Tell me all your sweet, sweet little lies
All about the dark places you hide
Tell me all your problems, make them mine
Tell me all your sweet, sweet little lies
The stridency of Scottish journalist/pundits, particularly coming from those on the BBC Sportsound platform from where they cry out for an investigation into what took place behind the scenes before and after the SPFL put forward a resolution to SPFL clubs, subsequently accepted by the majority, that allowed SPFL to pay out needed prize money to sides below the Premier level is, to quote an old saying, “the talk of the steamie”.
Whilst those cries are ostensibly in support of a demand led by The Rangers FC for a need to change the governance at the SPFL, it is not clear if they mean the way the SPFL conduct business or the way individuals inside the SPFL go about the conduct of that business.
During on-air interviews, questions are being put to clubs about the degree of confidence they have in individuals rather than the processes, systems and structures. This suggests it is individuals who are being placed under scrutiny, and not the dysfunctional processes and structures themselves. A pity, since there is little doubt the governance is dysfunctional.
SFM has long been asking questions about the system and processes of governance and in fact tried to elicit the help of a number of journalists (in 2014) after information which had not been made available to the then SPFL lawyers Harper MacLeod during or after the LNS inquiry had surfaced.
Information that had it been made available would have changed the charges of Old Rangers’ mis-registration of players contracts, and to the more recent and unresolved matter of their failing to act in good faith to fellow club members (which the SFA Compliance Officer made in June 2018 in respect of non-compliance with UEFA FFP regulations relating to tax overdue in 2011).
Following the last Celtic AGM a detailed independent investigation by an accountant was provided to Celtic who passed it to the SFA where the matter has been overtaken by world events but not forgotten. That report can be read here.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1NeNzADsUAXkcFQ6QtehK5QqNsFa6he8V
It only adds to the mountain of evidence on https://www.res12.uk that suggests the need for reform of both governance bodies, their structures, systems and process.
Instead the media have given us a narrow head hunt to remove individuals for reasons that can only be guessed. This from individuals in the media whose motivations are as questionable now as they were in 2014, when they and their organisations ignored stronger evidence of greater wrong doing than has so far been presented by those currently advocating change.
The current media clamour for heads on a plate carries with it more than a whiff of hypocrisy.
During week commencing 22 September 2014, some volunteer SFM readers posted a bundle of documents that had surfaced to a number of journalists. SFM had previously sent these documents to Harper MacLeod, the then SPL lawyers. These were important documents pertinent to Lord Nimmo Smith’s inquiry into Rangers use of EBTs, documents which had not been made available to Harper MacLeod by Rangers Administrators Duff and Phelps despite being requested in March 2012 as part of the commissioning of LNS.
Earlier SFM blogs provide the details of communications with Harper MacLeod and can be read from the same link(s) provided to 12 Scottish media journalists in the draft below.
Some of the addresses may have received more than one copy but apart from one for whom only an e mail address was known, they should have received at least one hard copy of what Harper MacLeod/SPFL had been provided with which the latter passed to the SFA Compliance Officer in September 2014 according to their last reply to SFM. It is unlikely none were received by the organisations they were addressed to.
The draft to the journalist which the volunteers were at liberty to amend said:
I am a reader of The Scottish Football Monitor web site and attach for your information a set of documents that Duff and Phelps, acting as Rangers Administrators in April 2012, failed to provide to the then Scottish Premier League solicitors Harper MacLeod, who were charged with gathering evidence to investigate the matter of incorrect player registrations from July 1998 involving concealed side letters and employee benefit trusts by Rangers FC as defined in the eventual Lord Nimmo Smith Commission.
The failure to supply the requested information in the form of the attached documents as clearly instructed resulted in incorrect terms of reference being drawn up by Harper Macleod and a consequent serious error of judgement by Lords Nimmo Smith in his Decision as regards sporting advantage.
