but somehow can log in on the mobile!

  171. Anent the Andrew Smith use of ‘ liquidated club’ that reference seems to have been removed in the one hour later ‘update’
    If that is so, and it was done against Smith”s wishes, will he meekly accept the editor’s decision in the same way that radio Scotland accepted the BBC Trust’s decision?
    It really is time for intrepid journalism to expose the nonsense for what it is, or to show why and how the RFC of 1872 was not liquidated and lost its membership of the SFA.

  172. A couple of quick observations from this week. Barry Ferguson, today, Morelos must “get fitter” by Sunday. Teams are six and a half months into the season and if a body isn’t fit by now it probably won’t happen in two or three days, even taking apparent injuries into consideration. Earlier we has Michael Beale stating claiming we are not Real Madrid, but, we are getting there. Will the two much talked about in coming transfers complete the package and turn them into Real. And we have McCoist offering managerial advice to Gerrard, comedy gold.

  173. vernallen
    11th January 2023 at 22.40
    ‘ Will the two much talked about incoming-transfers…turn them into Real ‘
    No more, vernallen, than the SFA and SPFL and the SMSM liars can or could turn SevcoScotland/Team12/ TRFC of 2012 creation into Rangers Football Club of 1872!
    As said before, the club of the 4 young men of Glasgow Green [ honour and respect to their memory] died the death of liquidation and ceased to be a member of the SFA.
    My dad died in 1984.He is still very much in my thoughts. I wish he was still alive.
    But he is not..and I would have to be a wee bit unbalanced if I believed that he was still actually alive on earth and working away at his job.
    [ or maybe I should have been a QC or a retired QC conducting an Inquiry, who could reassure me that my dad, although actually DEAD, was still alive!]
    Honest to God, that the liars should get away with their lying with the ready help of supposed journalists is something of a scandal.
    Shame on the lying club, certainly.
    Double-dyed shame on our pretendy newspaper ‘journalists’ and treble-dyed shame on BBC Scotland.
    Football is a sport: telling the truth ought not to be seen as inviting to be sacked and/or subjected to harm by mindless thugs, FFS!

  174. John Clark
    12th January 2023 at 13:34

    “I should have been a QC……”

    Should that now be a KC? going forward 2023.

  175. bigboab1916
    12th January 2023 at 17:31
    ‘…Should that now be a KC? going forward 2023.’
    Yes, bigboab1916, it probably should be!

    It’s Just after 8.20 pm here in Brisbane, and I have to thank the SFM blog administrators for their patience in dealing with my self-created techy problems relating to change of password.

    other than that, I note that oor Imrad’s case is in Court this coming Tuesday in a ‘starred motion’ to be heard before Lord Harrower between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m.
    Other than that, I’ll be here until 22nd February having been invited to stay on for a bit!

  176. Have a gander at this link
    and note this:
    “Any debate about BBC Radio Scotland should extend to the entire way it sees itself and its responsibilities.
    As a public service broadcaster, the station should be committed to standards of excellence..”

    Thus speaks a non-executive director of Celtic plc!
    Celtic plc accepted and accepts the propagation of a lie by the self-same BBC Radio, the lie that TRFC of 2012 is Rangers of 1872!
    If there was ever a fall far below ‘standards of excellence’ it was the abysmal capitulation of BBC Scotland to that lie.
    Wilson goes on to say, ” Lord Reith wasn’t all wrong and a serious debate about what should be expected of the national broadcaster is overdue.”
    He did not say that about the Big Lie in Scottish football, which was screaming for ‘serious debate’, did he?
    He was on about reflecting cultural heritage [and I very much agree with him on that point], but he seems to be happy to accept that a lying BBC Radio Scotland in the sphere of football reporting is acceptable.
    Can’t have it both ways!
    If Radio Scotland’s failure to recognise the cultural importance of piping is a sign that serious debate about the BBC is due, then serious debate about the reporting of Truth is even more important.

  177. Well Hello Fellow SFMs,

    As a Killie supporter, I actually once met the paragon of our site (JC) at a legal occasion in the Capital.

    The first thing I must say is that everything that is published about the bad lads down Govan way is supported by me.

    However, a certain well-known chap from across the Irish Sea was making remarks about what would happen today if there was a penalty call in the Killie box this aft. I got the impression that he felt that there might well have been an ‘honest mistake’.

    In that light, I look to the Celtic supporters on this site to give me their views of the ‘honest mistake’ which ‘may’ have occurred near the end of today’s match in the Celtic box (and not subject to a VAR review). Needless to say, I have not seen the incident, but various comments, even from relatively non-biased supporters, seem to suggest that justice has not been done.

    I look forward to a completely fair and equitable discussion – aye, right!


  178. Haywire
    14th January 2023 at 20:32
    ‘…I look forward to a completely fair and equitable discussion – aye, right!’
    Haywire, how’s it gaun?
    My post showing as being at 12.53 on 14 Jan was actually posted at 02.53 here in Brisbane.
    It’s only now that I have seen your post 20.32 yesterday!
    I followed up what I correctly understood to be an oblique reference to PmcG, and read with astonishment the text,as provided by PmcG, of Marc Horne’s report in the UK ‘ Times’ about the soon to retire Sheriff not being given ‘formal advice’ [whatever that might be or whatever its significance or effect]
    In relation to your question, I have yet to see the Celtic-Killie game (which I hope my son has recorded!) but I think many of us are aware that those in Scottish Football governance are so thirled to ‘expediency’ at the expense of truth that they will do what they think they can get away with.
    The 5-Way Agreement and the earlier Res 12 issue were proof positive that sporting truth is of little significance to them. They are so far steeped in dishonesty as to do what is best and least trouble for them, and to hell with integrity.
    If a penalty award to the perceived weaker team threatened to produce a ‘final’ that did not involve TRFC and Celtic? Who knows?
    That we can even pose such a question is the result of the Big Lie.
    That situation must be remedied before there can be any suspicion of a return of trust, and not just trust in Scottish Football, but in the BBC and the non-tabloids!

  179. My post of 06.01 this morning (15th Jan) refers.
    ‘… ‘formal advice’ [whatever that might be or whatever its significance or effect]’
    I’ve looked up the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008

    Section 29 Powers of Lord President
    29(1)Where subsection (2) applies in relation to a judicial office holder, the Lord President may, for disciplinary purposes, give the judicial office holder—
    (a)formal advice,
    (b)a formal warning, or
    (c)a reprimand.
    (2) This subsection applies where—
    (a)an investigation has been carried out in accordance with rules under section 28(1), and
    (b)the person carrying out the investigation has recommended that the Lord President exercise a power mentioned in subsection (1)..”
    So, not a warning nor a reprimand.
    Would there be any note at all on the official record of an individual who was not given ‘formal advice’?

  180. Haywire, at about 8.30 pm this evening in Brisbane, I saw just the highlights of the Celtic/Kilmarnock game.
    I saw enough to agree with McInnes’ view that the ‘VAR should be speaking to the referee’ about the Giakoumatis incident.
    It is VAR’s job simply to flag up potential penalty incidents of the kind where everyone watching either fears or hopes for a penalty decision. It is not for the VAR to decide whether it is or is not a penalty. That should be for the on-pitch ref, and in televised games the incident as seen by the VAR camera angles should be seen by viewers!
    On what I saw, I judged out loud that it was a clear penalty: there was no way that Giakoumakis was going to dispossess Wright of the ball without in effect shoving him down. Collum should have seen that for himself, perhaps.
    But even if Collum innocently saw nothing untoward, Greg Aiken should have done his only VAR duty by inviting Collum to see the incident as recorded by the VAR cameras.
    In my view, it is Aiken’s motivation and/ or incompetence as a VAR ref that might need to be questioned.
    Whatever, the use of VAR has not proven to be the promised land of absolutely indisputably objective decisions!
    The fact that (as I understand it) the match was in its 95th minute is entirely irrelevant. There might have been time for Killie to score an equaliser if they had scored from a penalty if Collum had seen the replays and on the basis of those had awarded a penalty to Killie.
    If there is not a football clubs’ managers’ trade union there ought to be one! Their own boards are perhaps their worst enemies!

  181. “Giovanni’s results were poor at times but it wasn’t a poor team. The way they played the game was very good.”
    So says Goodwin.
    What a backstabbing blow to Gee-oh! The team did well, the manager did not!
    Honest to God!
    The feckin inconsistencies of Scottish Football!
    Goodwin now in my opinion enters the pantheon of those who care not for truth .
    May he himself have similar comments made about him.

  182. @Haywire – like yourself I haven’t seen any footage from the Celtic- Killie semifinal. However based on what I have read and heard it does seem beyond strange that VAR wouldn’t call the ref to have a look at the monitor. Whether that is down to incompetence or corruption i don’t know. But I hope that the increasing number of bizarre refereeing decisions (with VAR in play and footage to “back-up” these decisions) will lead to change across the game in Scotland.

  183. In regards to the state of the field at Hampden for the weekend, did no one from the SFA pay any attention to weather forecasts and look at placing a tarp on the field before the rains came. It may not have done much to protect the field but would have appeared as if the SFA had some form of common sense about them. As to the VAR system breaking down, this borders with flirting with danger, as sooner of later there is going to be a decision, a missed decision, etc. that will touch off a good sized brawl. Hopefully for the League cup final the SFA will be watching the weather forecasts, and, run numerous tests to ensure that their VAR equipment if functioning properly. Heaven forbid that a major decision goes awry during that game considering the feelings of both sets of supporters.

  184. I am quite taken with the silence from most Celtic supporters regarding the ‘honest mistake’ penalty which should have been awarded to Killie. I except certain folk who managed to put their thoughts up on here. Not only that, it is quite remarkable how few mentions of this contentious issue have managed to reach the pages of the mainstream media. OK, I recognise that the MSM have to concentrate on selling papers to the most folk who are likely to buy same,i.e. Celtic and Sevco supporters, but that should not include so called agencies like the BBC which are supposed to be unbiased on most domestic issues.

    I believe that the ‘powers that be’ were quite keen on an ‘Old Firm’ final. OK, it’s only a game of fitba’, but what is the view of all the SFMrs?

  185. vernallen
    16th January 2023 at 13:54
    ‘..Hopefully for the League cup final the SFA will be watching the weather forecasts, and, run numerous tests to ensure that their VAR equipment if functioning properly.’
    It’s 08.31 Tueday 17th here in Brisbane.
    I note from ‘The Scotsman’ online that the SFA and the SPFL responded three hours ago to your remarks about the state of the pitch at Hampden!
    They have not given any re-assurances that a) the technical equipment for VAR will be in perfect working order or b) that the person appointed as the Video Assistant Referee sitting on his bum in Baillieston will properly understand what his job is!

  186. Haywire
    16th January 2023 at 22:04


    The absolutism being thrown around about the non-award of that penalty is laughable. I saw an ex-Referee say online “it was a shout for a penalty, and no more than that”. There was an equal shout that the Kilmarnock player just threw himself to the ground far too easily, something his team had been doing all game, so perhaps the Referee made the judgement that it was another of those attempts to win a set piece by going down very easily. It was not a massive injustice, and was the type of incident where a penalty will be refused as often as it is given.

    For me the most frustrating thing is fans of Kilmarnock saying VAR is scared to give decisions against Celtic. Where have they been for the past few months? They are embarrassing themselves with their lack of awareness. The truth is every club except one has been adversely impacted by VAR, and that one club is certainly not Celtic.

  187. Well UTH,

    I was trying to have a conversation which was not too tribal, but I seem to have hit a raw nerve with you. Anyway, I shall disregard the ‘whataboutery’ re. over-acting by Killie players, as well as another Celtic supporter describing them as ‘knuckledraggers’. In passing, I seem to remember a non-biased commentator referring to an incident near the beginning of the game which could well have resulted in red card for Celtic, but again, I did not see the incident.

    Whatever, it would appear that John Clark and Woking Celt agree with me that the least that should have happened was a referral of the incident to VAR.

    Needless to say, despite my reservations, I shall leave you to work out who I shall be supporting in the League Cup Final. Spoiler Alert: it won’t be Sevco!

  188. Haywire
    17th January 2023 at 19:10
    Regards your comments re the killie penalty, not many Celtic minded fans would disagree that it was a pen as would many agree Hatate goal was a goal and not offside, the ball was played to Kyogo and many have claimed hit the Killie defender on the hip, regardless, when it came of the opponent and changed from left to right away from Kyogo, then Hatate on the right was played into an onside position and he finished what was a good goal, so maybe refs do not know their own rules or VAR makes it up as they go along, Penalty then it’s also a goal. Thats the scenario with VAR inconsistent when in the hands of inconsistent officials. As a Celtic man i admitt it was a pen and it was a goal.
    Worth watching the game again as many instances of inconsistentes did happen.

  189. Haywire
    17th January 2023 at 19:10


    All I was saying is it’s the type of incident that is not awarded as often as it is awarded. It was no absolute stonewaller in the history of denied penalties.

    In terms of hitting a raw nerve I have to say I’ve been astounded at the number of fans of Kilmarnock who have immediately jumped on VAR favouring the ‘Old Firm’. Celtic have been absolutely shafted by VAR since it came in. Some other clubs probably feel they have too. Rangers haven’t had a single controversial call against them. Every single game Celtic play I expect a bad call, and forgive me for thinking every goal we score is scrutinised to the nth degree to try and chalk it off.

    I was in favour of VAR as I thought it would eliminate many of the Refereeing errors we have previously witnessed. Instead it just seems to have added an extra layer of controversy, with the inconsistency in decision making as bad as it ever was.

  190. 22.49 brisbane time and I have just read this;
    in which Beale as reported by Andrew Smith of the Scotsman said
    “Not at all [do rivalries get in the way of recruitment]. The player has got to live it. It comes down to ‘is it the right fit?’
    Beale I think is English and possibly is unaware of the fairly widespread in Scotland of the pronunciation of ‘foot’!
    I found the expression amusing from a historical perspective as far as the general run of football supporters goes, but TRFC is maybe locked into history, in spite of being only 10 years old?

  191. Here I am in Brisbane at 22.50 on Thursday night, air conditioning keeping me cool, and reading this guff from Andrew Smith in the Scotsman on-line

    “This led to stewards embarking on a boy hunt. They found the miscreant and promptly huckled him out. A furore ensued with angry punters in the area shouting at those in luminous jackets merely doing their job to “leave the boy alane”. A case of wholly misdirected anger when it should have been the youths who couldn’t stay off the pitch who raised the hackles. If a blind eye was turned to such antics, how many more would be encouraged to stage such invasions, leading to who knows what? The pitch is for players, not punters.”
    Aye, right, Andrew!
    Why not get as stroppy and censorious about the far more wickedly intentional lying of a sports governance body?
    Call out the Big Lie!
    Or pack it in as a journalist for the ‘The Scotsman’ if your editor won’t let you write truth!

  192. “But I think, with these things, what people expect most of all is, you know, the individual concerned, whoever it may be, put their hand up, be honest about it, accept the mistake, pay the fine.
    “And I think, look, given the circumstances, I don’t think it’s something which would result in his resignation.”

    A kind of a version of “it happened x years ago, and an apology has been made, so bugger the fact that lies were told by people in office they can remain unpunished in office until retirement”.
    The only variation being that the SFA has NOT apologised for creating/maintaining the myth that TRFC is continuity RFC of 1872!
    The Prime Minister will apologise and pay his fine. And remain in office.
    I, like any sensible person, expect duplicity and lying in the world of politicians and things political.
    But in Sports governance??
    It is, I repeat (for the thousandth time it seems) a matter of fact and law that it was the football club known as Rangers Football Club founded in 1872 that went into Liquidation in 2012 and, having lost any entitlement to membership of the SFA, ceased to exist as a football club entitled to participate in Scottish professional football. As the SFA itself acknowledged in a state of shock at the time!
    No one has yet been able to contradict that fact with contrary evidence!
    The liars KNOW that they are lying.
    The SMSM know that they are supporting an untruth for very unworthy reasons, and the very fans of the now deceased RFC of 1872 who marched on Hampden knew damned fine what Liquidation meant- as did a chap who became the PR guy for Sevco/TRFC!
    Honest to God!
    That we should be in the 13th year of untruth in the SMSM and SFA/SPFL for filthy lucre’s sake is quite, quite ridiculous!
    [It’s 22.53 here as I write, disappointed at Andy Murray’s defeat (watched the game live) but by jings what superb tennis we saw him play, exhausted as he must have been]

  193. I trust today’s ludicrous award of a penalty against Efe Ambrose and Morton will put to bed the conspiracies about how badly mistreated poor wee Celtic are regarding VAR and penalties.

    If anything, Morton would be justified in feeling they were being conspired against.

    Remarkably though, a group of Celtic supporters known as ‘Stand up for Celtic’ has claimed that it was all down to “the SFA tactically giving us a dodgy penalty in a Scottish Cup home game against Morton to make it appear like there isn’t an agenda against us…”

    When I first read it, I assumed it had to be a spoof, but apparently it is a serious accusation.

    Perhaps one of the ‘Stand up for Celtic’ group on SFM could clarify?

    Of course I’ll be told it didn’t affect the outcome considering the eventual scoreline, but with the game score-less and Morton looking dangerous early in the game, nobody knows how it might have panned out without that bizarre penalty award.

  194. I was incredulous at the penalty award…not. Just reaffirmation of the incompetence of officialdom. Having Kevin Clancy go to the side to view the incident I was hoping against hope he would be strong enough to say no penalty. Sadly not the case. As for gifting to placate, don’t subscribe either but given the complete lack of trust engendered by no real transparency and Celtic fans being ridiculed in the past when justifiably concerned then it is easy to see them going to a comforting place. Did this penalty matter in the grand scheme? Probably not, but it did spoil the game for me. Did previous VAR rulings have more import than today’s? Undeniably. I still think incompetence rather than conspiracy but stats are making it harder to hold such beliefs.

  195. Highlander and Gunnerb above

    On behalf of ‘Stand up for Consistency’, my verdict on the Ambrose handball is dead simple:-

    The incident was very similar to the scenario earlier in the season where (like Efie) poor Bernabei hadn’t the foggiest idea how the ball came to strike his arm/hand- so penalty it was.

    Good old VAR sez me (nae ifs or buts noo)!

  196. It clearly was not a penalty (just like the other claim later in the game against Ambrose). As soon as a ref is sent to the monitor then it appears to be a global phenomenon that the ref on the pitch agrees with the ref with in the VAR studio. Why anyone would think that was a penalty when the arm actually stopped the clearance from going out of the box is unfathomable. It supports a lack of competence AND a lack of confidence in the basic understanding and application of the rules.
    Fair play to Morton today for giving it a go until the referees got involved. my personal view is that this was through the refs incompetence but happy to consider/debate whether the environment in which our referees operate and are recruited and trained impacts this.

  197. wokingcelt
    21st January 2023 at 21:26
    ‘..happy to consider/debate whether the environment in which our referees operate and are recruited and trained impacts this..
    Sadly, wokingcelt, when you have a lying cowardly sports governance body the whole ‘environment’ of the sport must inevitably be warped to the extent at least of causing distrust and cynicism.
    Scottish Football is running on the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872. What other lesser deceits/practices might the governance body countenance?
    (posted at 17.18 , Sunday 22nd 2023 Brisbane time)

  198. Highlander
    21st January 2023 at 13:36
    When the ball hit Ambrose’s arm it was from less than 1m away, the arm was behind his back and the ball was travelling away from goal, having changed its direction of flight suddenly. If that’s a penalty then perhaps some referee could explain, but I’m past listening. I think I’ve seen more bad decisions from VAR in Scotland than good ones and it’s getting worse. On each occasion a new rule is quoted, some of which now appear to be contradictory.
    I’m not part of “Stand up for Celtic”, but I’ve been unjustly accused of paranoia for about half a century so on the conspiracy v consistency issue I’m wary. VAR is not making me less so. Goldson made a good save, but perhaps since he got two hands to it he should have held it. I didn’t see the incident Haywire referred to.
    I think VAR in England made the game worse down there. Up here it is ruining it, and rapidly. League titles and cup wins are going to come down to these decisions. It needs to be fixed, and publicly so we can all understand the rules of the game.

  199. macfurgly

    ‘I think VAR in England made the game worse down there. Up here it is ruining it, and rapidly’

    I agree with those sentiments, and, I have held off for some time with this comment re VAR in Scotland (which has almost without fail gone against my team Celtic), but here we go …

    With specific reference to Celtic, it is my belief that the difference between making the game worse in England and ruining it in Scotland is that the decision making (principally by cowardly ‘referees’ in the ‘tower’ or wherever) stems from historic anti-Celtic bias in Scottish football’s ‘corridors of (corrupt?) power.

    (In a land of relatively free speech, and SFM guidelines, I’m entitled to that view) .

    On another, more passionate note, , I’ll certainly ‘Stand up for Celtic’ on here – any day of the week – and especially against anyone from the ‘Sound of Silence when VAR decisions much more often than not go against Celtic Group’ coming on here deriding any contributor who dares defend CFC.

    I commented above, somewhat tongue in cheek, about the merits of Efie’s handball decision v that of Bernabie. Plenty of people in the MSM, and elsewhere, have criticised the VAR ref’s call yesterday. I wonder what they thought of Bernabei’s ‘handball’ at the time.

    ps – Did VAR miss Efie’s second handball?

  200. From the pen of Andrew Smith of ‘The Scotsman’ as Updated
    22nd Jan 2023, 10:53am

    Headline “It won’t necessarily delight Celtic manager Ange Postecoglou that his team’s 5-0 mashing of Morton in the Scottish Cup elicited some random thoughts not strictly related to events on the pitch.’
    Postecoglou takes issue with how it is in Scotland
    “The following exchange took place between the Celtic manager and a broadcast journalist at the beginning of the post-match conference.
    Journalist: “Ange, can you just give us an update on Josip Juranovic?”
    Postecoglou: “You don’t want to talk about the game? No interest? We’ve just scored five goals in a cup game and advanced to the next round. Let’s discuss the game and we can let your fun start.”
    Journalist: “What’s your thoughts on the game, then?” Postecoglou: “Thank you.”
    The Australian patently understands the environment he is operating in. However much he might want to rail against it, he will also understand then that every supporter of his club would have wanted, first-off, to hear the latest on Juranovic’s move to Union Berlin from their manager, rather than his thoughts on a regulation – though certainly attackingly-effervescent – cup thumping of a lower division side. The journalist was doing his job as his listeners and superiors want him to do so. In the game, the insatiable appetite for transfer information from football watchers isn’t matched by their interest in assessments of performances amounting to the largely expected variety. Postecoglou might lament that fact, but it’s just how it is.’

    “We must all hang together or we will all hang separately’, said that prominent crafstman Benjamin Franklin.
    For some reason that quotation came to mind on reading Smith’s observation that ‘the journalist was doing his job’.
    Smith does not name the journalist, of course, but it’s odds on that whoever he/she is he/she did not, like he himself in my view, report the truth about the death of rfc of 1872 in 2012 and is happy to live with the lie propagated by the SFA and the general run of the SMSM football ‘journalists’.
    To his eternal discredit, in my view.
    posted at 22.07 Brisbane time on 23 Jan 2023

  201. In an attempt to shed some light on the handball rules, and offer a constructive comment, I found the ifab rules for 2022-23. They are here:

    They say, “Not every touch of a player’s hand/arm with the ball is an offence.

    It is an offence if a player:

    deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
    touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised
    scores in the opponents’ goal:

    directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

    immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental”.

    In the case discussed above, I can’t see any reason why a penalty was awarded against Ambrose.