The information in the attached was provided to Harper MacLeod and the SPL Board in Feb 2014 and it was pointed out in subsequent correspondence that SFA President Campbell Ogilvie had failed to make a distinction in his testimony to Lord Nimmo Smith between the already confirmed as irregular Discount Option Scheme EBTs paid to Craig Moore, Tor Andre Flo and Ronald De Boer from 1999 to 2002/03 under Rangers Employee Benefit Trust (REBT) and the later loan EBTsfrom 2002/03 onwards under the Murray Group Management Remuneration Trust (MGMRT), having initiated the first DOS EBT to Craig Moore (as shown in the attached) and being a beneficiary of a MGMRT EBT as widely reported in national press in March 2012 at the time investigations commenced.
The complete narrative was set out in a series of blogs on The Scottish Football Monitor Web Site that are accessible from
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9dnVHSl9OU3RoWm8/view?usp=sharing
(Edit: The links to the original SFM blogs were listed but some have been lost but original sources have been uploaded to Google Drive accessible from the above link)
However in spite of the correspondence sent to Harper MacLeod, there has been no response from them or the SPFL, save their answer to the original letter. (Edit: There was subsequent correspondence with Harper Macleod after the package and this letter was sent to the journalists which can be read from the above index to the original blogs.)
These points suggests that the SPFL, Harper MacLeod and Lord Nimmo Smith were misled by Duff and Phelps failure to supply the attached documents as instructed as well as Campbell Ogilvie’s failure to correct Lord Nimmo Smiths decision to treat all EBTs as “regular” when the DOS EBTs are not, as the attached evidence clearly demonstrates.
You are one of a number of journalists to whom this letter and attachments is addressed either electronically or hard copy. We are hoping that some journalists will prove themselves worthy of the challenge and investigate the story, even if only to refute it and stop suspicion of a cover up.
A copy of this letter and responses from addressees (or failures) will be published on The Scottish Football Monitor web site for the Scottish football supporting public to note. The e mail address for your reply is press@sfm.scot and we hope that you will investigate what appears to have been the corruption of the very process set up to establish the truth or you will explain why you cannot.
Yours in Sport
Note: The letter above was drafted and distributed with the documentation before a reply from Harper MacLeod was received, but as the reply did not address the issue of the nature of the irregular DOS EBTs, the request to journalists to investigate was even more valid.
The following were the journalists to whom documentation was posted/delivered.
Mr Richard Gordon
Mr Richard Wilson
Mr Tom English all at the BBC.
Mr Grant Russell
Mr Peter A Smith. At STV
Mr Andrew Rennie Daily Record Sports Editor
Mr Paul Hutcheon
Mr Graham Speirs
Mr Gerry Braiden at The Herald
Mr Mathew Lindsay Evening Times (belatedly)
Mr Gerry McCulloch Radio Clyde
Ms Jane Hamilton Freelance ex-Sun Sunday Mail (by e mail)
Only three individuals showed an interest but it is inconceivable to think that the media outlets they worked for were ignorant of the information provided or that the Scottish media sports departments are unaware of the narrative and its implications which were subsequently picked up by The Offshore Game but drew no refuting comments with the exception of Tom English.
He opined that the TOG report was ‘flawed’ although he did not specify how he came to that conclusion.
Darren Cooney of the Daily Record did take an interest in November 2015 when he met an SFM representative, who explained the case then sent him a summary to give to his editor but The Daily Record did not publish the story nor give any reason why they didn’t.
Grant Russell was with STV at the time and a meeting with him was arranged with a fellow SFM contributor but he failed to show up.
He subsequently did show an interest when The Court of Session ruled the Big Tax Case unlawful in July 2017, when he was provided with the a note of the consequences for the LNS Commission. However Grant moved jobs to join Motherwell in late October 2017.
Why bring all this his up now?
Because currently, the existence of texts and e-mails and unsubstantiated claims of skullduggery appear to have energised a media (and BBC Sports Department in particular) that had ‘no appetite’ to investigate actual evidence presented to them in 2014. There seems to be little doubt that an agenda is being followed, but as the preceeding paragraphs demonstrate, it casts doubt that their motivation is reform of the governance of Scottish football, and raises a suspicion that replacement of individuals (whose steerage of the good ship Scottish Football into the RFC iceberg was deemed adequate a decade ago) is what is important. A meaningless powerplay. No more no less.