    The offside laws from the same document are beyond Kafka by the way. Don’t go near them.

    It should not be like this.

  202. The post refers to trust and dialogue. I would be naive to have the first, and no-one who matters is interested in having the second with an ordinary fan like me, but I’ll persevere.
    VAR in Scotland is a mess.
    It was promoted as being for “clear and obvious errors”, not toenail decisions dependent on the reaction time of a VAR official in stopping the video, or an extended review of 8 camera angles to determine what happened. Decisions taking 2+ minutes are ridiculous, not reliable, and not what the system is for.
    It was intended to support referees, but it is undermining them and making them appear incompetent, (which they may be anyway, but that’s not the point). The referee must be in charge, and not pressured into accepting often dubious decisions made elsewhere. At least we know who to appraise.
    The technology isn’t good enough. There was a camera failure at a recent game when a decision was to be made, and in at least two other matches, one involving Motherwell iirc, and one involving Celtic, the camera angle used could not possibly have allowed a decision to be made. In the Motherwell case, the camera appeared to be above and behind the corner flag viewing an offside at the edge of the box.
    As happened down south, discussions about VAR decisions detract from the match itself. VAR becomes a star of the show, the match fades into the background. Every controversial decision erodes trust and diminishes the match, and the result and belief in the sport.
    Leave VAR for those decisions for which it was intended, clear and obvious errors. If the VAR officials need to scrutinise umpteen angles three times over, let it go. VAR should intervene perhaps once in a match, mostly not at all.
    Publish the rules somewhere so we can all see them, and not have to rely on someone else telling us what happened on the basis of something we haven’t seen.
    Simplify the offside and handball rules so that people who have been watching football all their lives can understand them.
    Where VAR does intervene, mic the referee up to explain to the crowd, as happens in rugby.

  203. macfurgly
    23rd January 2023 at 15:05
    ‘…Where VAR does intervene, mic the referee up to explain to the crowd, as happens in rugby.’
    Let the referee on the pitch make it clear that it is he who is deciding in the light of seeing the replays that he knows we should all, in whatever ground the match is played, be able to see on screen at the same time as he sees them.
    If the ref knows that the spectators see what he sees, doubts about the Baillieston chap making the decision for him might be removed in so far as ‘honest’ mistakes are concerned.
    I agree with you that nothing but the highest degree of cynicism has to attach to any notion of TRUST in the lying governance body or in the SMSM’s reporting of football.
    We are dealing with institutional deceit, duplicity and deception, possibly on a criminal level, in the pretence that RFC of 1872 did not cease to exist as a football club, and that RIFC plc is the holding company of RFC of 1872, instead of a football club admitted into membership of the SFA in 2012!
    (I post this at 23.11 Brisbane time, 13.11 UK time, on 24 Jan.)

  204. Some mishievious rumours around – so (inspired by Hugh Keevins’ Absolutely Not Good Enough):-

    Postecoglu is …

    A bsolutely
    N ot
    G oing to
    E verton

    sez me – trying to be ‘lighter’ than my last post!

  205. At half past ten pm here in Brisbane, I report that, sadly, on Burns’ night, there was no local celebration of a poet who was a fornicating adulterer, who narrowly escaped losing his job as an exciseman [for sending arms to Revolutionary France] through his craft membership.
    Who also was ready to go to slave-land as an overseer.
    Not my cup of tea as someone whom I would have got along with any more than I would get along with Milton.
    Or with any denier of the death as a football club of RFC of 1872!

  206. I see where Barry Ferguson is somewhat confused by neither Celtic or Rangers ( in particular) making an attempt to sign Kevin Nesbit. With a reported transfer figure that could reach 2.5 million I believe it becomes crystal clear why Rangers were not involved. If the rumored figure of 125,000 paid to Norwich for Cantwell is to be believed, it becomes obvious why Rangers weren’t at the table. I don’t believe Celtic had any overt interest in this player. Maybe Rangers should approach Darvel with an offer for the player who scored the goal that eliminated Aberdeen. The figure of 125,000 would or could be most appealing to them, and, would land them someone who is used to the Scottish game and has actually been playing recently.

  207. (I’m posting at 12.19 UK time, 22.19 Brisbane time)
    It’s been 9 years since I sent this email to the Financial Conduct Authority!

    Date Sent: 23/01/2014 10:00:53
    Subject: RE: Rangers International Football Club; IPO prospectus,
    Please may I ask why Rangers International Football Club were permitted to exclude the rate of remuneration of one of its most highly paid employee’s (the team manager) from the details provided in the prospectus issued for their IPO last year?
    Can you refer me to the relevant provisions of any Rules or regulations that empower such an exemption and on what grounds?
    Would any and all companies intending to seek AIM listing be favoured with such exemption?
    Thank you.”

    Sadly, my IT skills are rudimentary, and it will take me a bit of time to post the reply I received.

  208. vernallen 25th Jan 22.34
    Not sure where you got the rumored figure of 125k from? but by multiplying it by 12 you would then be closer to the actual fee. Having commited to spending almost £15 million in transfer fees during the previous window i find it both baffling & amusing that some still believe Rangers are unable to spend a significant sum when required.
    As for the fee for KN, i believe had Rangers shown any interest this would have been increased by a considerable amount.

  209. My post at 12.19 UK time refers. Here is the reply I received from the FCA:
    “Consumer Queries

    Fri, 31 Jan 2014 at 04:02

    Our Ref: PC210834 / ISS10931401

    Dear Mr Clark

    Thank you for your email asking what rules allow Rangers International Football Club to exclude the rate of remuneration of an employee’s details in the prospectus issued for their IPO.

    In response, I am sorry to inform you that it is not clear what sort of firm this is and in what circumstances they are regulated. I have searched the relevant Registers and cannot find a firm with the above name listed, so cannot provide any information at this time. I would therefore ask that you provide more information about your query and more details about the firm so that I can locate them on the relevant Register.

    For further clarification about our role, the FCA regulates most financial services and firms to ensure that markets and financial systems remain sound, stable and resilient and to ensure consumer protection. Should you wish to find out more about how we do this, please click on the following link:

    While I recognise that this is not the answer that you were hoping to receive, I do hope that the information I have provided explains the reason for this and you are aware of your next steps.

    Yours sincerely

    Michelle Northover
    Customer Contact Centre
    Financial Conduct Authority
    Consumer Helpline: 0800 111 6768

    I found that a bit surprising.
    However, I replied as follows:
    “Ms Northover,
    Thank you very much for your reply.
    Rangers International Football club, Companies House number SC437060, is regulated by the Alternative Investment Market, to which it was admitted at the tail end of 2012.
    It appears that, at the request of the manager of that football club- who was afraid that if his huge salary was made known to the public, he would become a pariah- the Board made representations seeking permission not to include details of that salary in the Prospectus prepared for their application to be admitted to AIM.
    ( The background, for your interest, is as follows: a football club known as Rangers Football Club Ltd went into administration. It lost its membership of the Scottish Premier league, and of the Scottish Football Association).
    The assets were bought by a consortium which set up a new club ( Sevco Scotland) which then changed its name to The Rangers Football Club, a wholly owned subsidiary of Rangers International Football Club plc.
    Unfortunately for the new club, it was not admitted into the Scottish premier league. Instead, it was granted membership of the lowest division in the Scottish Football league.
    The manager of the new club, playing in the bottom-tier league, where many teams are composed of part-time players and have attendance of only some few hundreds, was nevertheless on a salary of c. £800,000 p.a.
    It appears that he felt that he would have been mightily embarrassed if the fans of the club realised that he was being paid such a ridiculously high  salary , which was vastly in excess of the combined salaries of the managers of the other teams against which his team competes.
    Especially when his own players were being asked to take a cut in their salaries to ease the financial pressure on the financially very badly and chaotically run club).

    I had thought that the  Prospectus for an IPO had to be kind of upfront about the running costs, directors’ and staff salaries and such like, and not try to pull the wool over the eyes of potential investors.

    I was therefore astonished to read that AIM (or whoever) had agreed that the Board of RIFC could keep schtum about the hugely disproportionate cost of their manager.

    Yours sincerely,

  210. My post at 12.43 UK time:
    This is the reply:

    “Consumer Queries
    To: (me)
    Fri, 14 Feb 2014 at 13:40

    Our Ref: PC210834 / ISS10936810


    Thank you for your further correspondence explaining the matter relating to the information that Rangers International Football Club did not make public.
    In response, I can now confirm that this is not something that the FCA can look into or would authorise or decline as we do not supervise the firm. I would therefore recommend that you contact the London Stock Exchange, who have an ‘AIM’ section on their website. For your convenience, I have added a link below to that section below as well as a link to their contact details section:

    While I recognise that I have not been able to provide a specific answer, I do hope that the information I have provided is of assistance to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to clarify this for me.

    Yours sincerely

    Michelle Northover
    Customer Contact Centre
    Financial Conduct Authority
    Consumer Helpline: 0800 111 6768

    Well, there was a nice wee serendipity in the date of that reply -Valentine’s day!
    It being Australia day as I write it’s a public holiday.
    But I’ve grafted hard helping my son with his house renovation work- new kitchen and living room configuration, involving creation of a new window and new front door siting.
    Not that I can be anything but a hauder-on/labourer/gopher!
    But it’s a joy to be here as some kind of help in the everyday life of the grandweans.

  211. From ‘the Scotsman’:
    ‘Rangers challenged by Forest Green Rovers chief as Charlie McCann transfer fee disputed
    Rangers have been challenged over the reported transfer fee paid by Forest Green Rovers for Charlie McCann.

    Matthew Elder
    By Matthew Elder
    1 hour ago
    1 hour ago
    “The 20-year-old midfielder completed his move to the League One side this week with the Ibrox outfit claiming to have retained a “signifcant future sell-on percentage as well as return options and matching rights on Charlie in the future”.

    Rangers insisted the transfer fee would remain “undisclosed”, but the amount has been reported to be in the region of £350,000 for a player who made eight first-team appearances for the Glasgow side.
    That figure has been disputed by Forest Green chairman Dale Vince, who insists his club paid nowhere near the amount quoted for the Northern Ireland international and former Manchester United youth.
    Vince, who this week appointed former Rangers and Everton striker Duncan Ferguson as the club’s new manager, said: “That figure is what Rangers said. It isn’t true. It’s a fraction of that price.”

    Knowing nothing at all about Forest Green but knowing something about the lie that TRFC is Rangers of 1872, I think I am more ready to believe Vince!
    And that’s the trouble that liars run into; they cannot be trusted!
    And the sports governance body that is the SFA can no more be trusted than the board of a plc which claims falsely to be the ‘holding company’ of a 150 year-old football club when its own official website, in very small print, makes it plain that it is the holding company of a football club admitted into membership of the SFA only in 2012.
    Honest to God!
    That our national sport should be run and administered to suit the fancies of a lying club!
    And that no one says ‘boo’, not the SMSM, not a club that was perhaps bilked out of millions of pounds by liars and cheats…and certainly not any officeholder in the SFA or SPFL!
    What have we come to in Scottish Football?
    (posted at 00.16 Saturday Brisbane time)

  212. So what has gone so wrong at AberdeenFC ? Everything looked very promising on and off the park at the start of the season and I though the appointment and recent backing of Jim Goodwin was a positive move but oh my what a sorry state they now find themselves in. The board probably had no choice but to relieve Goodwin of his responsibilities after a trio of very uninspiring results. The players should of course shoulder some blame but ultimately it is up the manager to cajole,inspire and demand better of his players. There is talk of either Lennon or Lambert being in the frame for the job but I think Steven Robinson former Motherwell and current St. Mirren manager might be the answer at least in the short term. A great club with a long history of success and their support is always solid and dependable. I hope they can put things right and become a force to be reckoned with once again.

  213. Another week and another low reached by Scottish referees. I am no longer in doubt that our referees are either world class bungling incompetents or institutionally corrupt. With the assistance of digital support from VAR the “honest mistakes” excuse no longer washes. If a referee made those sorts of calls at grass roots football they would be embarrassed.

  214. I didn’t watch the TRFC* game, but from what I’m reading it seems like VAR refereed the game for the Nicky Clark sending off? As far as I can tell from reading fan sites, the ref didn’t give anything other than a foul for Clark’s challenge on Ryan Jack – I could be wrong and he may have given Clark a yellow. Either way, it appears the VAR assistant did what he should do and brought the potential red card to WC’s attention. My understanding is that WC did not go to view the incident on the pitchside monitor but simply issued the red card on instruction from the VAR assistant. This is categorically NOT VAR’s purpose. It is there to help the referee make the right decision in cases where he has not been able to see a red card incident in real time. If WC did not view the incident, he has allowed VAR to be the referee which is not the intention.

    Will WC be punished for this?

  215. nawlite
    29th January 2023 at 11:53
    ‘..Will WC be punished for this?’
    [Posting this at 23.18 Brisbane time, 13.18 UK time on Sunday 29 Jan.]
    From ‘The Scotsman’
    Story by Andrew Smith • 2h ago
    “Unless we have been lumbering under a misapprehension, Willie Collum is what the red tops would have once referred to as “one of our top whistlers”.
    Yet, delve into his deployment in recent seasons, and a pattern emerges that feels at odds with that. His attention-claiming antics at Ibrox on Saturday were significant beyond shaping the encounter that gave Michael Beale the ninth victory of a 10-game unbetween spell at the Rangers helm.
    They represented the product of Collum’s first league game at one of the Glasgow citadels this season. Yup, that means he hasn’t not only officiated at Celtic Park this season, he has not done so there in more than a year. Before this weekend, his last game at Ibrox was the foremost of top flight fixtures in the form of the title rivals tussle last April. You begin to wonder if his superiors at the SFA are sometimes protecting the UEFA-listed referee from himself.
    “To put it in the mildest fashion, Collum’s eccentric applications of the rules so often seems to make him a magnet for eye-rolling bemusement. His flawed judgements as he made three huge calls that seemed to ill-serve St Johnstone provide a classic Collum character study. He appears a decent fella in his civvies, but when he steps on to a football pitch he seems afflicted by a desire to prove that he has an understanding of the regulations that allows him to see situations in a manner beyond the ken of mere mortals. Basically, it feels then as if he is assessing transgressions practically in an obtuse fashion.”
    I would say to Andrew Smith: ‘Do your journalistic duty! Dig and delve and report the truth that TRFC is not and cannot possibly be the Rangers of 1872 foundation and expose the liars in RIFC plc and the Scottish Football governance bodies and draw conclusions about the refereeing of TRFC games.
    I have my conclusions on the basis of actual, undeniable facts, sporting and business facts.
    YOU should be in there grubbing away like a serious journalist checking those facts and either calling me out, providing evidence, as being wrong or hammering (as would any journalist working with the ICIJ) the disgraceful farce of a 10 -year-old football club being allowed to claim to be a much older club which even as I write is in Liquidation!”

  216. Scottish referees – the gift that keeps on giving… So there was me thinking this weekend couldn’t get more bizarre and up steps Don Robertson. So firstly his penalty award that he changed his mind on. Did he miss the keeper punching the ball or did he award on the basis of the elbow/push from the defender on Kyogo? – we will never know. (for me the elbow would have been very soft but was it an obvious error that VAR should check? – no idea!). And then the penalty he did award (correctly) for handball after VAR told him to have another look. But why no yellow card for a deliberate handball?
    I presume that the mythical “referee observer” at both Ibrox and Tannadice have written their report cards and both refs will be told “must do better…”

  217. Wokingcelt 29th Jan 2023
    ‘…but was it an obvious error that⁷ VAR should check?-no idea!)
    ‘ after VAR told him to have another look ‘
    Those remarks reflect the guddle we are in in terms of understanding what the pitch referees are told
    about how they relate to the VAR.
    Some seem to feel they are free to decline to even look at the replays.
    All who do look appear to accept that the replays show their decision on-field was unsound.
    Those who decide not to look – what is their reason?
    In the present state of Scottish Football governance’s attitude to Sporting Integrity we may well suspect the worst: that those who refuse to look at replays simply want their decision to stand no matter what the objective evidence may show.
    I am just about to read the just issued annual report of the Scottish Football Supporters Association for 02/03.
    I’m hoping it mentions that VAR as used thus far has not been properly explained to fans or to onfield referees, and will take up the matter- even to the point of quizzing individual referees!
    In the sense that referees are accountable to clubs and fans in terms of being men/women of unquestionable integrity it should be open to fan organisations to ask questions about their use of the huge power they have.
    ( posting at 22.54 Brisbane time,02.54 )

  218. Here I am in Brisbane at 23.25 on 31 January enjoying [read ‘ spitting blood at the hypocrisy of ]Brian Wilson’s description , in his piece in ‘The Scotsman’ on 28 January, in which he accuses others of ‘moral cowardice’!
    The same Brian Wilson who
    as a non-executive director of Celtic plc is meant to show some moral fortitude in standing up against the acceptance of untruth by his Board: which he did not!
    He is in no position to accuse anyone of moral cowardice!
    But he is, after all, a failed politician and ‘ sui generis’. [ which being translated means, roughly, the same as the rest of them]

  219. Good program on BBC re the Magic Circle. Sexsual abuse within the justice and legal community in Scotland….enquirie found no evidence ….headed by NIMO SMITH

    Just saying

  220. paraniodbyexperience
    31st January 2023 at 23:23
    ‘…Good program on BBC re the Magic Circle…’
    [It is now 23.59 on Wednesday 31st January here in Brisbane, 13.59 in Scotland]
    I was looking forward to watching that programme but sadly, and apparently for copyright reasons, it cannot be shown in Oz!
    I’ve begun to read the Nimmo Smith/James Friel ‘Report on an Inquiry into an allegation of a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in Scotland’ at this link

    In the abstract, it seems to me that any Inquiry carried out by persons who are themselves part of the justice system must be questioned at least as much an Inquiry into, say, alleged police corruption by the police themselves must be open to question!
    Organisations tend to be self-protective, and individuals in a particular profession might be unconsciously hesitant about being truly objective in their assessment of evidence given by or about folk who might have an influence on their career prospects or whatever.
    We have a classic example in the case of Scottish Football.
    No one in Scottish Football – no director of a football club, no manager of a club, no player still playing for a football club, no football hack in the SMSM ever publicly queried the ridiculous Nimmo Smith opinion that having millions of pounds of cash more than other clubs does not give a club a ‘sporting advantage’
    I tend to work backwards from that perverse decision, in that I think Nimmo Smith was so crassly wrong in that matter that I am ready to believe that his judgment in any other much more serious and nearer to home matter could equally be faulted.

  221. John you are drawing the same conclusions as many people would considering the details in last night’s programme.

    The abuse of the daughter by her father and his legal colleagues is beyond comprehnsion.

    How this could be covered up proves that people very high up in the establishment deliberately and systematically buried the facts.

    Alarmingly through the process you can see there is a process in place to generate the position “nothing to see here” as this cannot be true.

    Similar to other enquiries the outcomes and the conclushions were predetermined.

    Now we know this happened elsewhere using the same type of perversion of justice.

    I must say I have huge amount of respect for the people who gave very horrendous details of their rapes.

    There is positive aspect to this corruption of the truth. Many people recognise the truth and will not let it go or forget. Including the Police and the BBC. (Surprisingly to many.)

    Truth is out there and has to be fought for.

    Never give it up.

  222. paraniodbyexperience
    1st February 2023 at 16.23
    ‘… Many people recognise the truth and will not let it go or forget. Including the Police and the BBC. (Surprisingly to many.)’
    (Thursday morning at 10.03 as I press the send button)
    Yes. I myself credited BBC Scotland for originally reflecting the truth that it was Rangers Football Club plc which held the share in the SPL in virtue of which it was a member of the SFA and a recognised football club under SFA Articles, the share which they were compelled to surrender when they became insolvent and could not pay their huge debt.
    The absurd decision of the then BBC Trust to order BBC Scotland to propagate an absurd lie put senior management in a difficult position, but they should have refused, and should have made such an issue of it as would have forced a detailed explanation from whoever manufactured the absurdity of the club surviving while some ‘company’ that ran it went into liquidation.
    That absurdity stinks in my view of secret contacts and dirty work.
    The Head of BBC Scotland should have made it a resignation matter. The fact that he did not suggests to me a very handy degree of readiness to abandon principle.
    And I castigate the current head of BBC Scotland for allowing the absurdity still to be propagated.

  223. [ it’s one o’clock on Sunday morning here as I press ‘send’]
    The baddies sometimes get caught!

    I idly wonder why UEFA accepted the less-than-financial-fair-play of Murray’s Rangers in the matter of truth-telling about finances.
    and allow the ridiculous nonsense that TRFC is the same club as RFC of 1872.
    honest to God, there is a story there-of perhaps what? rank rotten brotherly love?

  224. Has anyone ever tried submitting a Freedom of Information request to the SFA? I ask because I was reading today that an MSP is pushing the Scottish Government to update FOI legislation to ensure private organisations that receive public funding are as duty bound to respond to FOI requests as publicly owned organisations are. I believe the SFA receive public funding, and it appears that private organisations currently have a lot of wriggle room regarding FOI requests, even though they receive taxpayers money.

  225. upthehoops
    4th February 2023 at 21:11

    In late 2019, I submitted an FOI to Scottish Government asking about compliance monitoring arrangements regarding funds allocated to the SFA. My interest was in how SG satisfied itself that the money it was sending to the SFA was being used correctly and for the purpose intended. This was an interesting journey into the world of funding and grants allocated through sportscotland and SG directly. The exchanges are worthy of a complete blog in itself. However, in short, I was not satisfied from the responses I received from either SG or sportscotland that there is any definitive mechanism to check on how the funds were spent other that relying on the sporting body or governance body to monitor itself. There appears to be no formal reporting mechanism on compliance with standards and certainly no reporting publicly through any publication scheme.

    However, I did not detect any reluctance on the part of either SG or sportscotland to engage with me in terms of FOI. I would suggest that if sportscotland responded correctly, so too should the SFA.

    I can tell you, the SFA receives significant sums of money indirectly through sportscotland and directly, in the form of grants, many amounting to multi-millions of pounds, from SG. In my view, the serious sums of money allocated to the SFA from SG should be published as should details of how that money is spent and what checks and balances are applied to ensure it is used properly, e.g. were the objectives achieved, how was any underspend dealt with, etc, etc.

  226. Mordecai
    5th February 2023 at 07:10


    I am of the view that we should be able to see what is in the Five Way Agreement, although the SFA would undoubtedly refuse to reveal it through a FOI request. It is simply unacceptable there should be a secret agreement protecting only one club, and events have shown us certain aspects of said agreement prevent the SFA taking disciplinary action against that club.

  227. Mordecai
    5th February 2023 at 07:10
    ‘.In late 2019, I submitted an FOI to ……’
    In 2013, I made something of a pig’s ear in the way I structured my letter to Sportscotland, so I cannot relly complain about their reply, which I give below.

    “From: FOI
    To: “me”
    Sent: Monday, 22 July 2013, 15:05
    Subject: Freedom of Information Response
    Good afternoon,
    Thank you for your recent request under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002, asking for:
    { -are the relatively substantial grants made to the Scottish Football Association ( ‘SFA’) by the Scottish Government made without any investigation or enquiry into how that organisation functions in terms of adherence to its own Articles of Association?
    – in the event that the Board of the SFA were shown to have acted beyond its powers under the Articles of Association, would grants be discontinued and the Board called to account?}

    The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 permits requests to be made for information held by public bodies. Please note that the requests you have made constitute requests for sportscotland’s opinion and not information that is held by sportscotland in a recorded format.

    This request is therefore not a valid Freedom of Information request, however, if you would like to discuss matters further, please telephone 0141 534 6500 or email to speak to the sportscotland Partnership Manager for the Scottish Football Association, Michael Cavanagh.
    To help me, I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of this email for our records.
    If you are not satisfied with our response, you are entitled to ask us to review our decision. You must make this request within 40 working days of the date of this response, explaining why you think we should carry out a review, stating the information request to which this review relates, and the name and address of the applicant for correspondence. Review requests should be sent to Gordon Mavor, Head of Finance, sportscotland, Doges, Templeton on the Green, 62 Templeton Street, Glasgow, G40 1DA. Further information on our Freedom of Information procedures can be found on sportscotland’s website under the Freedom of Information section at the end of the home page.

    If you are still dissatisfied, you have the right to apply to the Scottish Information Commissioner for a decision. Further details on this process are available on the Commissioner’s website:

    Kind regards,


    Jennifer Anderson
    Legal Officer | sportscotland
    Doges | Templeton on the Green | 62 Templeton Street | Glasgow | G40 1DA
    t: 0141 534 1175 | f: 0141 534 6501
    sportscotland – putting sport first ”

  228. fishnish

    Among the questions currently ‘doing the rounds’ in the English ‘meeja’ is:-

    ‘Who gets Premier League titles if Man City are stripped of crowns for FFP breaches?’

    Maybe the City lawyers should enlist the assistance of one Lord Nimmo Smith who, as reported in that renowned Ibrox ‘mouthpiece, the Daily Record in 2013, ruled that £47m of secret payments to stars didn’t help club win trophies

    BTW, I’m still astonished by that ‘finding’ to this day.

    Perhaps the SFA, encouraged by the actions of Italian ( re Juventus) and English football bodies will open a historical enquiry into the financial corruption at the then Rangers. Aye right – wake up son!!

    Nice wee dream while it lasted!

    Efter a’, they’re a new club tae (aren’t they?) – cannae be charged!

  229. The tweet from RTC today was a brilliant reminder of the facts re knowledge at Hampden of the EBT nonsense;
    as is a wee read of the buggering about by the Scottish Sport Council trading as Sportscotland before they realised that SevcoScotland/Club 12/TRFC Ltd could tell them that Sportscotland had no claim on them for the (public) money they had given to Murray’s Rangers of 1872, liquidated in 2012, in the development of the Auchenhowie training ground etc.
    I suspect that sportscotland initially just accepted the lie that RFC of 1872 had simply changed ownership while simultaneously changing its name, and that TRFC Ltd was still RFC of 1872.
    When they eventually realised the truth that RFC of 1872 was in liquidation and not simply under new ownership with a simple name change, they had to take legal steps to safeguard public monies, and get new contract signed with the new club.
    I expect that the English press will be gung-ho in the Man City Inquiry in a way that will put the SMSM to shame.
    I hope so, anyway.
    ( 23.21 here in Brisbane as I press the ‘post comment’ button)

  230. Another 4,200,000 RIFC shares issued on the 31st Jan. Companies House notice issued this morning. Issue price £0.25 / share raising £1,050,000.

  231. Companies House 08.34 today 8th Feb 2023
    RIFC plc allotted 4200000 ordinary shares , nominal value of each 0.01 amount paid 0.25

    Statement of Capital
    Aggregate number allotted
    Aggregate nominal value
    £4,365, 286.33

    (Posted at 21.12 Brisbane time)
    A bill or two might be paid on time, perhaps?

  232. Westcoaster
    8th February 2023 at 11:09
    ‘…Another 4,200,000 RIFC shares issued on the 31st Jan..’
    We must have been posting simultaneously, Westcoaster.
    Great minds think alike, or what?
    But you put the date of the transaction (31 Jan) which I accidentally omitted!
    A relatively piddling sum of money, I think, suggesting that the buyer might be one of the big shareholders?
    We can check at sometime when the ‘Rangers FC’ website ‘information for investors’ wee section is updated: I haven’t looked at it yet.

  233. The ‘investor information’ page as I write at 23.33 Brisbane time shows this:

    New Oasis Asset Limited, 63,172,893, 14.47%

    Douglas Park, 52,550,000, 12.04%

    Stuart Gibson, 44,000,000, 10.08%

    George Alexander Taylor, 43,074,998, 9.87%

    Borita Investments Limited, 27,611,955, 6.33%

    Club 1872, 22.202,838, 5.09%

    John Bennett, 22,198,803 5.09%

    George Letham, 21,274,516, 4.87%

    Perron Investments LLC, 20,250,000 4.64%

    Tifosy Investment Nominees Limited, 17,610,000, 4.04%

    Which of these may have bought a few more shares?

  234. The bulk (4m) have been bought by Stuart Gibson. He was only holding 40,000,000 at the time of the confirmation statement on the 4th December 2022. It doesn’t appear the totals of the other main players have changed since then ( except the decrease and corresponding increase of DCK / Club 1872) so it may be one of the minor shareholders or a new investor has purchased 200,000.

  235. John Clark
    7th February 2023 at 13:20

    I expect that the English press will be gung-ho in the Man City Inquiry in a way that will put the SMSM to shame.
    I hope so, anyway.


    I expect the SMSM are unhappy that the Man City situation has occurred, as the actions of the FA with Man City compared to the SFA with Rangers will be brought into focus. As we have already seen, some mention has been made among them that Man City might be relegated, ‘like Rangers were’, even though they know that to say Rangers were relegated is a bare faced lie. Imagine being a professional journalist, and being willing to state what you already know to be a lie. It actually beggars belief that any journalist who believes in the principles of his/her profession is willing to risk so much of their reputation for a football club who cheated the public purse out of tens of millions of pounds, as confirmed by the highest court in the UK.

  236. UTH

    The SMSM no compunction about perpetrating the ‘Big Lie’

    Truth doesn’t matter – only their bigoted narrative.

  237. It is 22.43 on Friday 10th Feb here in Brisbane as I write.
    From Court of Session Rolls there is this:
    “LORD HARROWER –S Alexander, Clerk
    Court 6 – Parliament House
    Friday 17th February
    By Order and Note of Objections and Answers
    at 10.00am

    CA144/21 Imran Ahmad v The Lord Advocate ”

    Mibbees by the time I get home the actual case may be ready to be heard and I’ll be able to go to Court to hear how things go!
    But maybe not.
    The only ‘losers’ in the compensation saga so far have been David Grier and (through the ineptitude of the Crown Office and PFS) us, the taxpayers.

  238. bect67
    10th February 2023 at 11:02
    ‘…The SMSM no compunction about perpetrating the ‘Big Lie’
    Truth doesn’t matter – only their bigoted narrative’
    Bect67, I can’t make up my mind which is worse:
    a bigoted/partisan journalist who debases himself/herself professionally by propagating untruths or
    a journalist who debases himself/herself not from partisanship but out of fear of losing his/her job if he/she tells the truth.
    Even in the BBC, truth-telling can be career suicide if the truth being told is unpalatable to the bosses in the BBC.
    [There must be a doctoral thesis for some overseas non-European graduate in studying the lies of the SFA, the acceptance and propagation of those lies both by the BBC and by the entire membership of the SFA!]

    ( It is 23.30 here in Brisbane as I post)

  239. I have sent the following to The Times [London].

    john clark <>
    Sat, 11 Feb at 12:05
    I refer to Henry Winter’s piece published in ‘The Weekend Australian’ newspaper today Saturday February 11th, 2023.The piece is headed ” Take the emotion out of Manchester City case so that lawyers aren’t the only winners.’
    Henry Winter is wrong when he refers to Rangers having been relegated. Rangers Football Club of 1872 foundation was not bought out of Administration but entered Liquidation in 2012 and was required to surrender its share in the then SPL, ceasing thereby to be entitled to membership of the SFA and in consequence ceased to exist as a football club entitled to play in a recognised football league.
    SevcoScotland bought some only of the assets and sought to become a shareholder in the SPL. Its application failed. It subsequently obtained a shareholding in the then SFL.
    In virtue of becoming a member of a recognised league, SevcoScotland was granted membership of the SFA as a new club under the name ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’.

    The Rangers of 1872 foundation is still in Liquidation under the name RFC 2012 plc.
    Winter is either very ignorant of the easily checkable facts, or deliberately propagating a lie.
    Please ask him to check his facts and report truthfully.
    Yours faithfully,

    [It is 22.14 as I post this from Brisbane]

  240. It’s 23.20 here in Brisbane.
    A storm of wind and rain, would you believe a wee while ago!
    I have been fiddling about looking into Henry Winters’ background (my post of 11 Feb at 12.14 refers)
    I was gobsmacked to see that among his ‘followers’ is a Jim Spence.
    I hope to God that that is not our BBC Scotland Jim Spence who bravely told the truth about Rangers of 1872’s death!
    If it is the same Jim Spence, then may he feckin well stop ‘supporting’ Winter, as being either a liar or a propagator of a lie.

  241. As admirable as Michael Beale’s action was on Sunday to allow Partick Thistle to score, I do think his and his Captain’s claim that it was solely due to their club’s ‘high standards’ could come back to haunt them.

    Aside from the obvious question of whether they would do the same if it was against Celtic in the League Cup Final, it is reasonable to ask if every penalty won by cheating will now be refused (and there have been many). If they are not refused, will a choice be made to deliberately miss them? There are so many more questions to be asked, but they have made the statement, fully backed by a compliant media. We are therefore entitled to expect the game for the game’s sake from Rangers in future, and nothing less. If that is not the case, we are surely entitled to think the media will demand to know why?

    Actions will speak louder than words on this, but I won’t hold my breath.

  242. upthehoops
    14th February 2023 at 20.31
    ‘.We are therefore entitled to expect the game for the game’s sake from Rangers in future…’
    A club that lies about its date of admission into Scottish professional football and that claims the sporting achievements won over the course of 140 years by a club that ceased to exist when it was liquidated in 2012 will lie about anything!
    TRFC is a cuckoo club claiming to be what it quite clearly cannot be and making a mockery of ‘sport’ and ‘sportsmanship’ by so doing.
    They are a poison in the blood of Scottish Football.

  243. It’s now about 00.17 on Thursday here in Brisbane, and I have been catching up on the Sturgeon resignation.
    Far be it from me to be all that terribly interested in party politics.
    God forbid!
    But perhaps I may be allowed to observe that while powerful political leaders can be forced to resign office when they have buggered things up, the board of the SFA is able to continue to propagate a vile lie not only without sanction but with the whole-hearted enthusiasm of the SMSM!
    I suppose, like many people, that in a general sort of way a politician is likely not always to be a truthteller.
    I can live with that and cast my vote for one or another lying politician.
    I do NOT expect the Governance body of a feckin ‘sport’ to lie!
    What are we come to when the SMSM are prepared to lie to us about TRFC ?
    When there are much, much more significant lies out there in the world of politics?
    Can ‘The Scotsman’ or ‘The Herald’ be believed about political matters when they support the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872?
    No way, Jose!

  244. My post of 10th February at (UK time, 12.42) refers.
    I was looking this evening to refresh my memory on the Imran Ahmad business given that there is some court action tomorrow (Friday 17th)
    In doing so I came across this, from the ‘Daily Express’ on 20th December 2022.
    Headline: “Charles Green being called as witness by Imran Ahmad in £60m Rangers’ compensation case”
    story: ‘The ex-Rangers chief executive will be expected to give evidence at the Court of Session in March 2023 when his former colleague sues the Crown Office for £60m.’
    By James Mulholland, Edinburgh Courts Press Services and Ben Borland Editor

    I don’t take the Express, and I read Mulholland’s piece at 9.13 pm Brisbane time on Thursday 16th February,
    I don’t remember any previous mention of a date of a ‘date in March 2023′ for Green’s evidence?
    It would be good news for me if tomorrow’s action (Friday 17th) is just more buggering about and the real legal action is in March because I might get to be in Court to hear it because we will be home by then!
    Not that I give a tuppenny toss for Ahmad, of course, but if the Lord Advocate loses, and anything remotely like £60m has to be paid out of our taxpayers’ monies, then I think some senior heads should roll both in Police Scotland and in the COPFS. (I am astonished that nothing has been done already!)
    What an absolute cock-up!
    Not only have SDM’s original cheating and CW’s ‘incompetence’ been the real causes of the death of RFC of 1872, but they have also at least indirectly:
    corrupted a sports governance body, and ‘x’ number of club boards
    caused serious questions about Police Scotland,
    raised considerable doubts about a judge,
    and shown that the print SMSM and the BBC are as ready as the media in pre-war Germany to back Untruth either out of fear or (perhaps more likely) partisanship.
    Honest to God!
    All for a dead football club!
    Could only happen here!

  245. @JC your post reminds us that these matters take years to resolve so I am not getting too excited as to the twists and turns with regards to Man City. Obviously highly unlikely to result in a liquidation event (aka a death) but the press down south are talking about titles being rescinded. Now that would be an interesting development – taking titles off a team for cheating/financial doping/fraudulent reporting would shine a very bright light on Scottish football and dear old Lord Nimmo’s “judgement”.
    I can see this running longer than the Mousetrap…

  246. It”s about 20 to 9 pm on Friday 17th, Brisbane time.
    The Court Rolls of Thursday show :
    Lord Richardson, Tuesday 21st, procedural hearings
    ATP Investments Ltd v RIFC plc
    And Norne Anstalt v RIFC plc
    These are 2 of the 4 shareholders whose shares were frozen by RIFC in 2015 because they would not disclose who the actual owners of the shares are.
    Could be quite interesting.
    Who knows, might be some SFA types who do not wish to be known!

  247. There is an adage in sports that some participants have what is known as “rabbit ears” and opponents who are aware of this take little time in winding them up. A good example would be Scott Brown always having a chat with Morelos, thus taking his mind off the task at hand. Chris Sutton apparently has found another person with “rabbit ears” at Ibrox and looks to have done a good job in getting him off track. Mick Beale has a lot on his plate these days, a cup final, chasing a league title and a number of players approaching the end of contract. Taking time away from all of these issues and getting in a debate with Sutton is perhaps an indication of how easily he can be distracted. Next week’s cup final should provide an excellent opportunity for Celtic fans to throw taunts his way and maybe have an effect on his performance as manager.

  248. There is an adage in sports that some participants have what is known as “rabbit ears” and opponents who are aware of this take little time in winding them up. A good example would be Scott Brown always having a chat with Morelos, thus taking his mind off the task at hand. Chris Sutton apparently has found another person with “rabbit ears” at Ibrox and looks to have done a good job in getting him off track. Mick Beale has a lot on his plate these days, a cup final, chasing a league title and a number of players approaching the end of contract. Taking time away from all of these issues and getting in a debate with Sutton is perhaps an indication of how easily he can be distracted. Next week’s cup final should provide an excellent opportunity for Celtic fans to throw taunts his way and maybe have an effect on his performance as manager.

  249. vernallen
    18th February 2023 at 16:06
    “…Next week’s cup final should provide an excellent opportunity for Celtic fans to throw taunts his way and maybe have an effect on his performance as manager.”
    In the ordinary course of things, vernallen, the mocking taunts of opposition fans tend to render the supporters of the mocked manager more supportive of their manager, I believe, eh?
    Beale has his quite severe critics among the Ibrox fantasists who believe that TRFC is the Rangers of 1872.
    He might therefore be supported more positively and vociferously rather than half-heartedly if he is targeted by opposition fans!
    I think we can accept that his jaiket (how DO you spell that word??) is already on shaky enough a nail for him to be too worried about the opinions of any opposing club’s fans!
    Indeed, if he were to be upset by what may be said of his managerial skills by fans of an opposing club, he would prove that he wasn’t up to the job!
    A job which in my view he ought never to have applied for if he knew the background and climate of sporting deceit he was buying into.
    If he did not know (because of the lying SMSM and perfidious of the thrawn-to-deceit SFA) I can forgive him.
    But IF he knew that TRFC was a lying newcomer of a football club and NOT the Rangers of my grandfathers’ (both grandfathers!) days then I say: hell mend him for signing on.
    [posted at about 22.05 Brisbane time on 19 February]

  250. HirsutePursuit
    19th February 2023 at 16:37
    ‘…Whilst I firmly believe in second chances, it seems strange that someone who has abused a position of authority (and has a conviction for violence) was, at the time, deemed suitable to continue as a SFA approved match official.’
    The SFA, HP, has itself since 2012 been an abuser of office and function and therefore has no moral authority whatsoever and was and is in no position to discipline anyone!
    Not until the SFA proclaim that TRFC is NOT entitled to claim to be Rangers of 1872 and is therefore NOT entitled to claim the sporting achievements of a dead football club as being its own achievements will the SFA be accepted as being anything other than a lying, cheating, corrupt-at-its-core ridiculous mockery of a sports governance body, to put it politely.
    [There is a piece in ‘The Australian’ newspaper today (20th February) about panic in certain quarters in the Netherlands about the forthcoming release of 2nd World War documents relating to collaborators with the Nazis in the killing of innocent people. The Truth ALWAYS comes out in the end, whether in relation to horrendous war crimes or to dirty little men doing dirty wee deals with rogues while supposedly exercising an office of trust (in a mere matter of sport!) or in relation to lying journalism that fails to report truth about the dirty wee deals!
    And the dirty wee men know who they are, and know that we know who they are, and that we will spit on their graves, at least metaphorically, no matter what their obituaries may say in the fullness of time)
    [I post this at 23.14 Brisbane time on Monday 20th February]

  251. HirsutePursuit
    19th February 2023 at 16:37
    ‘…Is this the same Graeme Stewart who is the Assistant VAR next weekend?’
    My post of 13.06 UK time refers.
    Is it the same guy?
    I will say no more!
    Seriously, and my point on this blog since 2012, has been that the need to insist that RFC of 1872 and its great history did not die has caused governance bodies, and even, indirectly, the Courts, and certainly the SMSM to defend the assertion [i.e. the blatant lie] that TRFC is continuity Rangers of 1872 in spite of the actual facts!

  252. It appears Mick Beale is trying to steal thunder from other Rangers’ managers with his recent comment on Scottish football titles, 2 for Rangers and 2 for Celtic. A better presentation would have been Steve Gerrard 1, GVB 1 and Ange 2. And lets not forget the 8 games without defeat. Would not some of that streak ended when the management team bolted for the EPL and new management assumed the reins.

  253. vernallen
    21st February 2023 at 22:51

    ‘It appears Mick Beale is trying to steal thunder from other Rangers’ managers with his recent comment on Scottish football titles, 2 for Rangers and 2 for Celtic …’.

    Quite, and so typically selective of everything Ibrokes.

    To put his comment into perspective (purely from my viewpoint ye ken), methinks a more accurate , and honest, presentation would have been that, In their entire history, TRFC has won 2 major trophies, whilst Celtic, in the last 12 years alone, of an unbroken history, has won 18 trophies. Two kin play at that game Mick!

    Whit ur they like that WATP outfit?

  254. I understood Beale’s comment to have been that TRFC have won 2 of the last 4 trophies. I think St Johnstone might have something to say about that as they won the Scottish Cup in 2021 (being 4 trophies back).

  255. wokingcelt
    22nd February 2023 at 13:05

    I understood Beale’s comment to have been that TRFC have won 2 of the last 4 trophies. I think St Johnstone might have something to say about that as they won the Scottish Cup in 2021 (being 4 trophies back).

    Nice one, well spotted !

    Is this another delusional trait (to airbrush others’ achievements) of WATP ‘follow followers’?

  256. I see that England looks set to have a Government appointed Regulator for football. Somehow I don’t think such a scheme would work in Scotland given how many MSPs, including the then First Minister, were demanding in 2012 that the deliberate non-payment of tax be overlooked by HMRC. Wouldn’t a Regulator, among other things, be tasked with ensuring clubs paid all their social taxes in full and on time? If you don’t have the actual Government onside with that then there is a problem!

  257. John Clark 19/02/2023
    “A job which in my view he ought never to have applied for if he knew the background and climate of sporting deceit he was buying into.
    If he did not know (because of the lying SMSM and perfidious of the thrawn-to-deceit SFA) I can forgive him.
    But IF he knew that TRFC was a lying newcomer of a football club and NOT the Rangers of my grandfathers’ (both grandfathers!) days then I say: hell mend him for signing on.”

    Hi John,
    He must know all of the above as he was there with Slippy, so no excuses. He seems to have bought into the “Culture” and is encouraging, at least some of his players, to engage in silly games such as referring to rivals as, “that Mob”. I can’t imagine any other club allowing their players to talk like that about another club. His attitude and demeanour does him no favours and he needs to grow up and behave like a gentleman as most Managers do treating their rivals with respect even in defeat.

  258. Hello Boys,

    I’ve been on before about VAR, but that involved one of the big two. On this occasion that is not the case. I’m just interested in hearing what everybody, including fans of Sevco amazingly enough, thought of Vassell’s red card last weekend, especially now it has been confirmed after an appeal.
    I’m trying very hard not to be partial, but do you think that that would have been confirmed if it had been either of the two teams at the top of the SPFL? I’m really keen to hear what others think of that incident in some detail.

  259. Haywire
    I’m trying very hard not to be partial, but do you think that that would have been confirmed if it had been either of the two teams at the top of the SPFL? I’m really keen to hear what others think of that incident in some detail.

    Irrespective of the incident I question your premise that the teams at the top would have had a different outcome.

    Only one team has consistently benefitted from VAR and referees’ decisions, but I suspect you know this.

    I could be wrong, I often am, but I think lumping the two clubs like this is one of the greatest successes of SMS and the Liquidation deniers not to mention many years of brainwashing before 2012.

  260. Haywire
    23rd February 2023 at 21:33
    ‘…do you think that that would have been confirmed if it had been either of the two teams at the top of the SPFL?’
    Haywire, was the VAR evidence seen by anyone other than the on-pitch referee?
    If not, then we have to fall back on notions such as ‘trust’ in the integrity of a) the guy in Baillieston and b) the referee on the pitch.
    The whole of Scottish Football governance lost all trust in its Integrity and probity when it created/endorsed the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872.
    Such a betrayal of governance integrity makes it likely that similar, relatively less obvious ‘fixings’ will occur, when it suits one or other ‘agenda’.
    Until the legal and sporting Truth is acknowledged by the SFA that RFC of 1872 died as a football club and that TRFC is in no way entitled to claim honours and titles of a dead club there can be no hope of an honestly governanced Scottish Football Association.
    And no hope that refereeing in critical games will be honest and fair.

  261. Consternation on various fans’ sites over there not being a League Cup Final highlights package on BBC Scotland ,by a mob (I think that’s the current term ?) who glory in not paying tv licence fees , thereby restricting BBC’s ability to compete for access .

  262. From Thursday’s Court of Session Rolls:
    LORD HARROWER – S Alexander, Clerk
    Court 6 – Parliament House
    Wednesday 1st March
    Proof (8 days)

    CA144/21 Imran Ahmad v The Lord Advocate ”

    Might be able to attend on some day or days of this hearing.

  263. There is, as the say, nothing new under the sun!
    My attention has been drawn to a piece which gives words of praise and thanksgiving to a President of the board of the Rangers Football Club of my grandfathers’ days.
    The piece has this:
    “The club was in such financial straits, the committee approached President Goudie requesting he provide a loan of £30 (just under £3,000 in today’s terms). This he did.Would Rangers Football Club have survived if Goudie had not agreed to provide the loan?
    We have to assume that without it, the end may have been nigh. By the summer of 1883, the club was £100 in debt.George served just a matter of months as president. He stood down at the annual general meeting in May, 1883, held at the Athole Hotel.”