One may jump to the conclusion that the foregoing is a defence of the individuals at the centre of this controversy, and that it defends the SPFL position in respect of the requisitioners review of governance. That would be the wrong conclusion. The point is that a wide-ranging review of the SFA/SPFL governance is way overdue.
The time window covered by any review should the very least cover the tenure of those accused of malfeasance and mis-governance. The media, and the requisitioners are cherry-picking their poor governance. That is poor governance in itself.
SPFL arrange to have independent enquiry and set parameters with hired gun QC . Recover the costs from TRFC . To quote a stuffed toy , "simples ".
bect67 11th May 2020 at 11:16
For completeness here is what the ICT statement said:-
This is totally at odds to what Doncaster said yesterday on Radio Scotland. – It seems someone is lying.
It may be ICT or it may be Doncaster. I honestly don't know.
What I do know is that it is a shambles.
Why is the bandwagon farcical? Because T'Rangers are involved?
As discussed, I have no particular explanation why they are bumping their gums and leading the charge.
They have little chance of convincing people that Celtic should not be awarded the title. While there a mathematical chance of Celtic being caught if football recommenced, all other clubs and true football fans surely agree they deserve it as being the best team in the league. The degree of disadvantage suffered by T'Rangers for being awarded second is minimal as in all probability that is where they would have ended up.
The only logical reason I can see for T'Rangers sticking up a stink was that they were keen to get their hands on their prize money ASAP.
Take the Ibrox club out of the equation and what is so wrong about people raising concerns that some clubs are being disadvantaged and there has only been a grudging acknowledgement of this and no steps to offer any type of compensation for 'taking one for the team'.
The question often asked is, 'If it was Hamilton instead of Hearts in bottom slot would there be such a fuss?'
My question is 'If Hamilton was in bottom slot and it was Hibs or Aberdeen, instead of T'Rangers, taking pot shots at the SPFL would others, in general, and Celtic fans in particular dismiss the issues so easily? Or would they be calling for the head of Doncaster and others on a stick, given their past performance?
After all its only two months since this damming article:-
https://thecelticblog.com/2020/03/blogs/neil-doncaster-and-his-contempt-for-bt-shows-again-how-hes-unfit-for-this-job/
In terms of securing the future of the game I'd respectively suggest we are not really any further on than when the vote was held a month ago. In fact there is now a degree of division and mistrust amongst members which does not bode well in terms of finding a way forward.
We know the nature of the ‘threat’ made to ICT and to Dundee . It was included in the TRFC ‘dossier’ and evidenced by the WhatsApp screenshots.
At its essence, the ‘threat’ was that if the resolution did not gain sufficient support and league positions finalised, the alternative – making the season null and void – would mean that the scheduled fee payments could not be paid. If no fee payments could be made based on league positions, the only alternative would be an equal split of the total funds.
Of course, that would be a ‘threat’ to ICT’s and Dundee’s budgeted revenues.
But actually, that ‘threat’ only exists if the existing payment methodology was set aside by attempting to separate the (contractually bound) fee payments with final league positions.
The perceived ‘threat’ was simply someone pointing out the natural consequences that would come from voting against the resolution.
If I tell you that you risk killing yourself and others by driving at 70mph on the wrong side of the motorway, am I threatening to crash your car?
Or am I simply pointing out the inherently suicidal nature of your own actions?
https://dafc.co.uk/story.php?t=Chairman`s_Statement_&ID=11909
Sorry, can’t C&P the statement directly from the club’s web page because of copyright. But it’s in the web site, linked above.
I currently live in Dunfermline and sort of trust them (as a fan-controlled club) more than I might other clubs. That may be naive, I don't know. Ross McArthur's statement linked above backs up HP's differentiation between a threat and merely pointing out a consequence, which I can see being the nub of that particular argument due to tthe filters applied by each side of the argument.
However, I have to say I can't easily understand exactly what he says in the paragraph about the different proposals and the 1/10th versus league placings-based payouts. Anyone got a clear view?