    It’s a matter of record that no one was found to be ready to put up the money to save that Rangers football Club of 1872 foundation from Liquidation in 2012 by paying its tax and other debts!
    Your man Goudie can be praised for his genuine loyalty, unlike the monied so-called ‘Rangers ‘supporters’ who let the club die the death of Liquidation.
    What a disgusting farce was made of Scottish Football and football governance by the 5-Way Agreement.
    And what price the SMSM and their football writers with their cowardly refusal to report the truth?
    I raise my small glass of duty free Glenfiddich to the memory of George Goudie who put his money where his heart was and saved the original RFC from Liquidation 112 years ago!
    A feat that was not achieved in 2012.
    And every ‘football’ journalist knows that to be the case;
    and that in supporting and propagating the lie that TRFC of 2012 is RFC of 1872 they make liars of themselves.
    Trust not anything such journalists (or their newspapers) say about anything!

  264. JC – thanks for that post. I am curious as to where you found the aforementioned piece? It would be beyond irony if it was in any sort of “official” document. If you have a link or reference would you mind passing on.
    Many thanks

  265. A little while ago I opened the weekly email from the SFSA, and have read Andy’s ‘Sting in the tail’ piece, in which he references an article in the ‘Daily Mail’ by Gary Keown, discussing Rod Petrie and his candidacy for a vice-presidential post with UEFA.
    I looked up the said article , on this link

    I congratulate both Gary Keown for his article and Andy Smith for bringing it to the attention of the SFSA membership with his own pungent observations on the actual track record of Scottish Football governance as compared with Petrie’s ‘manifesto’.
    In my opinion, no one who has served in office in Scottish Football Governance at any time since the date when the first lying return about players’ wages was -under the authority of SDM-submitted from the now dead RFC ought ever to be elected to even part-time office in UEFA because the SFA and SPFL created and maintain the ridiculous myth that a club newly admitted to membership of the SFA in 2012 by the SFA itself is somehow the Rangers of 1872 foundation!
    Now, whether the whole of European football governance may or may not be corrupt is a matter of conjecture.
    But we KNOW as a matter of empirical fact that Scottish football was corrupted by one club, and that that corruption was not recognised and acknowledged and dealt with properly by either the SFA or the SPL/SFL/SPFL.
    It was instead covered up and denied by dirty little money-grubbers and/or blinkered partisans ready to lie and pervert the truth, making sure that that was done under the apron of a ‘non-disclosure’ agreement!
    It’s time that the liars and cheats were brought to account.

  266. paddy malarkey
    24th February 2023 at 17:05

    Consternation on various fans’ sites over there not being a League Cup Final highlights package on BBC Scotland ,by a mob (I think that’s the current term ?) who glory in not paying tv licence fees , thereby restricting BBC’s ability to compete for access .


    BBC certainly gave plenty of coverage to the Rangers Manager in the build up.

  267. paddy malarkey
    24th February 2023 at 17:05

    Consternation on various fans’ sites over there not being a League Cup Final highlights package on BBC Scotland ,by a mob (I think that’s the current term ?) who glory in not paying tv licence fees , thereby restricting BBC’s ability to compete for access .


    BBC certainly gave plenty of coverage to the Rangers Manager in the build up.

  268. Listening to ‘Off the Ball’ today I heard Jane(?) [ my apologies if I got the name wrong] remark that the ‘Sunday Times’ had an article about Beale and ‘Rangers’ that did not reference the ‘Old Firm’.
    I was distracted at the time and can’t be entirely sure, but I think the point being made by ‘Jane’ was that it is unusual to say the least that a sports journalist writing about ‘Rangers’ before an important Cup Final game against Celtic would not automatically bring in a reference to the ‘Old Firm’.
    Has anyone got a copy of the [Scottish edition?] of the Sunday Times and could find and read the article and let us know the gist of it?

  269. John Clark
    26th February 2023 at 23:31

    “Has anyone got a copy of the [Scottish edition?] of the Sunday Times and could find and read the article and let us know the gist of it?”

    John, I read that piece yesterday but didn’t notice the absence of a reference to the “Old Firm”. I have re-read it just there and I can confirm there is no mention. The article was an interview with Michael Beal by a Times reporter, Douglas Alexander. Here is a link to the article but it may be behind a pay-wall:

    It’s a lengthy piece but I am happy to cut and paste he article if you wish. It is basically a discussion with him about his time so far with Rangers and his previous spell at Ibrox with Gerrard and McAllister. It touches on a number of things such as his recent instruction to allow Partick Thistle to score from the kick-off unopposed and the reaction to that decision by the Rangers fans, etc, etc.

  270. Mordecai
    27th February 2023 at 06:07
    ‘.. I am happy to cut and paste he article if you wish.’
    That’s kind of you, Mordecai, but it’s probably not worth putting you to that bother.
    I think the point ‘Jane’ might have been making is that it would be unusual for any football reporter ,in Scotland at least, not to keep re-affirming the UNTRUTH that the concept of the ‘Old Firm’ did not die with the death of RFC of 1872!
    TRFC is a new club. It desperately desires that the lie that it is Rangers of 1872 be propagated at every opportunity, and the SFA/SPFL , the SMSM and the BBC try might and main to support them in that lie.
    But the lie is there, as stark and brazen as ever it was.
    If Douglas Alexander ( is it the failed Scottish politician?) does not accept the lie, good on him for that degree of honesty.

  271. My apologies for my absence these past couple of weeks, but I’ve been rather under the weather health-wise, and the time I have had to keep an eye out and keyboard at the ready has been rather limited.
    Almost back to normal – whatever that is at my age – so apologies if any moderation activity has been minimal.

    In recent times the money people have been posting results, chief execs have been flitting from club to club, and the fortunes of the emergent third force(s) in the Scottish game have ebbed and waned.

    Despite all this, the Scottish game is per capita the most attended soccer competition on the planet.

    Despite the generally poor (by comparison) fare served in the Scottish leagues, we really are wedded to the beautiful game.

    That honest, healthy enthusiasm of the fans is sadly not mirrored in boardrooms filled with folk totally unrepresentative of those they pretend to serve, and even less interested in the welfare of the paying customers.

    What a wonderful opportunity could be in store if the game was run by the wisdom and honesty of its fans. What is really holding us up is the greed of those in the boardrooms of our top clubs. A microcosm of the political kleptocracy that blights this country.

    We deserve better

  272. Big Pink
    27th February 2023 at 18:06
    ‘.. I’ve been rather under the weather health-wise, ..’
    BP, sorry to learn that you’ve been unwell. Glad to learn that you’re on the mend!
    I echo what you say about the running of Scottish Football.

  273. ’22 trophies in 11 years – we set the standard’ (Celtic supporters banner at Hampden)

    I came across CLUB at 22 (Ibrokes mob podcast – per The Viceroy Tavern I think) and quietly (smugly even!) chuckled to myself at the lovely irony, at least for now, of that embarrassing number!

    I briefly wondered if their administrators might, perhaps temporaily, rename it, and then realised that there’s no real need, as the saving grace (!) for follow followers is that this painful reminder will, in all probability be obsolete by the end of the season anyway – contingent on Celtic achieving further success this season of course!

    I reckon they’ll just ‘bite the bullet’ and live with it till then. This too shall pass?

  274. A couple of minutes ago I visited my superbly appointed cludgie to do some minor business. I switched on the gizmo that brought me Classic FM radio.
    And what did I hear?
    A voice urging me to sign into or sign up with ‘scamsmart’
    Who was urging me to ‘sign up’?
    Would you believe, none other than the FCA!
    The Financial Conduct Authority.
    Which was not in the least interested , when asked, in whether the Prospectus issued by a new plc in 2012 may have lied about which football club it claimed to be the holding company of.
    The irony!
    The scam of RIFC plc being launched on the market as being the holding company of RFC of 1872 and not of CG’s SevcoScotland/team12/TRFC founded in 2012!
    Honest to God!

  275. Good news spun by ICT. Freeport opportunities?

    Chairman’s Update

    As our most recent accounts which relate to last season 2021/22 are posted, the huge financial challenges we face while remaining in the Championship are there for all to see.

    We had a very difficult three month run without a win last season and during that period revenues were certainly down but our Head Coach Billy Dodds and the team went on an epic run to come within 45 minutes of promotion to the Premiership. I couldn’t have been prouder of the club and especially our supporters that night and they remain the inspiration for the Board of Directors and everyone at the club. As do our staff, who as many of you know always go the extra yard for the club and we are incredibly appreciative of their continued hard work and diligence.

    Our finances were indeed challenging throughout the season with many things contributing to this. For instance travelling away supporters were at their lowest for many years, but we managed the financial challenges with the magnificent and continued support of my fellow Directors. I would personally like to thank them as much as I thank our loyal Caley Jags fans for their support. Our season ticket numbers increased last season, as they did again this season, although we need to do more to get younger fans along to Caledonian Stadium, something we continue to target as this current season continues. We will continue to gift hundreds of tickets to schools throughout our catchment area for every game. Our retail operation and in particular our partnership with PUMA, continues to be a huge success with sales up by double digits year on year and by over 50% since switching to the global sportswear giants.

    It was clear to me when I became Chairman that unless we were able to secure significant external revenue streams we would continually and additionally have to rely on the goodwill of Directors and other sources, but thankfully, we are now moving towards the position where all of our hard work on external revenue streams comes to fruition. We plan to be able to include an update on the major joint projects we have been working on with our partners Intelligent Land Investments Group during our scheduled AGM on 28th March. We continue to speak to and search for new Directors to help us take advantage of the forthcoming opportunities and with these projects. We were delighted to be able to have Panos Thomas and Graeme Bennett join the Board in December and more new Directors will certainly be welcome.

    We also hope to be able to enlighten shareholders and fans on the hugely exciting potential we have now that our Stadium and surrounding land have been included in the Opportunity Cromarty Green Freeport. I believe we are the only professional football club in the UK to be situated with a Freeport Tax Zone and we are exploring the potential benefits and opportunities with other Freeport stakeholders, including Highland Council, the Scottish Govt and the UK Govt. So while this season has thus far been a disappointment which we are addressing internally and the financial challenges to a full time Highland club currently in the Championship remain, it is clear to me that as owners of our Stadium, with no bank debt and a thriving Boys Academy, a burgeoning Women and Girls section, an enormously successful ICT Development Trust, on the cusp of securing a stunning 8 acre Hub at the sports fields of the Royal Academy, and with our external business plans well in place, I believe we can look forward with reasonable and measured excitement and confidence.

    There is no hiding from how difficult and challenging it can be to maintain everything we want to have at the club, the cost of living crisis and the outrageous utility charges put an increasing strain on all businesses of our size but we have a good plan. There is no substitute for hard work and ingenuity and we will need to continue that in spades and we are one game away from a Scottish Cup Semi-Final at Hampden. I hope that as many as you as possible turn up to support the club and help roar us to what would be another huge achievement in our proud run of successes in the Scottish Cup.

  276. @BP – Freeport opportunities…that made me chuckle. Maybe SDM was just ahead of his time and thought that Govan was already a designated freeport and as such taxes didn’t apply.
    I could imagine the noise now though if ICT are deemed to be getting tax breaks in the future….

  277. paddy malarkey
    1st March 2023 at 18:01
    ‘..Imran Ahmad…..’
    I myself attended the morning session.
    The smallish court-room ( only about 42 seats in total) had only 9 unoccupied!
    The legal teams of the Parties occupied 18 of these ( 11 on the Lord Advocate’s side, 7 on Ahmad’s)
    I recognised only Mulholland as a journalist, but presumably Anna Savva was there as well.
    Everyone else, apart from me, seemed to a a legals or para-legals taking an interest in the case though not connected with it.
    I was in the back row, and had such difficulty in hearing what was being said that I gave up trying to take notes after a while.
    Counsel for Ahmad, Lord Keen of Elie KC, opened by informing the judge that Parties had agreed a chronology, and had also agreed a note about the ‘proposed indemnity’. He suggested to the Judge that he might wish to break about mid-morning so that there could be a discussion about the note. The Judge agreed, and said he would break at 11.20 or as near as practicable to that time.
    Counsel for the Lord Advocate ( Moynihan KC) wished to draw the Judge’s attention to Rule 47(1) and (2) of the Rules of Court, which refer to the requirement that ‘there should be reasonable opportunity to prepare” He wished to reserve his position in respect of information he had received late about Allenby. He said ” I don’t know where this is going in relation to Allenby. We were told on Friday that [ I missed the next bit].. the FCA were…[?] I don’t know what the basis of these allegations is…”
    referring to page 26, he asked ” Is Ahmad party to that? Why are we allowed to see that only on Monday morning? I would not know , if my learned friend brings up something in his evidence-in-chief how to respond [in cross-examination] …My complaint is thatI could be prejudiced .
    Lord Harrower asked: Has a motion been made on these documents or not?
    Moynihan KC : Yes, but ‘potential allegations’ smear or false…
    Lord Harrower: Lord Keen supplied… I can give you time to talk to Lord Keen?
    Moynihan: Nature of activities? Mr Ahmad?….(??)
    Lord Harrower:Lord Keen, do you wish to talk to Mr Moynihan?…
    Lord Keen: The Allenby documents…… Denton’s said there were other Parties …nothing further that I can do …other people’s confidentialities.
    Lord Harrower: Mr Moynihan would not be able to cross-examine…Let’s crack on.
    Imran Ahmad called to the stand and takes the oath, confirms his name as Sheik Imran Ahmad, gives his age as 53, confirms that , aware of the ‘malicious prosecution’ he moved to Dubai, resided there for 9 days. Resident in the UK since 2015. Separated from wife in December 2016. Reconciled 12 months ago. Living together again since January 2023.Been a broker for AIM companies since 1997.
    Lord Harrower: broker and adviser?
    Ahmad: Yes
    Lord Keen: as your career developed…..[missed the question and reply]
    Lord Keen: .. continued after you left Allenby.About 40 deals since 1997?
    Ahmad: [That’s] not all
    Lord Keen: 15 plus [indecipherable scrawl that looks like Reezim..]Is that the totality?
    Ahmad: No
    Lord Keen: The failure of Rutherford in 2022 impacted your reputation?
    Ahmad : [didn’t catch any response]
    Lord Keen: You refer to your employment with Allenby?
    Ahmad: Yes
    Lord Keen: The circumstances, the confidentiality agreement?
    Ahmad: Yes
    Lord Keen: the 7th inventory of production from Allenby., document 6/159. Letter from HB Markets to… Who are HB Markets?
    Ahmad: My old employer.
    Lord Keen: Who is Jeremy Morgan
    Ahmad: Chairman of Allenby.
    Lord Keen: second page: were HB shareholders in Allenby?
    Ahmad: Yes. 10 per cent,
    Lord Keen: who else were shareholders?
    Ahmad: I had 80%
    Lord Keen : [ indecipherable] …….mention placings
    Ahmad : [didn’t catch any reply]
    Lord Keen: was it designed to dilute? was it unlawful?
    Ahmad: It was not illegal.
    Lord Keen: Who made the offer for HB shares?
    Ahmad: [ couldn’t catch his reply]
    Lord Keen: It was you who intended to purchase?
    Ahmad: yes
    Moynihan: interjected with a query, to which the judge replied, and Lord Keen withdrew that question.
    Lord Keen: I withdraw that question and take the witness to the minutes of a meeting of the audit committee of Allenby.
    2 members of Littlejohn LLP were doing the audit?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    There was a payment of £250,000 to BDL for introducing clients, and a discussion on the appropriateness of that payment. Were you aware?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    Lord Keen: ..then a letter from the auditors to the directors of [ missed the rest]
    Ahmad: [I missed whatever he replied]
    Lord Keen: You, Jeremy Morgan and some other directors, some queries about payments to ‘quasi-related’ parties. Do you know what is meant by ‘quasi-related’?
    Ahmad: No.
    Mr Moynihan: My Lord, objection to the line of [questioning?]
    Lord Harrower: [said something which meant ‘over ruled’]
    Lord Keen: ‘compromise agreement..employee suspended..allegations. Were allegations made re BDL?
    Ahmad: No
    Keen: Did you receive auditors’ letter?
    Ahmad: No
    Keen: ‘termination of employment’?
    Ahmad: yes
    Keen: Had you engaged a lawyer on your own behalf?
    Ahmad: Yes
    Keen: A new company ” Allenby Emerging Markets .Ahmad will be heading up” At whose suggestion ?
    Ahmad: Allenby.
    Keen: Did you sell your shares in Allenby?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    Keen: How much for?
    Ahmad: Roughly £360k.
    Keen: Was Allenby approved by the FCA?
    Ahmad: yes
    Keen: were you approved by the FCA?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    Keen: You joined…[?]
    Ahmad: yes
    Keen: Did you make application to the FCA?
    Ahmad: Yes
    Keen: Your employer had to submit (the application)?
    Ahmad: yes
    Keen: Did you complete the form accurately?
    Ahmad: yes.
    Keen: CF 1 ‘director’, CF 30 adviser..?
    Ahmad: Yes, Hierarchy of approval.
    Keen: You made certain proposals for Rangers Football Club?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    Keen: You made certain payments to the Administrators?
    Ahmad: Yes., at 11 pm for exclusivity.
    Keen: Who granted exclusivity?
    Ahmad: [ I missed the reply]
    Keen: You were in contact with Charles Green?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    Keen: In April 2012 did you take up a directorship of Rangers Football Club?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    Keen: Did you resign from Zeus?
    Ahmad: yes around June 2012.

    I’m now knackered, posting this! And it’s late. I’ve a few more pages to decipher, and I’ll try to find time tomorrow.
    I should add that there was no indication that any reporting restrictions applied and that I openly scribbled in my notebook.

  278. My post of 2nd March at 00.06 refers.
    Here is the continuation of my notes of the Ahmad v The Lord Advocate hearing, such as they are.
    Lord Keen KC: Did you withdraw your application to the FCA?
    Ahmad: …..the form might have been submitted late.
    Lord Keen: the form gives a list of ‘reasons for withdrawal’ one of which is ‘resignation’?
    Ahmad : Yes.
    Lord Keen: ….your signature?
    Ahmad: Yes
    Lord Keen: the date is typed in -2013? Can you recall who might have typed the date other than you?
    Ahmad: [ did not hear his reply]
    my next scribble reads
    ‘ from the administrators for ‘exclusivity’ £250, 000 at 11 pm’
    [20 minute break]
    on resumption: Ahmad withdrawal of FCA application appropriate, and spoke of employment at Rangers Football Club as Commercial Director.
    Lord Keen: Was there any requirement for FCA approval?
    Ahmad: No
    Lord Keen: Your functions at Rangers?
    Ahmad: Commercial activities…Charles Green was involved on the Football side..
    Lord Keen: was there any requirement for FCA approval?
    Ahmad: No.
    Lord Keen: Did you encounter Malcolm Murray?
    Ahmad: I hired him.
    Lord Keen [ I didn’t catch the question]
    Ahmad: There was a gathering of directors on 14th June and Malcolm was there. He appeared to me to have had one too many …….
    Lord Keen: Did Malcolm Murray say that you needed FCA approval?
    Ahmad: No, On the IPO, Cenkos told me privately that vMalcolm had been bad-mouthing me.
    Lord Keen: When did Malcolm Murray leave Rangers?
    Ahmad: July 2013. We fired him for breaches of confidentiality
    Lord Keen: The IPO..did you dispose of shares in Rangers?
    Ahmad: Yes
    Lord Keen: Did you need FCA approval for that?
    Ahmad: No.
    Lord Keen: You moved to Proton. Did you require FCA approval?
    Ahmad: No, because allof the cash flowed between FCA-approved brokers.
    Lord Keen: Joint Bundle,3713 at 5.1.4, there bis reference there to Chris Evans, Martin Walton and ‘Arthurian’ ..who was ‘Arthurian’?
    Ahmad: Neil Woodford. He was putting up a £800 million fund investing in private companies…Deloitte and [ I lost the rest of what he said]
    LordKeen: You were instrumental in appointing them?
    Ahmad: Yes. And I did not need FCA approval for Alban Partnersb LLP

    ‘CG set up a company in Dubai 2015 wich did not provide ” any service which requires FCA regulation”
    Dr Mahli al-Farin Bank of Luxemburg, ” I first met Ahmad ..”
    27 August 2015
    [triumvirate Ahmad, Green and Walton]

    Lord Keen : did any of your share transactions require FCA approval?
    Ahmad: No.
    Lord Keen: Mr Ahmad, do you adopt your statement?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    Mr Moynihan KC, cross-examining: Mr Ahmad, you say you sold your Rangers shares at 41p per share?
    Ahmad: Yes.
    Moynihan: Was there a contract?
    Ahmad: Yes
    Moynihan: Where is that contract?
    Ahmad: It is disposed of, it was a very old contract
    Moynihan: Look at theAhmad ‘Holyrood’ report 19 August 2013.’ Ahmad no longer has RFC shares,sold them.Capital gain £800.000.’
    I note that as 43p per share?
    Ahmad [ he spoke of the normal 3 prices in share dealing ,]
    Moynihan: You returned to the UK in 2018?
    Ahmad: I came back to help my brother in 2015. I have a house in England and a house in Pakistan….. ( help his brother get his his full entitlements to benefits)
    Moynihan: Look at your witness statement: ” I returned to the UK on or around 17 August 2022″
    There is a question about where your tax residence was..

    I stopped note-taking at that point. I’m not sure I heard any reply, and then it was the lunch break.
    I went home , and did not return for the afternoon session.

  279. Some downtime last night due to a server fault at the datacentre.
    Hopefully all good now …

  280. I’ve just been reading the email today from the Scottish Football Fans Association ( SFSA).

    and ‘Andy’s -sting-in-the-tail piece’ therein.
    In that piece he comments on the “fans’ ” behaviour before and during the League cup final.
    He says in relation to that: “The press silence is shocking.
    It should become a power for the good, and report all incidents classed as sectarian on an ongoing basis and the dialogue should start seeing not ‘bigotry’ but ‘racism’ as the cause.”
    I agree, of course.
    But I would add that the SMSM should in the first instance report simple , non-racist, non-sectarian Truth, objectively!
    The SMSM propagate the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872.
    If they cannot report the true legal and commercial facts, there is little chance of them reporting truthfully on instances of bigotry and/or racism in Scottish Football!
    The denial of the death of the Rangers Football Club that was founded in both of my grandfathers’ time is a sure sign that we cannot look to the SMSM for any kind of objectivity in reporting on any matters of concern in the administration of Scottish football or in how the Clubs exercise control of their fans.
    Until the SMSM acknowledge that RFC of 1872 is as dead as Gretna and Third Lanark, and that TRFC has no sporting history earlier than 2012, they cannot be instrumental in influencing change for the good in Scottish Football development. They speak with forked tongues, and with a sickening degree of hypocrisy.

  281. Rangers win today and fans are all aglow with performances of some of the January signings. Lets look at who they were performing against, Kilmarnock with 6 wins, scoring less than a goal a game, and, conceding on average more than two a game. Also we have the normal Rangers penalty. Where were these star performers last week against real competition. Thankfully the run in to the Scottish Cup has been eased somewhat with a favorable draw. Transfer market opens up with untold fees and offers for this new group of Rangers. Still baffled as to the fact that anyone who performs/plays in Scotland earns the “star” designation. Any one with clarification on that would be helpful.