@gunnerb 12;46
With Douglas Park announcing that the funding gap of £10 million pounds for this year has been made good by current investors then I see no further charges against TRFC on companies house. Not that there is a lot left to secure loans against other than Ibrox stadium.No share issue either so it appears to be unsecured loans or gifts. Maybe the investors are acting like Ticketus and are understandably agitated by slow take up of season tickets.
———————————————————————————————————–
There is always the possibility that Douglas Park is being economical with the truth. The 10m shortfall is equal to 10m in deferred wages over 3-4 months so atm there is no shortfall but when the deferment ends then that pesky debt is back. If one of the current investors had indeed written a unsecured cheque for 10m then the MSM would have been trumpeting such a selfless act from the rooftops as proof positive they are backed to the hilt by people with the club's* best interest at heart. They say birds of a feather flock together well just a reminder that Douglas Park has been flying wing tip to wing tip with a glib and shameless liar for 5 years .
HirsutePursuit 11th May 2020 at 14:12
Sorry but that was not the alternative.
Doncaster has clearly said there have been no alternatives offered to the resolution.
What you describe is a potential outcome if a new resolution, covering that scenario, had been presented to clubs.
Null and void could only have been approved if presented in a resolution.
Are you saying that, from what is on the Whats App chat, some clubs favoured 'null and void' as their next best option?
paddy malarkey 11th May 2020 at 12:48
'..Recover the costs from TRFC '
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
'recover?'
Get it upfront in hard cash, I would recommend!
Some people can welsh on their debts.
This is the first timeline i have seen of events.
https://twitter.com/Zeshankenzo/status/1259825292295712769
Click on, show this Thread.
Good statement from DAFC.
Who's telling the truth?
Aberdeen now supporting the motion by Rangers.
https://www.afc.co.uk/2020/05/11/club-statement-monday-11th-may/
wottpi
The 'threat' has nothing to do with Neil Doncaster – or any alternative that he was offering.
You need to bear in mind that there were a number of competing self interests at play.
Clubs are businesses and directors have a fiduciary duty to do what is in their own best interests.
Obviously, the consequences of finalising league positions – promotion and relegation – set the agenda for those clubs who would gain benefit or be materially disadvantaged.
Separately, TRFC perhaps have a marketing advantage in attempting to undermine the legitimacy of Celtic's 9th consecutive league title.
Null and void was the alternative being proffered by those clubs who had/have a self interest in not finalising positions.
Dundee by contrast, in the certain knowledge that no more games will be played, appeared to have less to lose by calling positions as final. It appeared to be attempting to block the resolution as a strategic step towards a form of reconstruction that would give it the greatest advantage. It is likely that the same motive would have driven ICT to vote against.
Those quite disparate self interests coincided at a point of time to create a small cadre of clubs who felt that voting against the resolution was the best course of action. They were all entitled to do so.
Dundee changed its mind. Perhaps realising quite quickly that reconstruction and fee payments could not be conflated in the way it had hoped. It was entitled to change its mind.
Now that the resolution has passed:
Relegated clubs are, understandably, still unhappy with their fate.
TRFC still have season tickets to sell.
It is less clear what self interest is driving ICT's actions now.
The recent Scot Gardener statement was one of the most unprofessional pieces of corporate communications I have ever read. The spurious claims of bullying, the reference to the 'fake' 5:00pm deadline, etc was no more than an agenda laden diatribe. As such, one should ask for what, or perhaps for whose, benefit was it intended? Its own supporters?
One last thing on null and void.
It would have needed agreement, on the same 75% majority and the likelihood of achieving that was, as Dundee and ICT clearly understood, was highly, highly, unlikely.
However, should the SPFL resolution have failed and null and void was the only other way for clubs to get hold of money from the SPFL, the likelihood would have become much greater.
Null and void means no league placings and an equal share of SPFL cash.
This was the nature of the 'threat' conveyed by Ross McArthur.
HirsutePursuit 11th May 2020 at 16:18
'.You need to bear in mind that there were a number of competing self interests at play…'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
That was a masterly summary, HP, and I believe it to be wholly accurate.
Nothing I have heard or read suggests to me that (unlike the Res 12 issue and the 5-Way Agreement where in my opinion there was a great deal of skullduggery) the SPFL board has on this occasion been anything other than cack-handed .
On the contrary, it seems to me that the passing of the Directors' resolution was the only sensible thing in all the circumstances.
I just regret that there was no apparent recognition that the circumstances were such that some mechanism for reducing the financial impact on the clubs that were to be relegated should have been found.
I can add that I am extremely grateful that I never in all my own working life had to work with people of the same unpleasant hypocritical stamp and dog-in-manger attitude as some of the directors of the arrogantly boastful but penurious club that is kicking up a slanderous fuss.
Bad cess to them. And if the CEO of the SPFL were to take legal action against them, I would hope and expect that he would win.
Good summary Auldheid. Time for an effort to have any enquiry also include 2012 and prior?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Earlier today I was at the point of taking time out from the social media and media discussion about Scottish football. The knowledge that a statement from Dunfermline was online made me delay my decision and I am pleased that I did. The interpretation of events by ICT has been disputed and the explanation is more in my own acknowledging once again my feelings regarding the team I see as "little Rangers". I know my local chairman would not be happy with my comments but others will share my thoughts.
HP has then produced a masterpiece comment – well done!
I stay around for a while more as a result.
Excellent piece of work Auldheid.
Thanks Auldheid.
I hope there are a few red faces tonight.
Great stuff Auldheid – selective SMSM amnesia right enough!
I never thought I'd ever agree with SEVCO – but now I'm rootin' for an independent inquiry. Only mine is in line with many posters on SFM – no (historical) holds barred.
Unlikely I know, but as with Res 12, I'll keep the faith.
The FA in England has made it clear how the season should end if games cannot be played! No null and void and there must be relegation! Points per game played to decide. Surprise, surprise some clubs to benefit and some not!
Maybe a model for Scotland to consider! ?
https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/leeds-united/fa-tell-premier-league-how-18234450
Brechin have put the cat amongst the pigeons at the 11th hour.
Members and Supporters of Brechin City FC will doubtless have been concerned and indeed alarmed at the current tirade of negativity towards the Club, and in particular our Chairman Ken Ferguson. This challenges the integrity and reputation, both of our Club, and that of Ken personally. Having remained respectfully silent to date, the Management Committee now unanimously feel compelled to firmly rebuff these claims and set the record straight.
In particular, in the recent dossier released in support of the EGM taking place at the SPFL tomorrow (Tuesday), there is an accusation which is pointed directly at our Chairman relating to his part in the run up to the SPFL vote which took place on Friday 10th April. This states, “It has also been alleged that Ken Ferguson (Brechin City Chairman and SPFL Board Director) called League 2 clubs and told them that Inverness had changed their vote to YES and, as a result, the Resolution was going to be approved and that there was no point in League 2 clubs voting NO.”
This is categorically refuted. Unfortunately, this is feeding the current media frenzy and, by association, Brechin City FC and our Chairman are being subjected to un-necessary scrutiny and wholly unwarranted abuse. In addition to anecdotal evidence from all of the other League 2 clubs, we have in our possession verification from each club that no such call was made. Furthermore, each League 2 club is content to provide corroboration to this effect and has stressed that they are entirely relaxed (and in reality appreciative) of the integrity Ken displayed in his role as an SPFL Director in the lead up to the vote.
The Management Committee will issue a further statement in comings days to fully address other allegations that have been directed towards the Club in the media and online in recent times.
Playing the Scotsman and not the Scotsball is not the sole province of the Scottish media. This article from Private Eye the other week
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kbkxt6S2Ao-D_NnCZT4l3S8e6MH-azUG/view?usp=sharing
caused one long time PE subscriber to write to them to try and put balance into their article that reads as if it was penned by The Rangers PR department. Trial by media is bad enough but when they have already decided on their desired outcome , they are as guilty of trying to fix outcomes as the SPFL are being basically accused of now, although its turning into more of dog fight day by day.
To strobes at Private Eye
Long-time subscriber, first time correspondent.
The Eye’s pathological hatred for Murdoch MacLennan has produced a very partial account of the undisputed mess that is Scottish football governance, a bùrach that goes back aeons before Shifty’s appointment as Chairman of the SPFL.