  282. I note from PMCG’s blog (on 2nd March) a comment made by ‘Caine’ on 3rd March to the effect that Beale was reported as having said ” look at any team in the world, the team that spends the most is first. ”
    That is probably true.
    But only where the money spent has not been due to the tax authorities!
    As SDM/CW found out!
    SDM’s lavish, unlawful spending allowed RFC of 1872 to be ‘first’ for a decade or so.
    But the lies from the RFC board both to HMRC and the SFA caused both the death of RFC of 1872 in 2012, and the poisoning and corruption of Scottish Football governance.

  283. John Clark
    5th March 2023 at 00:12
    Speaking of finances, quite a few of my RIFC/TRFC supporting mates are querying why they should be spending circa 20% more than CFC fans just to finish second. And these guys aren’t glory hunters . Has the penny finally dropped ?

  284. Don’t forget the esteemed Lord Nimmo Smith declared that Rangers spending/savings by using ETBs which gave them the biggest budget to spend did not give any sporting advantage. Maybe someone should remind Mr Beale.

  285. Ballyargus
    5th March 2023 at 23:20
    ‘..the biggest budget to spend did not give any sporting advantage.’
    Ha,ha, Ballyargus: that surely ranks as the most fatuous and absurdly stupid observation made by anyone since Lord Denning’s infamous and (potentially dangerous) remark that
    “We shouldn’t have all these campaigns to get the Birmingham Six released if they’d been hanged. They’d have been forgotten and the whole community would be satisfied’
    Lord Denning may have been in his dotage, allowing deep-seated prejudice to surface,and might be excused on that account.
    There can be no possible excuse for LNS.

  286. Paradisebhoy
    6th March 2023 at 15:27
    ‘..Old big hands reappears .’
    Yes, and the rotten old Daily Express carries on the propagation of the Big Lie in the headline
    “Tax authorities ‘destroyed’ Rangers, former chairman Charles Green tells court..”
    Whatever Green was he was NEVER ever the Chairman of RFC of 1872. He bought a bundle of assets, which the perfidious SFA did not recognise as a football club except by constructing a number of nonsensical lies, destroying thereby the integrity of Scottish Football and the personal integrity of the guilty office-holders in the SFA .

  287. wokingcelt
    6th March 2023 at 20:59
    ‘..What to make of such differing interpretations…’
    Well, and it might be my own fault for being thick of understanding or of my general feckin ignorance, but I did actually believe that VAR technology would have removed the possibility of ordinary human error or deliberate referee bias seriously affecting the result of a match.
    That was the way it was sold to us.
    What I seem to have missed is that it is ONE single referee based in Baillieston who decides whether to signal to the on-pitch ref that there might be something that he might wish to look at.
    I may be wrong, [and if so that would demonstrate that the SFA have not adequately explained to us how VAR works]
    If I am right, then VAR as operated in Scottish Football is not worth a tuppenny toss in terms of removing doubt about potential refereeing bias on the part of the Video Assistant referee!
    The VAR has it in his power NOT to suggest to the on-pitch referee that there is anything to look at!
    And, sadly, there has been a time when particular on-pitch referees have been less than impartial.
    The possibility exists therefore that a referee tasked with being the VAR in any given match might conceivably ‘not see’ incidents that should be called to the on-pitch referee’s attention.
    That of course raises the possibility that the VAR ref in Baillieston has the power NOT to ask the on-pitch ref to look again at any potentially questionable decision.
    Back to square one!
    Ja wohl!

  288. Just read RTC latest tweet re the on air spat between Andy Walker and Kris Boyd during the St Mirren v Celtic game . Even with the benefit of multiple replays they couldn’t agree .
    RTC concluded by saying that it was impossible to eliminate personal bias from decision making .
    That being the case we need to look at the English system whereby referees have to declare club allegiances before being appointed to specific fixtures .

  289. @Paradisebhoy – think we would then find ourselves with an infeasibly large number of refs who support Third Lanark!
    Whilst our football clubs are very willing to accept that the best player for a position or indeed for manager may be foreign, our football authorities insist that our home-grown referees are always up to the task…

  290. There seems to be a distinct lack of MSM coverage of the Ahmad v Lord Advocate case . Charles Green gave evidence last friday and was due to appear again yesterday. Anyone have any updates ?

  291. @wokingcelt – yes I agree , Clyde and Partick Thistle would also receive a boost .
    However , some things are easily checked – like season ticket holders , shareholders, debenture seat owners and supporter club membership. We even have a current referee who is employed as a PE teacher helping to train one club’s future players.
    If we cannot find enough impartial Scottish officials to fulfil the fixtures – we need to look elsewhere.

  292. Paradisebhoy
    7th March 2023 at 15:27
    ‘..There seems to be a distinct lack of MSM coverage of the Ahmad v Lord Advocate case..’
    Indeed, considering that if Ahmad wins then another good few million quid of taxpayers’ money will be added the millions already spent in consequence of what can only be described as the fecked up (perhaps suspiciously so?) attempt at prosecuting some other folk.
    Sadly, I myself have not been free to attend since the first morning of the hearing.

    Meanwhile, and unconnectedly ,there is this from today’s issue of the Court of Session rolls:

    “LORD RICHARDSON – C Scott, Clerk
    Parliament House
    Thursday 9th March
    Continued Procedural Hearing
    between 9.00am and 10.00am
    COS/CA104-22 ATP Investments Ltd v Rangers International Football Club Plc
    COS/CA105-22 Norne Anstalt v Rangers International Football Club Plc
    (this is a about the shareholders blocked by RIFC plc)

  293. Paradisebhoy 07/03 15.44.

    Just to be clear pb, Nick Walsh doesn’t train the Rangers youngsters at Boclair Academy. He is also a Celtic fan, not that it matters.

  294. @Albertz11 – I was trying to be careful with my words as Nick Walsh’s exact relationship with the Ibrox youngsters has not been made public . But as a PE teacher at the academy, I think my statement that he “helps to train “ is accurate.
    It does matter if he is a Celtic fan – he should not be allowed to officiate at any of their fixtures.

  295. Well VAR has been operating for long enough now to have ironed out any ‘teething’ and so clubs should feel confident enough to assess its efficacy and value for money. Remember it is the clubs that are paying for this service and as such I suggest they should have the greatest influence on it’s development and continued use. At the outset I was of the opinion that it would be more cost effective and reliable to contract out to an established system already in use such as in England. The advantages are unquestionable neutrality in observation and an immediate accuracy and professionalism negating for the most part the tedious ear fingering delays we have experienced thus far. Scottish football is right to value it’s independence and international standing but I don’t believe striving for a level of excellence should preclude sourcing assistance from outside of the usual gene pool. If clubs are happy to continue with the current sham and pay for it as it stands then fine but ultimately it may cost one or two members in terms of European qualification and domestic success.

  296. Paradisebhoy 07/03 18.44

    The football part of the youngsters education is provided by the clubs own coaches with NW playing no part in it.
    I would have no problem with him refereeeing any future OF games irrespective of which club he supported in the past. He is, imo, the best official in the country and was excellent in the recent LCF.

  297. Albertz11 07/03 21.48
    Thanks for that explanation of Nick Walsh’s position.
    Of course , it will be impossible for him to referee any “ future OF games” as these are things of the past – but that’s another topic altogether.

  298. What’s all this talk about the OF? To continue using this obsolete ‘descriptor’ is a narrative and agenda driven nonsense.

    As so accurately described by the ‘sage’ Leigh “Yir club’s deid mate!” Griffiths when referring to the liquidation of Rangers (1872 – 2012), this previously accepted term can only accurately be used to describe the Celtic/Rangers ‘relationship’ in historical terms (i.e prior to 2012).
    Thereafter, a newly formed (replacement?) Govan mob arrived on the scene (Sevco/TRFC or whatever) then, lo and behold, the term OF was, farcically, re-introduced!

    (n.b. TRFC was a new club with no history!)

    Although, in fairness, the fledgling outfit has done well by winning 2 major domestic trophies in 11 years (as against 22 by CFC and 3 by St Johnstone), all liquidation deniers and ‘airbrushers’ out there should note that …

    There ain’t no OF! (mibbee it could, in time, be a New Firm – ah dunno!).

  299. bect67 08/03 16.39

    Leigh Griffiths has been called many four letter words throught the years but ‘sage’ has never been one of them.
    To be fair one of the two major trophies won in the past 11 years was rather important don’t you think?

  300. bect67
    8th March 2023 at 16:39
    ‘What’s all this talk about the ‘OF’?..’
    Yes, bect67.
    Albertz11’s otherwise entirely reasonable post of 7th March 2023 at 21:48 was vitiated by his reference to the ‘OF’
    Because for as long as TRFC is allowed to claim to be RFC of 1872, there is no possibility of Truth in Scottish Football and Scottish Football governance!
    Everybody in Scottish Football KNOWS, as James Taylor so signally did at the time, that RFC of 1872 was as dead and gone as a football club as Third Lanark when no buyer prepared to pay its huge debts could be found and it was consequently liquidated.
    And knows that ‘team 13’ was a lying construct by the SFA/SPL/SFL at the time,
    and knows that CG’s SevcoScotland had to seek entry into Scottish football as a new club, with absolutely no footballing history but lying in its teeth that it was RFC of 1872!
    A lie so gross as to render those who created it and those who propagate it unfit to be operating in any field of professional Sport!
    Honest to God!

  301. Just in the passing can I say that I attended the afternoon session of today’s proceedings in the Imran Ahmad action v the Lord Advocate.
    I’ll try to decipher my notes and give some idea of what I heard.
    I can say that interest seems to have waned, because only about 20 seats in Court 6 were occupied!

  302. John Clark 08/03 23.22

    My opinion differs from yours John. I alongwith the vast majority of people still use the term when discussing the game. A few refer to it as RAN V CEL or CEL V RAN, no-one i know mentions the Glasgow Derby prior to the match i’m afraid.

  303. I was able to attend the Wednesday 8th March afternoon session (2.00-4.00) of the Imran Ahmad case.
    Interest in it seems to have waned somewhat, for only about 20 seats were occupied, [Counsel for both parties sat at the clerk’s table, immediately below the bench, and the row normally used by Counsel was occupied by three ‘expert’ witnesses, Mr Andrews, Mr Constantino and a Mr [Curten?] These are ‘experts’ in the world of corporate finance, who [I assume] had been giving evidence about Ahmad’s career and abilities to earn monies in the world of raising capital investment and share purchasing etc. and able to assess his future earnings potential and value of loss of earnings.

    Apart from Counsel, there were 6 legals on the Lord Advocate’s side, and I think 7 on Ahmad’s side. Ahmad himself was present.
    The afternoon session began with Lord Keen KC concluding his examination of Mr Andrews. He referred to reckoning the total value of losses sustained by Mr Ahmad, and to page 118 section 5.1. This related to a report which included the following “the move from Rangers would have provided monies and [while there] is no evidence of specific opportunities arising from Proton Partners, Ahmad was in a strong position”.
    Mr Andrews agreed that the statement (as amended earlier) was correct and reliable.
    Lord Keen then asked Mr Curten[?} to look at his own statement. and asked if the report in 2022 was made by him? Mr Curten agreed that it was. He was asked if he adhered to his declaration to the Court in 2022. The answer was ‘yes’ And did he accept the Joint Statement? Yes, he did.
    Lord Keen asked whether Mr Curten relied on Mr Andrews? Yes, he did.
    That was the end of Lord Keen’s examination.

    Mr Moynihan KC had to sit in the witness box (because of a faulty microphone) and quipped about role reversal)
    He began by asking Mr ? to look at the report at Joint Bundle 707[ or 747?], and asked: you contributed to your colleague in [producing] the Joint Statement?
    Moynihan: There was some correction to the report (he referred to P 2909, app III (c).6 ‘tax calculations had to be revised”
    Witness: yes
    Moynihan: Corrected version at 2916 to be used?
    A: 2921
    Moynihan: make change to 2922 as well?
    Witness: Yes
    Moynihan: That is a Schroeder report on the valuation of Proton…correct?
    W: Yes.
    Moynihan: I have some questions to ask about your CV which I will leave till tomorrow, but I have a couple of points now.
    First, refer to page 796 para 5.22 of your report. This is the Calculation of commission, £3.9 million, and after some deductions, a net figure of £2.55 million.That ,divided by 3, equals £850,000. He was paid £631,000. Is that included in the £850,000?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: When were you first instructed?
    W: Late July 2022.
    Moynihan: .late July to beginning of December?
    W: had no time to have a vacation..
    M: How many colleagues had you?
    W: 3 to 5
    Moynihan: Any particulr challenges?
    W: I struggled with the consistency of the information, trouble defining….
    Judge (intervening) 3 to 5 colleagues? .. did that involve you delegating ?
    W: Not all the time.. Every week there were I or 2 colleagues, some weeks all 5.
    Moynihan: Other companies ..Para 4, page 781 ‘background of legl entities involved’ Was this a significant piece of work?
    W: Yes. It was hard to find information..
    Moynihan: [he mentioned a company name that sounded like ‘ Albin Capital Ltd]?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: Albin Partners?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan:’Albin Partners general trading’ ?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: para 4.16, page 783..”Albin Partners, Albin General Traders, Albin Capital Ltd.’…thse were all separate legal entities?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: P 784- ‘Tota Partners international’, Abu Dhabi? A separate entity?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: Then at P.785 ‘Albin General Traders LLP?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: An entity called “Singulanta”[ ed: that’s what it sounded like!]
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: [ed: he said another name that sounded like ‘Cruse’ ?
    W: I found nothing on that
    Moynihan: [ed: my scribble looks like “ Lianasut Albin partners’ ?- Made enquiries into?
    W: Couldn’t find anything without a Court order
    Moynihan: ‘Flanigs’ [ ed: that’s how my scribble reads!]-a Cypriot company?
    W: You can see it online, but you have to go personally.
    Moynihan: A flavour of how difficult it was?
    W; Yes
    Moynihan: Page 995. Have you set out the link to some of these entities in trying to track the transfer of shares?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: Info about ‘Singulanta’?
    W; The name Charles Green came up.
    Moynihan: “Cruse? Did you hear any info about Cruse during other evidence ?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: So your sum of knoedge about Cruse is wht you herd from other people’s evidence?
    W: yes.
    Moynihan: Page 6503… This is an analyisis of Mr Ahmad’s bank transactions in current aaccount. Got a lot, but not all. Example, line 28 “ 20 August 21…..£500 000”
    W: We have the receipt
    Judge: [ed: he asked a question which I didn’t hear]
    Witness: We hd a lot of bank statements.
    Judge: [the Court ws looking at the screen on which the document referred to was being shown, and Lord Harrower was seeking clarification on what it was showing} What is the request being made, and wht is the response?
    W: [ explained the layout]
    Moynihan: P. 263: blue colour entries are the information requested and the red entries are the replies.”Question 5:povide receipts and invoive received by Ahmad”?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: P6650 …further request for information [in blue] , red (?) column spredsheet “ Can Mr Ahad tel us how (?) ws calculated?” “Mr Ahmad cannot provide further information”
    email from E Smith , more uestions from you? Have you seen these?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: Confirmation of tax residency “ ..our client lives in Dubai” “Our client left for Pakistan..” How dependent on [ ed: missed the question]…?
    W: [ed: missed any answer]
    Moynihan: What degree of understandingdid you hve of Mr Ahmad’s losses?
    W: Still unknown.
    Moynihan: You’ve been here in court and heard about Allenby documents ?
    W: Yes, last week, Thursday?
    Moynihan: You’re unclear?
    W: The documents we saw yesterday I had not seen before
    Moynihan: The Supplement to the Joint Bundle, p.201 3rd February….?
    W: I haven’t seen before
    Moynihan: Yesterday annd today’s informtion , p.73, ‘Invoice £220 000 Ali Shar’ When did you first see that?
    W: yesterday
    Moynihan: Joint Bundle..376 two statements. I take you to p.3722. , para 5.2.7- trying to work out what Mr Ahmad’s career might hve to do with you and ZAI in 2004.. would you follow up?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: Why?
    W: to see possible extension of career
    [ At this point , 3.00 pm, Mr Moynihan suggested that it might be a good time for a short adjournment. { I think it was for practical reasons to do with making sure that the Court and witnesses were all on the same page when documents were being referred to because one ‘expert’ witness had appeared not to and hadn’t asked for clarification]
    On resumption at about 3.15 or so, Mr Moynihan continued his cross-examination of Mr Andrews:
    He asked about the length of time and work Andrews had expeneded on his work, and when he was first instructed.
    W: February till April 2022.
    Moynihan: Full-time?
    W: No
    Moynihan: [?]
    W: About 45 hours work

    Moynihan: Did you have to ask for work?
    W: No
    Moynihan: You were here this morning?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: Was that the first time you had heard of [ ed: missed it!]
    W: My gut reaction..[ ed: missed the rest]
    Moynihan : p. 2292 of statement. “ 5A Set out VCE generated by Andews for the purposes of his report ..
    Ahmad ‘Venture Capital European’
    if [ed: ‘it’?] had said ZAI, what would you say?
    W: Corporate Finance
    Moynihan: ‘NOMAD’ etc ?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: If his intention was to work with ZAI you might call him a NOMAD?
    W: Correct.
    Moynihan: Exactly. Comes out of Rangers into ZAI
    [ed: I missed the first bit of what was said] …….if he had to lie to the FCA..

    by January 2015 ZAI was a route into Allenby which to be quite difficult?
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: Your report: engagement letter 2014…in Albans Capital…entitlement to 5%?
    W: Yes
    ( My heid’s done in trying to decipher my notes. I’ll continue tomorrow)

  304. My post of 9th March at 22.42 refers
    This is the continuation of my notes

    “Moynihan: You weren’t told that it was a variation-were you not told that the fee was 3%
    W: [ed: didn’t catch his reply]
    Moynihan: .para 325 , 5% is mentioned?
    W: [ed: the witness referred to high level operations, and verbal agreements subsequent to written contract . I lost the thread of what he was saying]
    Moynihan : [ed: I think he referred to a paragraph number, and said ‘ the writing of the IPO was £58 million’?
    W: [ ed: seemed to say something bou that figure being smaller]
    Moynihan: 2% of £50 million equals £800 000.To what extent is your dependent on what you are told?
    W: It’s very subjecive.
    Moynihan: Page 97,31.10—Rangers shares,2.2 million shares, £946,000..= 43p per share, £899,000 gain..
    The [ed: ‘Holyrood’??]report, page 6674, para 3.24 ….On 21 August 2013 “Ahmad no longer held an interest…£899.000 capital gain… Share price August 2013 share price 43p per share. That’s what you relied on. The sum received was closer to £902,000….41p per share. Ahmad did not tell you what he received for the Rangers shares?
    W: I may be at fault, I apologise if so.
    Moynihan: Were you told that Ahmad did not pay rax on a capital gain?
    W: Not to my recollection
    Moynihan:Is it relevant that tax not paid might be relevant to an application for Financial Conduct Authority approval?
    W:[ed: don’t know if there was a reply efore Mr Moynihan asked his next question
    Moynihan: If someone had asked you to send a letter of approval ..?
    W: It’s very hard to say ,Moynihan the key word being [ed: my scribble might be ‘evasion’]
    Moynihan: 14.6.12 , hyperlink to RIFC plc’s Interim results. This was given to you in 2022. Full results of Rangers Football Club Ltd, p. 4902, balance sheet of RFC Ltd, June 2013 On this sheet “ current assets less debtors” cash of £10.25 million. Rangers blew £25 million in 13 months.
    W: [ed: not sure whether Witness made any reply]
    Moynihan: page 4895 , Board of RIFCplc, investigation into Green and Ahmad.. is it in line with trading [ed; missed the next bit, hearing only “ a letter before claim” then
    “Did Mr Ahmad tell you that he had dealings with Mr Whyte
    W: No
    Moynihan: Did Ahmad tell you he got £137500 from Whyte? The evidence we hve is that that money was put into his mother’s account?
    W: No
    Moynihan:Same document, p 446. the 2012 acquisition of Stagecoach. Mr Ahmad was not an ‘Adviser’ Were you aware?
    W: No
    Moynihan: To bea NOMAD Mr Ahmad has to be employe by a NOMAD
    carried out a number of ‘qualified transactions’. By 2015 his last transaction , Stagecoach, he was short of the 3 years?
    W: Yes and no [ ed: there was then a some kind of explanation that I could not follow]
    Moynihan: Page 109 of the Joint Bundle, para 5.4.5 “the most important fact….he would have 2 successful..”
    {ed:if Witness replied, I missed his reply]
    Moynihan: Having heard what I have said, wold you stick by ..
    W: No, that would not have been a successful career.
    Moynihan: Is it acceptable for a company to keep that quiet?
    W: No
    Moynihan: You would feel obliged to report this to the FCA
    W: Yes
    Moynihan: Even ifnthe fault was Allenby Capital’s?
    W: [ed: couldn’t make out what witness said, except the word ‘reference’ was used. The Judge intervened to to make it clear that the ‘reference’ was not just a job reference but a formal reference to the FCA for approval]
    Moynihan: CENKOS observed that Rngers had been an unmitigated disaster for them.Cenkos advised Ahmad that he should not be a director of RIFC plc.
    Is that a successful career
    W: [ed: not sure if there was a reply}
    And that was the end of the session, Court adjourned until next day.

  305. From the Rolls of Court today
    Adjustment in the undernoted cases commenced on Wednesday 8th March 2023 and in the absence of any court order to the contrary the records therein will, without further publication in the rolls, close on Wednesday 3rd May 2023.
    1. ……..
    2 A272/21 Craig Whyte v Chief Constable Iain Livingstone &c

    I don’t know what that means. Anybody?

  306. rom the Rolls of Court today
    Adjustment in the undernoted cases commenced on Wednesday 8th March 2023 and in the absence of any court order to the contrary the records therein will, without further publication in the rolls, close on Wednesday 3rd May 2023.
    1. ……..
    2 A272/21 Craig Whyte v Chief Constable Iain Livingstone &c
    I don’t know what that means. Anybody?

    Don’t worry John I’m sure it will be explained in great detail by our hard working truth seeking journalists. 🙂

  307. I’ve just been reading today’s email from the SFSA, and had a wee laugh of agreement at reading this in ‘Andy’s -sting-in-the-tail ‘
    ‘… because Deloitte are not the source of anything other than expensive guesswork for expensive fees.’
    No harm to Deloitte but having recently heard in Court some ‘fee’ figures for people ‘advising’ on finance matters I am inclined to have the same opinion as he about ‘financial advisers’, whether they are approved by the FCA or not!
    Mind you, I have a very low opinion of the FCA as being any kind of regulatory body. They did not see (because in my opinion they did not look!) anything questionable about RIFC plc’s IPO, with its strong suggestion to potential investors that RIFC plc is the holding company of the liquidated RFC of 1872!
    Which, of course, it is not!
    It is the holding company of a football club first admitted into Scottish Football in 2012.
    As the BBC knows to be the case, and as the SMSM generally knows to be the case.
    May they live uncomfortably in the knowledge that in essence they are propagandists of untruth-in a mere matter of so-called Sport- and that we assume that they would readily be propagandists of any untruth in more fundamental life and death matters to save their wretched skins!

  308. Ballyargus
    10th March 2023 at 23:28
    ‘..Don’t worry John I’m sure it will be explained in great detail by our hard working truth seeking journalists. 🙂’
    Ha ha! Would I believe what they might say? [ see my post of 23.30 above]

    To be fair to the Courts’ administration body the stuff on their website is aimed principally at legals to keep them up to the minute with administrative matters relating to their work, not at Joe Public.
    I make no criticism of them.