I don’t want to bore the reader with the history and minutiae of all that, but for regular readers like me the Eye’s cheerleading for the club now known as The Rangers (to give it its proper post-liquidation title) is breath-taking and massively unresearched.
In summary the Covid-19 crisis has inevitably produced chaos for the football industry the world over. In Scotland too the relegated or unpromoted are unhappy and understandably complaining. The real reason The Rangers remain incandescent however is that they do not want Celtic (who stand 13 points clear of them in the SPL) to be declared worthy Champions yet again.
The 200-page dossier produced by the Ibrox club alleging mis-governance by the SPFL and demanding an independent enquiry has been widely likened to an elephant labouring to bring forth a mouse.
The Rangers have been in the financial and legal mire since they were formed 8 years ago. In their own published accounts they admitted they would need £10m to see the season out, and that was before the plague struck. This is an unsuccessful club facing another extinction that is now dangerously creating enemies in order to sell season tickets for a season that might not happen.
Tragically for journalism and truth there was indeed a real story in this area 8 years ago when massive tax-evasion and rule-breaking by Rangers (as they then were) led to their death. Around this time the club was improperly awarded a European licence by the SFA.
In addition, their EBT scheme (later to be judged illegal by the Supreme Court) which had allowed them to overpay players was exposed. Related and rule-breaking side-letters should have seen them automatically punished with retrospective trophy-stripping. A sham “enquiry” exonerated them on the pretext that the players were “imperfectly registered”.
The story of how the new “Rangers” was shoehorned back into the Scottish league structure is another aspect of the most multi-faceted saga of corruption in the history of British sport. Institutional collusion underscored everything that happened then, not just by the football authorities but by the mainstream media also, and especially by the BBC.
The only journalist who addressed this in any serious way was Alex Thomson of C4 News. There were a couple of fleeting references on your own pages, but the attempts of myself and others to get your organ to engage properly with one of the most "Private Eye" stories ever fell on deaf ears.
The Rangers now want an independent enquiry into the governance of Scottish football. The rest of us are very happy to see that happen, as long as it goes back fully 20 years.
Yours aye
"Minority Reporter"
Name and address withheld for personal safety reasons
Any SFM readers who wish to follow that example can e mail strobes@private-eye.co.uk
Great article Auldheid
This farce by RFC (IL) tribute act imo is to stop 9IAR even if it means bringing down our whole game and also to appease their raging fans. That is it.
SC verdict (among several other issues concerning oldco) has never been dicussed by our smsm and the implications of the level of cheating by RFC ( IL) over a period of 13 years. Fact. They totally ignored this because simply they can. This is Scotland's open biased shame.
Whoever penned that letter to Private Eye deserves a medal!
Auldheid 11th May 2020 at 21:05
'..their article that reads as if it was penned by The Rangers PR department.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
It might equally well have been written by the the chap who wrote
"SPFL EGM: What you need to know before the meeting" on the BBC Scotland Sport page
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52615278
His catty, insinuating use of a pejorative word rather than more ordinary words to describe a perfectly legitimate, within the allotted balloting time, change of vote by Dundee.
He writes "..It looked like the league's season-ending proposal would fail until Dundee belatedly – and decisively – reneged on their initial no vote.[my italics]" betrays him as a biased journalist working to his (or his editor's) agenda.
In the matter of football, the BBC was a blinkered, prejudiced, biased organisation in the 1950s. Not a lot has changed.
Anybody know what TV channel the EGM is on tomorrow…?
If the clubs and the SPFL wanted to – quickly – build some bridges with totally p!ssed off / disillusioned fans, then any/all meetings could be streamed online.
Do they not understand that they will be wholly reliant on the goodwill of us paying punters to save the senior game?
And they're not having a COBRA meeting tomorrow: it's only about bloody football…
An interesting read though probably fair to say nothing that will come as a surprise.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemeehallwood/2020/05/11/rangers-dossier-on-scottish-football-corruption-proves-damp-squib-as-spfls-latest-big-vote-looms/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
wottpi 11th May 2020 at 13:00 Edit
After all its only two months since this damming article:-
https://thecelticblog.com/2020/03/blogs/neil-doncaster-and-his-contempt-for-bt-shows-again-how-hes-unfit-for-this-job/
In terms of securing the future of the game I'd respectively suggest we are not really any further on than when the vote was held a month ago. In fact there is now a degree of division and mistrust amongst members which does not bode well in terms of finding a way forward.