  309. paddy malarkey
    10th March 2023 at 17:28
    ‘Barca now ‘
    The thing about the Barcelona allegations is that it is about one football club’s alleged arrangements with an allegedly crooked official in charge of referees.

    Our wee Scottish problem is that our football GOVERNANCE body sold its soul (allegedly) in creating the LIE that a football club that they themselves admitted into Scottish football as a new club in 2012 is the Rangers of 1872!

    One allegedly cheating club and/or bent refereeing supervisory body are as NOTHING compared with an allegedly bent national ‘governance’ body’s fabrication of the lie that TRFC are RFC of 1872.

  310. There’s something in me that just loved watching the Falkirk v Ayr United game tonight.
    I can openly say that I was a smidgeon biased in favour of Falkirk: a cousin’s husband, [sadly deceased some years ago, as is my cousin], who was generous and entertaining company on our visits to my cousin and him, was an avid supporter of Falkirk!
    I miss them both.
    I smile to myself as I wonder whether the ‘Sun’ has already anticipated a Celtic v Falkirk final. and is working on a headline as (objectively measured in newspaper terms!) as brilliant as the ‘supercaley go ballistic.’ one.
    Or an equally stinging but amusing headline if the final is between a losing TRFC and Falkirk/ICT.

  311. John Clark
    15th March 2023 at 22:06

    I note from Mark Elder in ‘the Scotsman’ online half an hour ago that Kyle Fox has withdrawn from ” Rangers take-over bid”
    So maybe the conditions were too onerous for the current board. Conditions such as anti dilution meaning the usual emergency funding would not be available, management interviews might prove more difficult than anticipated and then the data room? Poor Dave.

  312. gunnerb
    16th March 2023 at 09:28
    ‘.So maybe the conditions were too onerous for the current board.”’
    (Mark Elder’s piece is repeated, of course, in this morning’s print edition of ‘The Scotsman)

    The now dead RFC of 1872 had one ‘owner’ [ technically, SDM as the majority shareholder] with no fractious Board able to veto his (enforced by the bank] decision to sell.
    The Board of RIFC plc (the holding company of TRFC Ltd) are clearly ready to engage with at least one interested buyer, are clearly not singing from the same song sheet when it comes to the conditions of sale.
    Something will have to give, and soon. A cash-strapped entity that can raise survival cash only by borrowing from its directors and/or by diluting its shares has no long-term future.
    TRFC 2012 is heading for football extinction.
    Meanwhile, poor Beale is left waffling semi-philosophically:
    “It’s trying” he says, “to bring everyone together with a lot of clarity and cohesion in the way we think and where we’re going to go. We need to cut the cord from the past. There have been some déjà vu moments in the last few weeks because it’s me coaching the team and we have some issues we had before at the same stage when we were building and the same meetings. So, we’re cutting from the past and moving in a different direction in terms of the way we’re playing. And we’re moving in a different direction recruiting new players into it. A lot of people have done a lot of good things over the last few years but the club needs to move forward. The game doesn’t wait for anyone. That’s what the coming months are about.”
    It’s incidentally interesting that ‘The Scotsman’s’ business section carries not a word about the Kyle Fox bid as a matter of business and commercial news.

  313. Thompson (beardless!), Foster and McCann on ‘Sportscene’ this evening!
    Balanced comment on the Celtic v Hibs match?

    I deeply dislike having to ask that question.
    But the BBC in Scotland, by buying into and propagating the lie that TRFC is the Rangers of 1872, showed that it is no more impartial in ‘Sport’ than is the wider BBC in the much more serious world of politics (as the Lineker episode has shown).

    So, having 3 pundits- two of whom played for the dead Rangers of 1872, the third for the new TRFC- commenting on a Celtic v Hibs game is, frankly, a piece of bloody-minded nonsense.

    Whether those pundits are in fact ‘objective’ in their views and opinions is neither here nor there.
    They are emotionally thirled to the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872. The perception therefore is, understandably, that there is the possibility that they MAY not be seen to be entirely objective.
    And the BBC should recognise that.
    The shade of Peter Thomson may well have crossed the Clyde to carry on its nefarious biased business.

  314. JC – I had the very same thoughts watching Sportscene last night and really struggled to understand in what football world the producer of such a show would consider the “pundit lineup” in any way balanced, and in my view this was borne out by their “analysis”. With regard specifically to Richard Foster I fail to understand why he is considered worthy of an opinion on any show – and lord only knows how he has secured licence payers money for the “Vardict”.
    I also found it curious that for Motherwell’s first goal they showed the “lines” confirming the Motherwell wingback was onside but didn’t show the same level of analysis for TRFCs 3rd goal which Motherwell were unhappy about.
    Before we know it BBC Scotland will be losing footage again…

  315. Re-Sportscene/Sportsound.

    According to BBC in correspondence I’ve had with them they employ pundits on the basis as stated:

    ‘Our contributors are appointed on the basis of their experience and knowledge of the game, not which club/s they may have played for during their careers. That Rangers may be one of the former clubs of some of our contributors is not indicative of bias’

    So there you have it. It just so happens that more ex-Rangers players have better experience and knowledge of the game than ex-players who do not have Ibrox on their CV. I would add that it appears to me that having been part of an unlawful tax avoidance scheme when playing for Rangers also appears to be an advantage when attaining a pundit’s position with BBC.

    Sadly we all have to pay the licence fee, but that does not entitle us to receive objective, balanced coverage of all of our football teams. I am a Celtic fan, and I do not want three ex-Celtic players on Sportscene as that would not be balanced. However, the notion that the BBC would ever dare to have such a panel is laughable. Social parity for ex-Celtic people is not yet a thing at BBC Scotland.

  316. upthehoops
    19th March 2023 at 16:32
    ‘…Our contributors are appointed on the basis of their experience and knowledge of the game….
    That Rangers may be one of the former clubs of some of our contributors is not indicative of bias’
    Whoever it was in the BBC who wrote that seems to imagine that an ex-professional’s ‘knowledge and experience of the game’ means that he can be somehow more objective in his view of whether a referee has ‘called it right’ in any particular situation than the any ordinary spectator can!
    However, their ‘expertise’ lies in being able to discuss/explain/ point out the strategies and tactics of the teams and whether and how the respective team managers have made the right choices of personnel before the match and are able to spot and explain the weaknesses and failures that result in goals being conceded and the strengths that bring success, and such like.
    The pundits’ OPINION on whether an offence calls for a yellow or red card or whether a player takes a dive to get a kick in the head and win a free kick is JUST an opinion that carries no more weight than, say, yours or mine.
    Bearing in mind the culture of untruth in Scottish Football and BBC Scotland football coverage department and the very real fear of becoming a ‘persona non grata’, not many pundits with a playing connection with either the defunct RFC of 1872 or the lying TRFC of 2012 creation are going to broadcast an opinion that might cause them any kind of problem!

  317. With all the interest in the pitfalls of VAR, and the thoughts of various clubs’ fans as to how it is being used against them, yet again I am beginning to wonder if I live in a slightly different universe to the rest of the SFM crowd.

    Bearing in mind that the blog is supposed to be about something other than just the big Glasgow teams (I never use the term ‘Old Firm’ these days – John Clark would cast me into the outer darkness!). However, and I have to say yet again that I am a Killie fan of too many years (I saw them play Real Madrid), but yesterday I saw as clear a handball penalty as you are ever likely to see by a certain Mr. Considine for St. Johnstone – the referee had a clear view of it, but no penalty. Nothing whatsoever has been said on the blog about it – wake up at the back, please! It was far more blatant than any other thing I’ve seen in relation to VAR this season. I’m presuming that some of you may have missed viewing it because it was towards the end of Sportscene. In that case, please have a look on iPlayer and tell me what you think that the referee saw and why he wasn’t asked to look at the incident. It was such a ridiculous decision that I’m surprised that he didn’t send a Killie player off for breathing heavily. On top of all that, he disallowed a Killie goal when the ball brushed against the scorer’s arm which was by his side.

    I really would like you all to look at this and tell me what you think the referee saw or thought he saw. He did not penalise a Killie player. The two points lost in the draw could be absolutely crucial when you consider the upcoming games for Killie.

    I look forward to hearing your views.

  318. Haywire
    19th March 2023 at 23:16

    I watched Sportscene and am in total agreement regarding the Considine incident – penalty and red card in my opinion . Not so sure about the disallowed goal , though , as the contact with the arm , which I saw as more than a brush , altered the trajectory of the ball and it fell favourably for the forward . Accidental and unfortunate , but I agree with that decision . Do you think Killie are suffering from worse decisions since the inception of VAR , or is it still the same but you expected better ?

  319. @Haywire – agree completely on the Considine handball. Why that hasn’t been given is beyond me (but only if I exclude rank incompetence of the officials). Agree with PM on the disallowed goal – rule quite clear that if the ball hits your hand at all then you cannot score directly as that player.
    I don’t watch The Vardict – does anyone know if the handball was discussed?

  320. Haywire
    19th March 2023 at 23:16
    Considine’s handball was a penalty. The goal should have stood; the arm was tucked in front of the body. However, that is only my view in a sea of confusion.
    VAR is a complete mess. New factors appear for each incident. This week’s Sportscene analysis threw up “touching lines”, and “onside although the forward’s line was in front”. Twice referees were not called to VAR when it appeared a mistake had been made, which is what VAR is supposed to be for. On other occasions referees are called to VAR for marginal decisions, after they have let the game run, some of which are not clear even with imaging.
    Where are all these considerations coming from? Which document? The SFA should release the rules that VAR is working to, so that we can all understand. I have found the IFAB (FIFA) ones, but they do not include what I am hearing in Scotland, and that must be because of the room for interpretation allowed to member Associations.
    VAR was always going to be a hostage to fortune in Scotland, given the long history of “honest mistakes”, but with no consistency and unfathomable decisions it has become utterly discredited, and distrusted by by pundits, coaches and fans.
    The Sportscene pundits rightly commented on the importance of two points lost to Kilmarnock and Dundee Utd. through VAR errors. It is a matter of time before a Cup Final or League title is decided by a dodgy VAR, which will be the point of no return for fans, and the game’s credibility.
    Dundee Utd. should be granted their inquest and every club should be in there with them.

  321. …….and the pundits were Thompson, Foster the VARdict man and McCann for goodness sake. Next week it will be Crichton after she has done the live video rulings on contentious decisions on Sportsound, and the paragon of impartiality that is Iwelumo. For balance and an Edinburgh viewpoint, Stewart also appears.

  322. You would hope that the SPFL are learning from the current carnage that is VAR in Scotland . It was rushed in mid season , hopefully to iron out any wrinkles in the system and give experience to our whistlers in its operation . I would suggest that they have a media debrief of VAR use after every weekends’ fixtures and appoint a VAR Czar to explain the decisions and the nuances that guided the decisions .I’m not holding my breath , though , as I honestly think there is a severe lack of competence in our refereeing ranks . Time to go professional ,imo .

  323. Haywire

    As a Celtic supporter, I have long regarded refereeing in Scottish Football as one of the ‘dark arts’, designed primarily to benefit, almost without exception, one (now defunct) club. Sadly, this insidious practice has not ceased following the liquidation of Rangers Football Club (1872 – 2012) and the subsequent ‘immaculate conception’ and birth of TRFC -indeed it has intensified with VAR whereby the referee on the park basically ‘jist diz whit he’s telt’ by some official hiding in a bunker – or wherever.

    From my perspective, it defies logic that the ‘other mob’ (term borrowed from Fashion Sakala) has not conceded (well, deemed not to have) a single penalty kick in this domestic season, whilst also being, I believe, joint ‘top of the league’ – NOT with Killie or Celtic – for penalties awarded. Maybe the VAR judiciary think Goldson is a goalie!

    With regard to your beloved Killie, I sympathise, and empathise, with your sense of injustice re the shambles, and inequity, of VAR.

    (Thinks – what odds might Paddy Power offer on TRFC going through the entire campaign without conceding a penalty).


    I tend, these days, to record Sportscene, watch the highlights, and fast forward through studio guests’ comments. Chicken soup for the soul and all that!

  324. Thanks to all for your comments on the mysterious non-penalty for Killie. Wokingcelt, I have to admit that I was not aware of the rule which does not allow a player to score even if his hand is by his side when the ball hits him. From your wording, could another Killie player have scored after Vassell’s slight contact with the ball?

    However, nobody has yet made a stab at answering my question. What did the referee see, or think that he saw? He had a good view of the incident and was not too far away from it. There was no melee of players involved and Considine’s hand was clearly up in the air. He didn’t give a foul against Wright, who jumped well above Considine and would have at least connected with the ball if the ‘hand of God’ had not been in front of his face. It just doesn’t make sense at all.

    In many respects, the VAR issue is almost secondary with this incident. It was so blatant and obvious that the referee should have given the penalty based on the evidence of his own eyes. From Killie blogs, I understand that this was the first time the VAR had performed these duties, but I ask again, what did he think that he saw in the incident? He was very quick to get the ref. to look at the Vassell disallowed goal, which was much more difficult to spot, but somehow allowed play to continue after much more obvious foul play.

    I’m not even going to get into ‘honest mistakes’, but I remain completely puzzled by this whole catalogue of errors.

  325. @Haywire – yes, another Killie player could have scored following the ball touching Vassell’s hand, assuming this contact was deemed accidental. I think there was an incident involving a Celtic player earlier in the season where the ball was won in the midfield and had come off the Celtic player’s hand accidentally. Play continued and Celtic scored – I recall some pundits being upset by the application of the laws of the game and the goal being allowed to stand!

  326. Haywire
    19th March 2023 at 23:16
    ‘(…John Clark would cast me into the outer darkness!)
    Naw ah widnae, Haywire!
    I am the most forgiving of men, needing plenty of forgiveness masel!
    I need your forgiveness now for not being able to look again at the incidents you mention- I haven’t a scooby about iPlayer downloading and my primary school grandkids aren’t at hand to show me!
    There was mention yesterday, I think, that Dundee Utd intends to call for a summit, hoping that enough clubs have seen that the way VAR technology has been used to date has been questionable, with none of the basic questions answered, and are prepared to support them.

    It cannot go on like this, with none of us (including ‘pundits’) knowing for certain how the technology is to be used in a wholly consistent way.
    And I am inclined now to begin to think that Sweden’s top-flight’s refusal to adopt VAR might have been a very sensible choice, especially if, as Mikael Lustig asserts, it was the supporters of the 32 clubs who didn’t want it [ see Andrew Smith’s piece in this morning’s ‘the Scotsman’.)

  327. Joel Sked in this morning’s ‘The Scotsman’ has a useful piece on whether VAR is still worth having.His own view is that it is not. He cites with approval Ally McCoist’s view that it should be dispensed with, and quotes , also with approval, Ange Postecoglou’s observation “For me it’s more about the disruption it gives to the game. We had 15 minutes of extra-time purely on the back of officials’ disruption. That doesn’t really excite me that much”
    An editorial in the same paper suggests ” that perhaps what is needed is a better VAR system.” Or that if we go back to relying “on fallible human decision-making, perhaps we should copy American football which uses 7 or 8 officials”
    It concludes that if we want a return to “one referee and two assistants’ then fans must be prepared to accept inevitable mistakes and cut referees some slack”

  328. The make up of the latest Scotland Mens A squad is a wee bit of an eye opener – only 2 players each from CFC and TRFC . And I remember a time when we wanted to ban “Anglos” from representing their country .

  329. Bect67 20/03 17.59.

    (Thinks – what odds might Paddy Power offer on TRFC going through the entire campaign without conceding a penalty).
    Still a bit to go to equal Celtic’s record though.

    14/01/06 – 29/04/07 50 games without conceding a League penalty.

  330. I too am utterly aghast that Kilmarnock were not awarded a penalty last Saturday. Even more aghast that if the Ref missed it, that VAR did not recommend what would have been a straightforward look at the monitor, followed by the penalty being awarded.

    I was all for VAR in Scottish Football, and although I generally still am, the SFA really do have a lot of work to do. Are they up to the task? My initial thoughts are they are not.

  331. Haywire
    21st March 2023 at 17:37
    ‘JC: I wouldn’t want you to miss this. Please see..’
    Thank you for that, Haywire.
    No wonder you’re spittin’ blood! I don’t think there has been such a distinctly clear example of a refereeing ‘mistake’.
    Haven’t heard anything more about Dundee Utd’s proposed ‘summit’?

  332. upthehoops
    21st March 2023 at 18:57
    ‘.Even more aghast that if the Ref missed it, that VAR did not recommend what would have been a straightforward look at the monitor,’
    Yes, uth,that’s the puzzling thing we’ve seen from time to time: an incident in the box that at least raises doubt but is not seen as such by the ref in the Baillieston dug-out and not flagged up to the on pitch ref.
    Could it be the case that the Var ref has to ASK the on-pitch ref whether he wishes to look at his decision again, and has to shut up if that ref says ‘no, I’m happy with my decision?’
    I think I always thought that the job of the VAR ref was to tell the pitch ref that there might be something he hadn’t seen and invite the ref to have a look at the screen for himself.
    Am I wrong? Is the on-pitch ref free to say ‘bugger off, I KNOW my decision is right’ without going to the screen to have a look?
    If that’s the case then the whole point and purpose of the technology is vitiated!
    I’ve said before that there can only be one definitive referee and that is the on-pitch ref. But surely where there is some evidence that he may have been unsighted or distracted at a critical point ( and it is only critical points that the VAR ref is supposed to flag up), the on-field ref should be required to look at the screen for himself?
    I think we need a fresh statement from the powers-that-be about the intended and actual use of VAR.

  333. I’ve just noticed this from ‘The Scotsman’ online (as updated this evening)
    “The BBC claims that the SFA is exploring the possibility of having officials who only work with the VAR technology and Clydesdale House. Presently, referees rotate between being on the pitch and then in the nerve centre of its operation in Baillieston, but if these new practices were brought into place, then there would be a distinction between an on-field official and a VAR official.
    Scottish football began using VAR back in October in the cinch Premiership and certain cup ties, although it has not been without controversy. There were a number of contentious decisions just last weekend which brought frustration from players and managers, with a penalty award to St Mirren against Dundee United labelled “as soft a penalty as I’ve seen given all year” by Tannadice boss Jim Goodwin”

    I’m having some difficulty in grasping the concept of two distinctive types of football referees.
    ‘On-pitch’ referees who do not ever sit in the Baillieston dugout and VAR refs who never act as on-pitch refs!
    Sounds interesting, if somewhat soul-less!

  334. A11 – a most reasonable chap. 21Mar@17.44

    ‘Still a bit to go to equal Celtic’s record though.

    14/01/06 – 29/04/07 50 games without conceding a League penalty’.

    Fair dos there so, continuing this theme …

    Rangers* have now had two runs of 44 League games without conceding a penalty in just over three years (which incldes VAR decisions) as follows:-

    1st run of 44 from Jan 20-April 21
    2nd run from Jan 22 – Nov 23
    (These stats , of course, refer to the new entity playing out of Govan. Their predecessor had most recently ‘achieved’ a similar invinciblity’ in 2004 I believe. (I might be wrong there?)).

    It should also be noted that, since the new club was elevated to SPFL in 2016/17, they have consistently been awarded more penalties than Celtic.

    Ah ferr enjoy playin’ these games – mibbee we should continue (selectively of course). Naw – am dun!

    I’ll leave you with a reminder that my main point was about he partisan nature of refereeing in Scotland, and ask, just for clarity, if you accept that Rangers (1872-2012) were liquidated.
    n.b no literary ‘gymnastics’ will be accepted.

  335. @JC – I agree with the soul-less nature of a VAR-only ref and agree with Derek McInnes that Scottish refs need to fundamentally raise their game. So for me (given that I suspect full time refs not something we can afford – I reckon we would need at least 12), then we need to look at options such as:
    1. Using retired refs in the VAR studio where their experience “should” be helpful.
    2. Up the training provision and requirements for our refs. We have too many basic errors in the application of the rules. I would also up the physical fitness levels of our refs and assistant refs – the effort some exert keeping up with play is not then conducive with good decision-making.
    3. Own the mistakes and explain decisions post match.
    4. Bring transparency to the referee pathway to encourage more uptake (no sniggering at the back!) and blow away the “who you know” culture.

  336. ‘SPFL face Celtic and Rangers* post split fixture headache as things stand.
    The Hoops are due toplay five away games and Gers* five homefixtures if the top six remain the same’ (Ryan McDonald – Footballscotland).

    I’m not saying Ryan’s ill-informed, lazy or being over dramatic, but here’s what I think…

    After the top six is finalised on completion of 33 fixtures, Celtic will have played 17 home matches, and Rangers* 16. Thereafter, whether it finishes as it currently stands or not, for the remaining 5 fixtures, Celtic will have 2 home games, and 3 away (one at Ibrokes), and TRFC will play 3 home games and 2 away. Both these teams will therefore complete 19 home and 19 away matches over the course of the season – this primarily to avoid a right ‘stooshie’ between the top two.

    Any inequity will affect teams in positions 3-6.

  337. The Scotsman online had this earlier today:
    “SFA accused of treating fans with contempt as former referee blasts VAR errors.”
    “The Scottish Football Association has been accused of treating fans with contempt by one of its former referees over its failure to address the controversies surrounding VAR.
    By Matthew Elder
    Published 22nd Mar 2023, 16:01 GMT
    Updated 22nd Mar 2023, 16:52 GMT

    ‘The video assistant referee technology has been the subject of intense debate since being introduced to the Scottish Premiership in October and the scrutiny has intensified this week following a weekend of highly contentious decisions.
    VAR failed to intervene to award Kilmarnock a penalty in their 1-1 draw with St Johnstone on Saturday despite a blatant handball against defender Andy Considine.
    There was also controversy over Rangers’ third goal in their 4-2 win over Motherwell over a potential offside against Fashion Sakala in the build-up, while at Tannadice, referee Craig Napier was not summoned to the monitor despite awarding St Mirren a penalty when replays suggested no foul had been committed.
    Hibs were also incensed over decisions made in the 3-1 defeat at Celtic Park including the red card shown to Elie Youan and the penalty awarded to Celtic that allowed Jota to equalise from the spot….
    VAR was involved in a number of controversial decisions in the Scottish Premiership last weekend.
    The SFA has yet to comment publicly on the issue, but a BBC report claimed that the governing body is considering drafting in specialist video assistant referees to improve decision-making. Former grade one referee Steve Conroy branded the recent errors “shocking” and called on his former bosses at Hampden to explain what is going on.
    “It’s been the most explosive, controversial and worrying weekend of VAR we have seen this season,” Conroy said. “There were major decisions in virtually every game – some bad and some inexplicable.
    “We are now four months or so into this and it’s not getting any better. There is nothing wrong with the technology – it has been the interpretation of it. Referees can make mistakes, but VAR is supposed to be there to rectify them. That didn’t happen.
    “There were shocking mistakes in Dundee United’s game with St Mirren and Kilmarnock’s match with St Johnstone that could have significant bearing on their survival.”
    Speaking to BonusCodeBets, Conroy added: “Every time something like this happens there is deafening silence from the SFA. They are treating the Scottish football public with contempt. Why not come out and say, ‘we’ve had a howler and we’re going to try to get it right’? They have to say something.”
    (As a wee aside, I say :such irony! ‘The Scotsman’ giving space to criticism of the SFA over an issue such as VAR when the SMSM still propagate and foster, in absolute contempt for Truth and the rest of us, the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872)

  338. From the Rolls of Court today
    Lord Harrower
    Wednesday 29th March
    Continued Proof (1 day)
    CA144/21 Imran Ahmad v The Lord Advocate

  339. I note from reports in ‘The Scotsman’ and other publications that Bernd Reichter , CEO of A22, is bumping his gums again about a proposal to set up a super European league comprised of an open 60 to 80-team multi-divisional format (with no permanent, founding members) guaranteeing competing teams at least 14 European matches per season…
    He seems to me to be away ahead of himself, since the European Court of Justice has still to issue a decision on whether UEFA/FIFA are/would be in breach of EU competition laws etc. in opposing any such proposal.
    The greedy-guts of the football business world got a bloody nose from European football over their first ridiculous proposal.
    Let’s hope that the ECJ decides in favour of UEFA/FIFA and rules out the possibility of companies like A22 ever getting any kind of control of Football.

  340. Couldn’t agree more JC. I would go further and say that the governance bodies of football (of which the SFA is a prime example) are unfit guardians of what is (on a global basis) the people’s game. The vested interests and associated stench of corruption is destroying our game. Reform from the top down is required – the question for me is by whom should FIFA be held to account? Maybe the UN should classify football as a “sport of special cultural significance” and impose proper scrutiny (not that the UN is perfect). Maybe all football administrators are subject to full transparency on their global earnings (I am not suggesting any wrongdoing but I would like to see Infantino’s earnings (cash and non-cash and those paid to related parties) over the past 10 years).

  341. Possibly the most untruthful and perversely misleading bit of ‘Sports’ reporting ever to come from Pacific Quay, clearly aimed at propagating the lie that TRFC are RFC of 1872 but making an absolute of the job is to be found here in this as uselessly fudged a report of fact as the RIFC plc’s IPO prospectus was.
    Have (another) look at
    “Dundee’s SPL membership is ratified a day before opener
    Last updated on3 August 20123 August 2012.

    Dundee are now officially members of the Scottish Premier League – a day before their opening fixture of the season away to Kilmarnock.

    The 12 members clubs unanimously approved the transfer of Rangers’ SPL share to the club which finished second in Division One last season.

    Dundee were invited to take the Ibrox club’s place on 16 July after their new owners’ failure to avoid liquidation.

    But the SPL had to wait until now to ratify the decision.

    Charles Green’s controlling consortium had its new club voted into Division Three.

    Rangers have already started their season with a 2-1 win over Brechin City in the Ramsdens Cup and host East Fife in the Scottish Communities League Cup on Tuesday.

    They make their debut in Division Three away to Peterhead on 11 August.”

    What an absolutely disgraceful piece of reporting that was, indicative of a level of fear and/or ignorance and/or bias on the part of the writer who wrote it and/or the editor (if any) who allowed it.
    Its saving grace is the sentence:
    “Charles Green’s controlling consortium had its NEW CLUB [my capitals] voted into Division Three.”

    [ I bring this up because I was earlier this evening, after watching the Spain v Norway game, looking at stuff related to the ECA and its predecessor club organisation, which led me into the untruths about TRFC being RFC of 1872 that Wikipedia parrots.
    I now know for certain not to trust Wikipedia any more than I would trust BBC Scotland in the matter of reporting on Scottish Football]
    And what a strange feeling came across from the ‘Off the Ball’ chaps after the Cyprus game! A 3-nil victory was kind of dismissed as being unexciting, in circumstances where a 1-nil lead could easily have been a 1-1 draw until late in the game!

  342. Well, nothing against Hamilton Accies of course but I was kind of rooting for Raith Rovers today.
    I would have been pleased for the sake of the memory of that man of great personal integrity and moral courage, the late Turnbull Hutton, if RR had won.
    It’s a stain on the escutcheon of Scottish Football that a 10-year-old football club is allowed to claim the sporting honours and titles and long history of a club which lost its membership of the SFA when it was required to surrender its share in the SPL.
    Hutton cried “Corruption!” on the stairs at Hampden while the general run of club boards shamefully put money before principle and agreed to and/or signed as dirty a deal as ever was signed, the signatories emboldened in their infamy because they were able to sign under the ‘protection’ of a ‘non-disclosure agreement’. [ Question: as a matter of interest, did they know that an NDA agreement is not worth the paper it is written on IF its use is hiding or disguising illegality? ‘Whistleblowers’ cannot be prosecuted for breach of an NDA]
    Oh, that even a couple of other chairmen of football clubs had been as brave as Hutton and that more than two SMSM journalists had found the courage to try to report truthfully on the death of RFC of 1872, and insist on these truths:
    that TRFC was not a member of a recognised football club until it became a shareholder in the SFL in 2012 and only on that account became eligible for membership of the SFA

    and that there was no ‘transfer ‘to TRFC of the SPL share surrendered by RFC of 1872 or of RFC of 1872’s membership of the SFA.. Dundee got that share on winning promotion to the SPL

    I really enjoyed the match, and Accies’ heroic 10-man resistance, and some really, really good saves by their goalie who seems to have a great instinct for being in the right place at the critical time.

  343. John Clark
    26th March 2023 at 22:35
    “there was no ‘transfer ‘to TRFC of the SPL share surrendered by RFC of 1872 or of RFC of 1872’s membership of the SFA.”
    John, Charles Green’s new club was given conditional SFA membership at the end of July 2012 to allow it to play Brechin City. Once Rangers’ SPL share was passed to Dundee and Green accepted certain conditions, such as the payment of Rangers’ football debts, Rangers’ full SFA membership was transferred to the new club on the 3rd of August 2012. This was clearly done to give the illusion of club continuity.

    When searching the SFA’s website and elsewhere today for confirmation of that membership transfer, I was reminded of many of the perplexing, absurd and sometimes comical events that have played out since the self-inflicted demise of Rangers Football Club.

    Who could forget the SFA hiring a QC to provide legal advice regarding whether Dave King passed their less-than-stringent ‘fit and proper person’ test? It remains difficult to conceive of finding a less fit and proper person on the entire planet, given his past criminal record.

    King appeared to have a season ticket for the front row of the High Court, regularly appearing on a weekly basis, such was his fondness for litigation, more often of the losing variety.

    Even today, more than a decade after Rangers ‘plunged’ into administration followed by liquidation, tens of millions of pounds are being lost from the public purse thanks to wrongful arrests in connection with the takeover of ‘Rangers.’

    In 2017, the SFA again obtained legal advice following the Supreme Court’s ruling on EBTs. Remarkably, the Senior Counsel advised that there was no prospect of success in pursuing anyone, despite Rangers’ decade of financial doping, and the football authorities advised there was no appetite for raking over old coals in the form of an inquiry. I strongly suspect they’d long since stymied themselves by the terms of the five way agreement that they’d drafted and signed up to, leaving them totally impotent when it came to restitution (title-stripping) and punishment.

    Somebody more cynical than me might spot a pattern emerging, whereby the legal opinion that was accepted invariably coincided with the express wishes of the football authorities, almost as if ‘he who pays the piper calls the tune.’

    Never was this more evident than in the sham that was the LNS inquiry, notwithstanding that its recommendations had no legal clout. Rangers had already accepted guilt over the DOS EBTs, but remarkably these were excluded from the inquiry by the terms of reference set by the football authorities.

    LNS then indulged in tortuous linguistic gymnastics in an effort to explain that having more money does not provide an advantage on the field of play, despite Rangers’ board members, including David Murray, later begging to differ.

    Then we had the sheer absurdity of Sandy Bryson’s contorted take on ineligibility, which effectively meant that guilt only applies from the moment you’re caught, and can’t be backdated. It’s almost as if the football authorities calculated that the general public would fall for anything they could concoct, however bizarre.

    Talking of falling for anything, let’s not forget the major part played by the Scottish media, who had unambiguously and in unison reported the death of Rangers Football Club back in 2012, before inexplicably slamming on the brakes and performing a screeching u-turn a short time later.

    I can’t remember whether it was LNS or during a later court case where a supposedly learned gentleman informed us that although a football club had never been legally defined, it must at least comprise of its supporters, the stadium, players, coaching staff and other assets etc. Remarkably, he did not consider the financial side of the undertaking to be part of the club, despite the fact that no modern professional football club, all of whom are businesses, could operate without it. But no, it’s a separate entity, conveniently suiting a distinct agenda where a football club is ethereal and immortal.

    I’ll leave my rambling post there before I bore myself and the rest of you to tears, but I just find it astonishing that more than a decade after the death of a specific cheating football club, its rewritten, fabricated history continues unchecked and unabated.

  344. Highlander
    27th March 2023 at 21:30
    ‘..Green’s new club was given conditional SFA membership’
    Yes, Highlander, by ignoring the requirement that under the Articles of Association a club has to be a member of a recognised football league!
    The determination to save ‘Rangers of 1872 drew out the rottenest streak of dishonesty in those who governed Scottish Football and made cowardly liars of journalists in the SMSM and the BBC and of the boardrooms of the majority of SPL/SFL clubs.

  345. Highlander
    27th March 2023 at 21:30

    “I can’t remember whether it was LNS or during a later court case where a supposedly learned gentleman informed us that although a football club had never been legally defined, it must at least comprise of its supporters, the stadium, players, coaching staff and other assets etc.
    I remember this comment

    “Mr Dewar adds that ” you can only be the chairman of an entity that has a legal personality. Sevco Scotland, and it alone, bought the assets and carried on the business. The concept of the Rangers Institution continuing exists only in the minds of die hard supporters.”

    Mr Dewar was responding to a question by one of the three appeal court judges who inquired: “Why is it so important that Rangers football club is Sevco Scotland rather than an institution going back 100 years?”

    Mr Dewar emphasized that Green bought ” the business and assets of the Rangers entity” then acted on behalf of, and for the benefit of the shareholders of Sevco Scotland.”

  346. bigboab1916
    28th March 2023 at 20:41
    ‘..Mr Dewar emphasized that Green bought ” the business and assets of the Rangers entity” then acted on behalf of, and for the benefit of the shareholders of Sevco Scotland.”
    Yes, bigboab1916.
    All the liars falling out with each other!
    very entertaining at the time.
    Me masel personally, like, think that the whole ‘Rangers’ thing was not at all well and properly handled by the Courts.
    At every level the Courts failed, it seems to me, to recognise that the football club of 1872, a shareholder in the SPL and on that account a member of the SFA, had ceased to exist when it had had to surrender its share in the SPL on going into Liquidation on account of huge debt that it could not pay.
    It is astounding that the Courts seem implicitly to have accepted that CG bought, as a new owner, Rangers of 1872 and that RIFC plc was entitled to claim that he was not covered by them for his criminal defence costs on the grounds that he had been the CEO of SevcoScotland, and not of RFC of 1872.
    One wonders, doesn’t one?
    The guy who claimed to have bought Rangers of 1872 whole and entire is knocked back by the very people who claim today that his Sevco is RFC of 1872!
    Honest to God!
    Was it, incidentally, Charles Dickens who said (and I may be misquoting) ‘there’s nothin like lying basterin lawyers’?
    Except, perhaps, lying conmen.
    footnote: my strictures against the SFA’s lying and cheating are one thing.
    I am praise for Scotland’s performance tonight. Great game to watch.
    And it annoys the hell out of me that the liars who created the Big Lie will try to get some reflected glory.

  347. An interesting article posted this morning on the BBC website on yet another attempt by football clubs to avoid / evade tax. The article concentrates on the EPL but it is hard to believe that this practice doesn’t potentially have ramifications for clubs North of the border. Given the scale of the potential tax clawback / penalties this could have serious implications for those who have been using the “mechanism”.

    For those wanting a “deeper dive” pasted below is a link to the article. You will likely have to register to read it but the registration is free.

  348. Westcoaster
    30th March 2023 at 11:51


    I heard an article about this on the news earlier today. Three clubs were mentioned in particular, those being Arsenal, Man City & Man Utd. The sums mentioned that those three might owe was around £10m each. It seems the problem is far more widespread though and as you say, it may affect some clubs in Scotland too. Unsurprisingly the Agent’s Association are saying it’s not an issue. HMRC won’t give up if they think they have a case though.

  349. UTH – 30th March 11.51 – “The sums mentioned that those three might owe was around £10m each.”

    Those sums are for tax year 2021 only. The scheme of dual representation was apparently first introduced in 2015. The combined exposure for certain clubs could be multiple times the £10m figure.

    The taxpolicy link has some interesting additional info together with some good graphics which illustrate how tax was avoided / evaded.

    Newsnight (at 10.30pm tonight) will apparently run a piece on this.

  350. Westcoaster
    30th March 2023 at 11:51
    ‘…An interesting article posted this morning on the BBC website’

    30th March 2023 at 16:28
    ‘..Newsnight (at 10.30pm tonight) will apparently run a piece on this…’
    Many thanks, Westcoaster, for those posts and for the links provided.
    I only wish the FCA were as ready to exercise their Regulatory functions (in relation to companies seeking public issue of their shares) as HMRC were and are to exercise their function in seeing that tax evasion/avoidance dodges are hunted out and examined rigorously!
    As an example, I believe that the Summary of the ‘Prospectus’ issued by RIFC plc in connection with its Initial Public Offer in 2012 was MISLEADING, in that it clearly implied that Rangers Football Club plc ( founded in 1872) had been bought whole and entire as a going concern and that RIFC plc would therefore be the holding company of RFC of 1872 ( company number SC437060) when in fact and law it would be the holding company of TRFC Ltd (company number SC 425159).
    The FCA, in my opinion, were grossly derelict in their duty of ensuring that would-be plcs did not, accidentally or deliberately, issue a misleading Prospectus to bolster its chances of a successful launch.
    This is from the Prospectus:
    (Note the ‘definitions’ of the terms used in this extract)
    ‘The Company’ is ‘Rangers International Football Club” company number SC 437060
    ‘Club’ or ‘Rangers’ is ‘Rangers Football Club’
    ‘RFCL’ is ‘The Rangers Football Club Limited.’
    ‘RFC 2012 plc’ is RFC 2012 plc (in Liquidation), company number SC 004276, formerly known as the Rangers Football Club plc.’

    Here is the extract from the ‘Summary’ of the Prospectus:
    “B.3 On 19 November 2012, the Company was incorporated with the intention of acquiring RFCL upon Admission in order to allow an investment in the Company to qualify for VCT and EIS tax relief. The Company has not carried out any trading activities since its incorporation.
    RFCL acquired the assets and business of the Club on 14 June 2012 from RFC 2012 plc and now operates the Club and other ancillary businesses.
    Immediately prior to Admission, the Company will acquire RFCL pursuant to the Share Exchange Agreement, which is conditional on the Placing Agreement becoming unconditional in all respects, save for Admission, and will be the holding company of the Rangers Group. It is the intention of the Directors and the Manager for the Club to return to topflight football as soon as possible. The Club’s first-team squad is comprised of 27 players (two of whom are currently on loan), who are contracted for varying lengths of time with only one player above the age of 25 having a contract beyond May 2016”

    As I have pointed out before, the current official website of ‘Rangers FC’ does not dare to claim that RIFC plc is the holding company of a club whose company number is SC 004276!
    No, no! SC 004276 is in Liquidation, hasn’t kicked a ball since 2012!
    It states, and HAS to state, that RIFC plc is the holding company of a company whose number is SC 425159- yes, good old CG’s Club13/Sevco5088/SevcoScotland/TRFC Ltd!
    This is all old ground, of course, but we need to keep reminding ourselves and others of the Truth that there were and are serious questions to be asked about the FCA’s functioning as a Regulatory body, as well about Scottish football’s governance bodies’ integrity.
    (Every man, woman and child and their dugs KNOW that TRFC have no entitlement to claim to be the Rangers football club that was founded when one of my grandads was 20/21 years old and the other was 2 years old!)
    The English MSM is better placed to do its journalistic duty than the miserable, cowardly hacks (with one or two very honourable exceptions) in the SMSM.
    Poor old Bury died the death of Liquidation, and Liquidation was accepted by one and all as being the death of a football club, pure and simple.
    Just as it was here in our own country right up to and including Gretna!

  351. I am not a golfer,and have only the mildest of interest in the sport while recognising the levels of skill involved and the pleasure and enjoyment it affords to millions.
    However, I see from a judgment of the Court of Session today that a company called LIV Golf Inc are suing the PGA Tour Inc (in the U.S. Northern California district court),
    They allege that the PGA have engaged in anti-competitive practices in order to dissuade players from joining LIV’s tour. LIV allege that the PGA are seeking unlawfully to monopolise the elite golf event services market.
    LIV have petitioned the court seeking an order to recover evidence which they say is held by the R&A Trust Company (No. 1) Ltd. The R&A organises and promotes The Open.
    LIV allege that the PGA have “leant” on the R&A to engage in anti-competitive practices
    with them.”
    I imagine that the A22 ‘super league’ chaps’ case against UEFA/FIFA will be based on similar ‘anti-competitive’ grounds.
    Today’s CoS judgment was only in the matter of whether the Californian Court’s request that the Royal and Ancient should release documents or what not requested by LIV Inc, could be acceded to under the terms of the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975.
    In case anyone does not want to know the result before reading the judgment I will not give it
    the link to the (short) judgment is

  352. The Rangers Football Club have failed to submit their annual accounts to Companies House in a timely manner..they are overdue. I have tried to find the consequences for such maladministration but as ever in the financial world it is very vague. It does seem to leave directors of any rogue company open to criminal responsibility and financial penalties are implied but all very nebulous. Perhaps the more interesting thing would be knowing if a ‘version’ of accounts has already been submitted to the SFA for consideration in regard to licensing the club for participation in UEFA competitions for the coming season. Bearing in mind that TRFC are on a watch list with regard to financial sustainability rules this could be very worrying indeed for their support. Any contributors up to date with submission dates requirements etc?

  353. gunnerb
    1st April 2023 at 16:58
    ‘…The Rangers Football Club have failed to submit their annual accounts to Companies House in a timely manner…they are overdue.’
    I see that indeed TRFC Ltd’s page in the Companies House register carries the red ink endorsement “Accounts overdue. Next accounts made up to 30 June 2022 due by 31 March 2023
    Last accounts made up to 30 June 2021”
    They should have been in by close of business yesterday!
    There is provision ‘to apply to extend your filing deadline if an unplanned event stops you from filing your accounts.’
    The fact that the record carries the ‘overdue’ endorsement might suggest either that the club secretary did NOT for some reason apply for an extension or that the application was knocked back!
    According to the ‘Guidance’, “failure to deliver accounts on time is a criminal offence. In addition, the law imposes a civil penalty for late filing of accounts on the company.
    The amount of the penalty depends on how late the accounts arrive and whether the company is private or public at the date of the balance sheet:
    Length of period Public company
    Not more than 1 month £750.”
    and so on.
    So, unless Companies House have got it wrong, that’s another £750 blown from the kitty!

    RIFC PLC’s next accounts due-by-date is 31 December 2023, for period made up to 30 June 2023 so there is no apparent time problem in respect of getting them prepared and submitted timeously! There might, of course, be other difficulties.

  354. John Clark

    1st April 2023 at 22:31

    Thanks John and I did a little digging regarding document submission to the SFA initially for consideration in regard to UEFA licensing and found this

    From which this little nugget caught the eye..
    4.2.6 – Licensing Committee Meet and Review

    ‘..That the licence applicant has been provided with a deadline date for the submission of information. In the case of the UEFA documents this will be 8 April (unless an earlier date is stipulated by the Scottish FA during the licensing process). • That the licence applicant has been given the opportunity of being represented at the Licensing Committee meeting if there are items on the “Committee Report” that may lead to a refusal of a UEFA Licence award.’

    So maybe all parties concerned have already had a nice little sit down and discussion. Any member club of the SFA has the right to expect their association to assist as much as possible with guidance and recommendations and I am sure the SFA will do so on this occasion if needed. Without prejudice to the wider membership.

  355. gunnerb
    2nd April 2023 at 09:35
    ‘…In the case of the UEFA documents this will be 8 April (unless an earlier date is stipulated by the Scottish FA during the licensing process’
    Or, gunnerB ,since TRFC’s accounts are already late, perhaps a congenial little get-together will result in an extension of time beyond 8 April to give the impoverished club time to get their accounts to Companies House?

  356. Not being a ‘twitter’ user, I’ve just this last hour, and indirectly, come across RTC’s tweet about RIFC plc’s opposition to an SPFL/Glen’s Vodka sponsorship deal as variously reported in the Daily Mail and DR.
    RTC takes the view that ‘As with the cinch dispute, this has nothing to with sponsorship and everything to do with control of the SPFL and the SFA.’
    Given the state of RIFC plc’s/TRFC’s finances generally [ overdue submission of accounts to Companies House is not a good sign!] and the fact that TRFC are not likely, judging by current league placings, to be in the position of being in with a chance of European football millions, I am inclined to agree with RTC.
    What must the directors/major shareholders do EXCEPT try to exercise dominion over the Governance bodies to ensure that if RIFC plc goes bust, another brand-new club will be accorded the same treatment as was generously accorded in 2012 to CG and his merry band.
    In my opinion CG was able -and without too much difficulty, if truth be told- to subvert Scottish Football governance.
    A monstrous lie was created by frightened and/or partisan men in the SFA/SPL/SFL; a lie which ludicrously insists that the club created in 2012 by the very Governance bodies under whose rules RFC of 1872 lost its share in the SPL, losing thereby its entitlement to membership of the SFA in 2012,is the club that had been created in 1872 but which went into Liquidation in 2012!
    Auld Nick himself would laugh at the absurdity of that lie!
    In my opinion. the RIFC plc board believe they have the support of the SMSM (including the BBC) and influential folk in politics and business in whatever they do to maintain the fiction that TRFC is Rangers of 1872, and that any new club admitted into Scottish Football if/when TRFC is itself liquidated, will still be RFC of 1872!
    You see, that’s what happens when belief in the integrity of the Governance of a Sport has been shattered by the egregious lying of that Governance.
    Am I right or a meringue!??

  357. Another share issue for Rangers international and their only interest is in TRFC who are overdue with accounts. This must be setting alarm bells ringing among the support. By the by, who the hell is throwing money down the plughole? Emotional investing?

  358. gunnerb 3rd April 18.15

    The shares were issued on the 30th March raising (or converting existing loans to shares) £1,929,913. Given the issue date and the TRFC filing deadline (missed) of the 31st March it seems certain the two are linked. When the TRFC accounts are filed the going concern wording may be interesting.

  359. gunnerb 03/04 18.15

    John Halstead with 4 million is the largest investor. George Letham, John Bennett and various smaller shareholders make up the rest.

  360. Mainstream media ‘omerta’ again alongside the move along there huge costs to the Scottish taxpayer of liquidating the genuine version.

  361. gunnerb
    3rd April 2023 at 18:15
    ‘Another share issue for Rangers international..’
    3rd April 2023 at 18:26
    ‘The shares were issued on the 30th March raising (or converting existing loans to shares) £1,929,913..’
    The Companies House pages reflect the share issue of 30 March with the entry:
    “Statement of Capital following an allotment of shares on 30 March 2023”
    GBP 4,442,482.85
    Rangers has an issued share capital of 444,248,285 ordinary shares of 1 pence each in the capital of the Company (“Ordinary Shares”).”
    previous share capital was 436 528 633

    Major Shareholding (3% or above):
    The Company understands that its major shareholders are as follows …
    New Oasis Asset Limited, 63,172,893, 14.22%
    Douglas Park, 52,550,000, 11.83%
    Stuart Gibson, 44,000,000, 9.9%
    George Alexander Taylor, 43,074,998, 9.70%
    Borita Investments Limited, 27,611,955, 6.22%
    Perron Investments LLC, 24,250,000, 5.46%
    John Bennett, 22,647,059, 5.10%
    George Letham, 22,274,516, 5.01%
    Club 1872, 22.202,838, 5.00%
    Tifosy Investment Nominees Limited, 17,610,000, 3.96%
    The Ordinary Shares are freely transferable. No Ordinary Shares are held in treasury. John Halsted has advised that he is the beneficial owner of the shares held by Perron Investments LLC. The shares held by Tifosy Investment Limited are held as nominees for a significant number of individual shareholders none of whose shareholdings are major.