=====================
A lot can happen in two months and this article suggests the author has taken cognisance of changing events this months.
https://thecelticblog.com/2020/05/blogs/the-spfl-sevcos-dossier-neil-doncaster-celtic-and-the-ibrox-mouse-that-roared/?fbclid=IwAR1atRXwIrQDYZ3bIf8qma-6nEByq8LAJeuOx4gpFVpVhugbcbAN0YIumRk
Indeed that is the starting point in that blog.
I think the real problem was an unwillingness of everyone, not just football, to face up to the current reality that might continue for a much longer time for football than can be measured in weeks.
I thought a quick return unlikely which is why I was advocating the long spoon approach, call it solidarity payments, whereas in mid April clubs were only considering this season and I don't blame them for the reason given, too bloody fearful to imagine the end game, so they didn't.
Perhaps after the vote tomorrow with the understanding of the full extent of the threat to our game, those around the SPFL table will stop using the long spoons to hit each other with and turn them to the job of keeping each club alive based on basic costs of each mothballing, a much bigger problem for clubs with high wage contracted players still on the books after the season is ended.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=grXBBzNtm2Y&feature=emb_logo
“Just as Drummer would say, ‘picked it out of my arse,’ you know,” he said. “I mean, look, what we did was we basically said: ‘What is the amount we can securitize over the next six months? And basically say to them: ‘Look our problem here is time, it’s not our ability to create the liquidity, the enemy is time here.’”
Just for context:
https://www.rt.com/news/irish-banker-bailout-arse-tapes-184/
me thinks the newco are picking their arse too.
Auldheid 11th May 2020 at 22:45
I refer you to my post earlier, in that, if T'Rangers had kept their silence and it was Hearts, Partick, ICT and now Aberdeen asking for an independent review there would have been no, I repeat no, celticblog article defending Doncaster. He would have still been the bogey man tied up in Res 12, The 5 Way Agreement etc and would have been roundly booed when at the next flag raising at Celtic Park.
Yet some people would now have him up and others for a sainthood!!
I wholly agree that there are major challenges ahead for Scottish Football and wish we weren't where we are.
For the good of the game as a whole, unity was required.
However regardless of the illogical grumblings from Ibrox, the manner in which the SPFL (as a corporate body, not just Doncaster) have handled the situation has led us to a point where there is little trust between members and the chances of the membership doing the right thing, in unity, when faced with an even bigger problem is probably unlikely.
As I said a few days back, the resolution was put forward to deal with one part of the problem, and typical of Scottish Football they did not have the vision to see beyond that.
The result is that they have simply made dealing with the next phase of this situation twice as difficult for themselves and everyone else.
It has been that way for years now and we shouldn't be surprised.
wottpi 11th May 2020 at 23:35 Edit
Auldheid 11th May 2020 at 22:45
I refer you to my post earlier, in that, if T'Rangers had kept their silence and it was Hearts, Partick, ICT and now Aberdeen asking for an independent review there would have been no, I repeat no, celticblog article defending Doncaster. He would have still been the bogey man tied up in Res 12, The 5 Way Agreement etc and would have been roundly booed when at the next flag raising at Celtic Park.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I agree but had it been the clubs you named would the BBC and others been as strident and consistent in their support as they have been?
I listened to a Sportsound podcast last week where every guest and host had connections to The Rangers, pushing an agenda for reasons that are still unclear. I still don't know what dog The Rangers have in the fight.
To make matters worse the motivation changes at some point from standing up to bullying to wanting proper governance!
That coming from The Rangers, the biggest beneficiaries of Doncaster's talent for finding a way to justify via an interpretation of the rules, an outcome that until this instance Rangers benefitted from?
When your intelligence is being insulted in such manner it is little wonder Celtic fans said wtf?