    Currently 8,500,000 of the Company’s Ordinary Shares (c. 1.91%) are subject to restrictions affecting the right to vote the affected shares, the right to receive payments or distributions in respect of the affected shares and the right to transfer the affected shares.
    Director shareholding interests are as follows:

    John Bennett holds 22,647,059 ordinary shares
    Douglas Park holds or is otherwise interested in 52,550,000 ordinary shares
    George Taylor holds or is otherwise interested in 43,074,998 shares
    Julian Wolhardt has advised that he and his wife are interested in the shares held by Borita Investments Limited (see above for details of that Company’s shareholding) and East Harvest Limited, which holds 7,498.525 shares.

    Alastair Johnston holds 7,497,537 ordinary shares

    I can’t find my note of the shareholdings of the individual directors after the previous share issue. Maybe someone has and can tell us which (if any) director(s) and/or Club 1872 may have acquired the 30 March issue?

    And, incidentally, I have not seen any decision in the case of the ‘blocked’ shareholders.
    This is the link to the RFC website

  362. John Clark 03/04 22.11

    Maybe someone has and can tell us which (if any) director(s) and/or Club 1872 may have acquired the 30 March issue?
    John Halstead 4 million, George Letham 1 million, John Bennett 450k, Remaining 2.3 million shared between minor shareholders.

  363. JC 3rd April 2023 22.11

    “Maybe someone has and can tell us which (if any) director(s) and/or Club 1872 may have acquired the 30 March issue?”

    Perron investments (John Halstead) was the biggest individual “buyer” with 4m
    George Letham – 1m
    John Bennett – 0.45m
    the other 2.3m appear to have been distributed to other minor, or new shareholders, and we may have to wait until the next confirmation statement to get some visibility of who they may be.

    I have seen several reports that this was a loan conversion rather than new money in which case the timing would imply a need to strengthen the balance sheet rather than an immediate need for the £1.93m in cash. This would make sense if the TRFC auditors were concerned on the ability of RIFC to continue to fund TRFC.

    I still find it hard to believe that RIFC will not make a paper profit in FY 22-23 given CL group qualification and the Aribo / Bassey transfer monies. Cash is obviously a different matter and deferred COVID related tax payments and the MASH court settlement could easily have weakened the cash position considerably, compounded by not shifting Kent / Morelos in January.

  364. PB 4th April 18.30

    ‘Are these events connected?’

    It is hard not to come to that conclusion.

  365. Which accounts connected to Ibrox will UEFA be keeping an eye on? TRFC or RIFC? Also, does issuing new shares count as football related income under FFP regulations?

  366. Westcoaster
    4th April 2023 at 17:30
    ‘..Perron investments (John Halstead) was the biggest individual “buyer” with 4m
    George Letham – 1m
    John Bennett – 0.45m…’
    Thanks for that info, Westcoaster.
    Yes, I’ve seen suggestions that the recent share issue was aimed at reducing the cash amounts owed to some lenders by ‘repaying’ by way of giving the lenders some more shares, so you’re probably right.
    I think you’re also probably right in wondering where the cash generated from a reasonable European run went, and why RIFC plc have made such a pig’s ear of themselves in their operations in the transfer market.
    I’m not necessarily suggesting anything other than pretty poor performance by the Board, riven as it appears to be with dissension.

  367. upthehoops
    4th April 2023 at 19:40
    ‘..Which accounts connected to Ibrox will UEFA be keeping an eye on? TRFC or RIFC? Also, does issuing new shares count as football related income under FFP regulations?’
    I’m no expert, uth, but since RIFC plc is only a ‘holding company’ which doesn’t itself actually DO anything in the way of revenue generation except ‘run a coming- up -for- 13-year-old football club’ it is the TRFC’s accounts that matter.
    Whether the repayment or partial repayment of loans by treating the loans as purchases of shares by the lenders is included in the ‘football earnings rule’?
    I would think probably not.
    But maybe BP could have a conversation with David Low to give us the answer?

  368. Is it at all possible that the reason it is important to keep TRFC solvent ,with regard to company law at least ,has something to do with the proposed housing development of the Albion car park area? Perhaps the funds potentially generated by this proposal dwarf any realistic UEFA competition returns and as such the majority board are willing to take the embarrassing hit of FSR and Douglas Park is not. Idle speculation on my part but curious to know how much the development could actually raise for TRFC.

  369. Highlander
    5th April 2023 at 21:02
    ‘…The podcast contains Kenny Macintyre and Tom English..’
    Why am I thinking of Daphne Anne Caruana Galizia, the heroic journalist in Malta, murdered by evil sods for her pursuit of truth?

  370. TRFC accounts were lodged today with Companies House but we have 10 days to wait until we can see them.

  371. Garrion security services ltd..Company number SC433635
    NEW EDMISTON HOUSE LIMITED..Company number SC674832
    RANGERS MEDIA LIMITED…Company number SC436460

    Accounts are all available online within the next 10 days.

  372. I saw earlier today a Tweet from Paul Larkin, which referred to Lord Bannatyne’s judgment in the betting case in which featured the question as to whether “ ‘Rangers’ had been ‘relegated’”
    This prompted me to have another look at that judgment which was delivered on 15th March 2017’ (Albert Ian Kinloch (Ap) against Coral Racing Limted)

    I give you this extract: paras 178 to 180

    “[178]    Relegate is a transitive verb.  A transitive verb has two characteristics:  first it is an action verb and secondly it has a direct object. 
    [179]    Applying that understanding to the phrase “From SPL Rangers to be relegated” means:  that a body performed an action which moved or demoted Rangers to a lower league.
    [180]    However, as submitted by Mr Sandison that is not what happened to Rangers.  It was either unchallenged evidence or a matter of admission, that what happened to Rangers at the material time was this:  the Rangers Football Club Plc sold inter alia the one share in the SPL to Sevco Scotland Limited.  That sale required the approval of at least 8 of the members of the SPL.  That application was refused.  It was thus no longer eligible to play in the SPL.  It thereafter applied to the SFL and was permitted to join the lowest league of the SFL (the five part agreement). The foregoing process cannot be described as being moved by anyone to a lower division, or being moved down or demoted.  The dictionary definitions are not apt to cover what happened to Rangers.  I am satisfied that what did not happen was that the SPL moved or demoted Rangers to a lower division.  Rangers ended up in a lower division by the entry into a contract which allowed them to join the SFL in the third division.”

    I loved the skillful fudge about the sale of the SPL share!
    What actually happened was this:
    RFC of 1872 held a share in the SPL.
    Holding that share had given it membership of a recognised football club and thereby entitlement to membership of the SFA.
    On becoming insolvent RFC of 1872 had to surrender its share in the SPL. It thereby ceased to belong to a recognised football league and in consequence ceased to be entitled to membership of the SFA. It therefore ceased to exist as football club. There was therefore no RFC of 1872 club to be relegated!

    The entity named SevcoScotland made application for a place in the SPL and ‘inherit’ the surrendered SPL share.
    They were knocked back by the SPL.
    The surrended SPL share was transferred toDundee FC which had earned promotion from the SFL as winner of the First Division of the SFL .

    Subsequently SevcoScotland were granted a share in the SFL. Having thus become a shareholder in and member of a recognised football SevcoScotland became eligible to apply as a new club for membership of the SFA.
    It was granted membership, and as a new club, had to begin life at the bottom of the lowest league in the SFL.
    That was fine.
    Thereafter Scottish Football Governance went ga-ga, lost its Integrity as a governance body and manufactured a most absurd lie, a lie to the effect that SevcoScotland ,admitted into Scottish Football in 2012 as a new club named ‘The Rangers Football Club’, was really the Rangers of 1872 and 140 years old which had somehow got out of Administration without paying all of its huge debts and had not entered liquidation!
    They continue to propagate and foster that lie today, blinding themselves to the Truth, and act of betrayal of office and duty of the first magnitude.

  373. John Clark 06/04 22.49.

    “8. It was advised to The SPL Limited that acting through its administrators The Rangers Football Club Plc had sold substantially all of its business and undertaking to Sevco Scotland Limited in June 2012 and that the sale included the one share held by The Rangers Football Club Plc in The SPL Limited. The registration of such a transfer of share required, in terms of the then articles of association of The SPL Limited the approval of not less than eight of its members. An application was made to the SPL for the approval of the registration of the transfer of the one share in The SPL Limited previously belonging to The Rangers Football Club Plc to Sevco Scotland Limited, the new owner and operator of the business which included the Club commonly called ‘Rangers Football Club’, but that application was refused by a vote at a General Meeting of the members of The SPL Limited on 4 July 2012.

  374. The accounts for TRFC are now available online at companies house. A quick glance made me cough at £4m compensation for Steven Gerard and staff. No going concern warnings which may disappoint some but still begs the question why the delay in posting accounts ?

  375. Albertz11
    7th April 2023 at 07:12

    See you are still hurting from the gymnastics.

    “Rangers Football Club became a limited company on 27 May 1899 when it was incorporated as The Rangers Football Club Ltd. It continued in this form until the year 2000 when Murray decided to list the company on the stock exchange, making it a public limited company.”

    One and one in the same once incorporated with both liable for creditors hence the need to liquidate or the debt remains.

  376. Albertz11
    7th April 2023 at 07:12
    ”…the new owner and operator of the business which included the Club commonly called ‘Rangers Football Club’,
    No, Albertz11, whoever wrote that [ could you give the source?] was quite wrong.
    CG did NOT buy the business ‘which included the Club commonly called Rangers football Club’ He bought only some assets of the failed business that was RFC plc, which the not very proficient Administrators signally failed to bring out of Administration!
    If he HAD bought the business ‘whole and entire’ as a going concern by paying all its debts, or if the Administrators had been able to persuade HMRC to agree to a CVA, then the ‘business’ known as ‘Rangers Football Club plc ( founded in 1872) would have been able to exit Administration instead of dying like Gretna and Third Lanark when it lost its share in a recognised football league, and lost its membership of the SFA.
    Green hadn’t the dosh to pay all the debts in full, and Whitehouse and Clark seem to have been a pretty disappointing duo of Administrators without skills enough, for all their glib, smoke-screen words like “business and assets”, to persuade HMRC to arrive at a settlement that would have avoided Liquidation.( Not that those chaps will be too concerned, as they spend their millions that we all paid to them!)
    No, he had bought only a bundle of ‘assets’ that had belonged to a failed business, ( and bought them very, very cheaply). And RFC of 1872 had to surrender its share in the SPL.

    CG’s football club eventually got into the SFL and on the basis of that got into the SFA as a new member.
    It is legally impossible for either RIFC plc or TRFC to be RFC of 1872.
    And it is pure arrant nonsense that a football club newly created in 2012 could even remotely be entitled to claim the sporting honours and titles won by a now dead club over a period of 140 years before that new club was formed.

  377. John Clark 07/04 20.28

    No, Albertz11, whoever wrote that [ could you give the source?] was quite wrong.
    It comes from the same Kinloch v Coral judgment you referenced earlier John. The source is Rod McKenzie who acted as principal solicitor for the SPL.

  378. Rangers ended up in a lower division by the entry into a contract which allowed them to join the SFL in the third division,” said the judge.

    “I am persuaded that the reasonable man is not only directed but driven to the rules of a particular sport when placing a bet in a sporting context. The natural and ordinary meaning of a sporting term is the definition of that term within the rules of that sport.

    The judge said: “I am satisfied that the odds of 2500/1 to a reasonable person placing a bet as well as the reasonable bookmaker would clearly indicate that relegation meant what is contended for by the defenders (Coral) that is, the highly unlikely event.

    “Accordingly, on this construction of the pursuer’s bet it is a losing bet.”

    Charles Green if you read the ruling above simply eneterd into a new contract with the SPL to play football in lower divisions. Kinloch’s case was not based on liquidation, it was based on Corals rules re relegation, Rangers did not exist to be relegated, the matter been there was no relegation, for old Rangers they were not allowed to continue life in a debt ridden state. Incorporated means what it means, they knew the risks of liquidation ; simply put his new club now free from debts and liabilities were allowed to play football after some deliberation to find them a berth.
    Rangers died end of.

  379. Albertz11
    7th April 2023 at 22:03
    “…It comes from the same Kinloch v Coral judgment you referenced earlier John..”
    Thank you,Albertz11.
    I had read Mckenzie’s name as giving evidence, but I wondered whether he might have been quoting from a statement made by the Administrators in their account of the Administration process. ‘business and assets’ was , if I remember correctly, their kind of language.!
    But no one knows better than the Insolvency Practitioners that it was the football club that was the shareholder, not CW personally, and not Wavetower, and that it was the football club that owed the debts that needed to be cleared if the club was to exit Administration. For whatever reason, they chose to use language which was misleading, presumably to show themselves as having been ‘successful’ Administrators, because some people seemed to understand it as meaning that RFC of 1872 had avoided Liquidation.

  380. What Albertz11 has provided with the quote above is a succinct summary of what Scotland’s football authorities desperately want us all to believe; that Rangers Football Club merely experienced a routine change of ownership in 2012 following the demise through insolvency of its previous owner and operator, the Rangers Football Club plc. That brazen work of fiction is what we have been force-fed ever since Rangers’ death.

    The football authorities’ treatment of ‘Rangers,’ steeped in vested interest and self-preservation, allied to the media’s mass rewriting of history has led to a monstrous fabrication becoming universally accepted as fact, resulting in non-football related officialdom (BBC, ASA, etc) also accepting unquestioningly what we all know to be abject nonsense.

    The club/company construct the authorities contrived was concocted post-mortem, or at least while the club was already lying prostrate on a mortuary slab, its very last breath suspended pending the completion of a lengthy administration and liquidation process.

    As others have pointed out, an incorporated football club doesn’t have a separate club and operating company relationship, since the entire purpose of incorporating is that the club BECOMES a company. At no time in the 113 years between incorporation in 1899 and insolvency in 2012 was any mention made of a separate club and company arrangement, even in Rangers’ own literature, coincidentally until such time as that manufactured construct became vital in validating a fairytale. Indeed the Rangers’ incorporation document I’ve read specifies that club and company are synonymous, ie the same thing.

    We all know that the authorities ‘manufactured a solution,’ to Rangers death, supposedly “for the good of all of Scottish football and to avoid civil unrest,” undoubtedly in part for financial expediency, but even the staunchest Rangers fan knows their club died back in 2012, because they witnessed it with their own eyes and ears, just like the rest of us. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth at the time.

    Now, more than a decade later, people like Albertz11 can happily reference the officially promoted version of what happened in the sure and certain knowledge that few, least of all our complicit media, will challenge the glaring lies, inventions and anomalies that form its basis.

    However, I’d wager that those living a flagrant lie, including football administrators and hordes of deluded fans of the club that died an entirely self-inflicted death, won’t sleep as well as my clear conscience allows me every night.

  381. Highlander
    9th April 2023 at 12:41

    We all know that the authorities ‘manufactured a solution,’ to Rangers death, supposedly “for the good of all of Scottish football and to avoid civil unrest,” undoubtedly in part for financial expediency, but even the staunchest Rangers fan knows their club died back in 2012, because they witnessed it with their own eyes and ears, just like the rest of us. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth at the time.


    That’s the bottom line. Why did Hearts and Dunfermline fight so hard to avoid liquidation? However, we live in Scotland, and there is simply no way ‘Rangers’ were not going to be protected in a way no other club has been protected, or ever will be protected. I always think back to Chic Young saying on Radio Scotland, “I’m sorry, but Rangers are special, and should be treated as special…normal rules don’t apply”. Despite Chic being a bit of a joke figure, he recognised the way it is in Scotland.

  382. nawlite
    9th April 2023 at 20:07
    ‘…Excellent summation, Highlander’

    I whole-heartedly agree with you there, nawlite. Brilliant piece by Highlander.

    If someone among us who knows about crowd-funding could get involved in a fund-raising effort to raise enough money to bring a challenge in the Courts about
    (1) the RIFC plc ‘Prospectus’ and how it came to be authorised by the NOMAD, and
    (2) about TRFC’s claim to be continuity Rangers of 1872 without paying the debts of RFC of 1872, and
    (3) why HMRC doesn’t take RIFC plc at its word that it is the holding company of RFC of 1872 and chase up payment of RFC of 1872’s debts from TRFC’s revenues, such as they are?
    we might get to the TRUTH and get things sorted for the long-term good of Scottish Football and the general UK finance and taxation regimes.

  383. Now that they are , by their own statements , financially secure and have no external debt , you would expect RIFC/TRFC to be looking for a NOMAD and getting themselves registered on an exchange . Like normal clubs do .

  384. Hope this works , TRFC accopunts . If not , hopefully somebody competent can do it instead .

  385. paddy malarkey
    10th April 2023 at 02:25
    ‘…you would expect RIFC/TRFC to be looking for a NOMAD …’
    I imagine that ‘touch’, ‘with’, ‘not’, and ‘bargepole’ are words that would leap to the mind of AIM if RIFC plc were to seek placing again, paddy malarkey
    I’ve just enjoyed re-reading the BBC’s report of them leaving AIM in 2015, on this link

  386. From the Rolls of Court


    Wednesday 12th April
    Single Bill

    CA72/20 David Grier v The Lord Advocate Kennedys Scotland SGLD Ledingham Chalmers LLP

    (My note: Single Bill: the name given to a motion or other matter which can be dealt with in a short period of time by the Inner House of the Court of Session.)

  387. Just for fun I have gone on to the WH Ireland site and sent them a query: asking why they acted at any time as NOMAD for RIFC plc when it was clear that the Prospectus for their launch was misleading in that it implied that RIFC plc would be the holding company of RFC of 1872 when in fact and law it would be the holding company of TRFC of 2012.
    Will I get a reply at all?
    I won’t hold my breath, of course.
    But their resignation as NOMAD in 2015 speaks volumes to me masel personally suggesting as it seems to me a fervent desire to get the hell out of any connection with what they (it seems to me) appear to have begun to believe to be a toxic entity.
    I don’t know about anyone else, but when I think back on the Court proceedings relating to ‘Rangers’ that I attended I realise that that whole world of ‘Finance’ is simply full of Delboys- and that there are no really effective checks on them.

  388. I wonder what exactly tomorrow’s ‘single bill’ relating to David Grier can be about. Three judges bombed out his appeal in their judgment in December 2022.
    Given that the proceedings tomorrow relate to a matter ‘which can be dealt with in a short period of time’ I think that perhaps Grier has sought permission to appeal to the Supreme Court of the UK, and tomorrow will be told whether his request has been granted or not.
    If permission has been refused, then that’s it: he will not be getting paid millions of our money like some others involved in the death of the Rangers Football Club of both my grandfathers’ days, occasioned by SDM’s tax-law breaking and sneaky, underhand use of EBTs.
    Looking at the clock as I write I don’t think I’ll bother my going in to Parliament House tomorrow.

  389. Big Pink
    12th April 2023 at 10:56
    Whatever the outcome, Grier has been nothing if not persistent


    …doth protest too much methinks.

  390. From the Rolls of Court of Session:

    “Thursday 20th April
    Continued Preliminary Hearing
    between 9.00am and 9.30am

    CA74/22 Elite Sports Group Ltd v The Rangers Football Club Ltd.”

  391. Did you know that at least one ex-player was paid £10,000 per month under his football ‘co-commentator’ contract with a TV company?
    For co-commenting on about 8 matches a month?
    I didn’t until this very evening,
    I was scrolling through BAILLI looking for other stuff, and my eye happened to fall on a Tax Tribunal case which seemed to have a bearing on the matter I was looking for.
    It turned out to be a Tax Tribunal case about the taxation of income derived from ‘co-commentating’.
    There’s nothing to suggest any tax-dodging dirty work on the part of any party, just an ordinary attempt to show that HMRC were wrong in law in relation to the particular individual’s tax assessment. I therefore have not given any identifying details.
    I just wanted to share my astonishment (and, maybe, a touch of envy that naebody ever offered me that kind of money for my expertise!)

  392. I note from Andy’s ‘sting-in-the-tail’ on this link
    that he sees full restoration of schools’ football as a priority, requiring the involvement of government in so far as recognising the benefits of participation in active sport by our school children is concerned.
    I am inclined to agree, being a schoolchild of the 1950s, and a temporary schoolteacher in the middle 1960s (once refereeing the first half of a match, while the second half was refereed by none other than Archie MacPherson still working as a teacher then, as he began his BBC career)
    The teachers’ strike of ( and I’m buggered if I can remember what year that was!) ended the days of teachers giving up their Saturday mornings to take the school team to matches.
    Clearly, there was more to it than that, and I was hoping that some knowledgeable SFM folk could fill me in on detail. Google at the moment is full of current strike stuff in Engerland.

  393. Upthehoops
    18th April 2023 at 14.38

    ‘Another £750k of confetti shares…

    Good spot,uth. Any indication as to purchaser(s)?

  394. John Clark
    18th April 2023 at 15:10
    According to Follow Follow ,
    £500k from Bennett.
    £250k from George Taylor

  395. We keep seeing the dilution of Club1872 shareholding and yet I thought their whole raison d’etre was to eventually have a significant say for the fans by buying more control. I have no idea of the membership numbers or the current financial contributions being regularly made but I can’t remember when Club1872 last made any share purchase or even voiced an opinion on the current state of affairs on behalf of their members. All seems strangely quiet.

  396. I see elsewhere on Twitter that Kenny Mac has had it suggested to him that he invite the [improbably named?]Kevin Maguire ‘to explain why the latest issue of shares is a sign of strength on the road to sustainability.’
    As well ask the BBC why they propagate the ridiculous myth that TRFC of 2012 is RFC of 1872!

    Truth will NOT be acknowledged by BBC Radio Scotland when it comes to anything to do with a ‘Rangers’ after the originally truthful, honest reporters and editors at Pacific Quay were told to shut up and propagate the story that it was a ‘company’ that died and not the football club. And did so!
    Shame on those ‘journalists’ in the BBC who for one reason or another propagate untruth as easily and readily as do the evil sods on Radio Moscow- who at least have the excuse of literally fearing for their lives if they step out of line.
    Honest to God!
    That a lying football club founded in 2012 should get away with its claim to be RFC of 1872 tells us a lot about football governance, the SMSM and the BBC.
    And those in football governance, and in the SMSM and in BBC Scotland KNOW in their black hearts that they are propagating untruth.
    As do the Boards of our football clubs.

  397. gunnerb
    18th April 2023 at 22:48
    ‘I can’t remember when Club1872 last made any share purchase or even voiced an opinion on the current state of affairs on behalf of their members. All seems strangely quiet.’
    In my opinion Club 1872 is actually a tool of the Ibrox board, cynically used for the Board’s purposes, exploiting the desire of fans to have representation on the Board in order to get some cash through the purchase of shares while making damned sure that Club 1872 would never be in a position to exert any boardroom influence.
    A wee look at the history and those involved in the concept tells you all. In my opinion.
    And in my opinion Club 1872 is the very opposite of what it was sold to ‘Rangers’ fan to be.
    but, then what do I know-or care- about TRFC?