Celtic supporters know that feeling of not getting a result they hoped for from SFA/SPFL, but this time the shoe was on the other foot, but at least now both sides of the green/blue divide agree an investigation is required, but its focus cannot be limited to what is in the dossier clubs will vote on today and it should be directed at examining what has gone wrong since 2000 and how structures/processes enabled it and what changes are need to prevent a repeat.
I say 2000 because had proper governance been in place then Rangers would have been prevented from committing financial suicide.
As the current blog ends most fair minded supporters of all clubs would love to see a reform of both SFA/SPFL governance but not a man hunt and this is what the whole business started from because Rangers asked for heads to roll.
Auldheid 12th May 2020 at 01:31
wottpi 11th May 2020 at 23:35 Edit
I refer you to my post earlier, in that, if T'Rangers had kept their silence and it was Hearts, Partick, ICT and now Aberdeen asking for an independent review there would have been no, I repeat no, celticblog article defending Doncaster. He would have still been the bogey man tied up in Res 12, The 5 Way Agreement etc and would have been roundly booed when at the next flag raising at Celtic Park.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I agree but had it been the clubs you named would the BBC and others been as strident and consistent in their support as they have been?
I listened to a Sportsound podcast last week where every guest and host had connections to The Rangers, pushing an agenda for reasons that are still unclear. I still don't know what dog The Rangers have in the fight.
========================
What if, what if! What if Rangers had been 13 points clear. Would they have an issue with governance or would they have submitted a dossier? What if Hearts hadn't been so quick to tie their flag to Rangers mast without even knowing what Rangers 'evidence' was? Might they have had more support had they tried a more conciliatory approach on their own, rather than siding with a club lashing out everywhere for reasons that have never been made clear?
I see the latest allegation today is that ICT wanted to kill the vote then propose a null and void for all four leagues, which would have cost them £175K. Murky? You bet it is, especially given the leanings of the ICT CEO. What of the ICT fans, what do they think? Are they happy their CEO appears willing to have cost the club financially as long as there were no Champions this season, and who was he being influenced by?
In terms of what Rangers actually want my personal view is that governance is not the target, they just want rid of people who they perceive as Celtic minded, presumably to get people in who will be disposed to them.
I too would love to see a root and branch reform of football governance in Scotland, but I am damned if it should only be because of this. Far, far worse things have been ignored in the past twenty years, and the main beneficiaries every time has been 'Rangers'. Get everything on the table, and 'Rangers' will be left thinking they should have been very careful what they wished for.
It won't happen though. Rangers will get their wish as their smear campaign against certain individuals will continue, with the BBC providing an outlet for it. Then they can get their wish of honest people of the highest integrity in charge. I am sure Campbell Ogilvie and Gordon Smith may be willing to step in if required, even just to steady the ship. They are the type of people our game is missing.
We have reached a dark place at a particularly difficult and challenging time. The game needs to ensure it has the best possible governmental structure and individuals in place going forward.
The ongoing omnishambles at the SPFL has found that same authroity badly wanting at a crucial time. Why would you trust them in the stormy waters ahead?
We need an Independent Inquiry to shine a light on all pertinent areas so whatever governmental faults, individual responsibilities, etc. that are found, can be addressed with an eye on the future.
The SPFL mistakenly conflated issues within the resolution (infamous Good Friday Vote). Now I see this messageboard looking to conflate their resolution 12 campaign onto the current problems. I'd call the latter, tribal whataboutery.
By all means pursue whatever issues you want but this is seperate matter that needs immediate attention to give us a chance to future proof the game at a time of a real existential threat to Scottish fitbaw.
Any talk of ...but this should of happened 8 years ago and we wouldn't have been in this mess is predictable but of no material use to the current situation, however you twist it.
I have to laugh at this ridiculous assertion that BBC Scotland are somehow involved in a fiendish plot to help Rangers get what they want.
It’s tinfoil level that only helps reflect a weak argument and doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Referring back to Auldheid's blog above, the depressing thought is that Scottish football governance hasn't progressed in the last 8 years.
Back in 2012, and repeatedly since, the SFA, SPL/SPFL, the clubs – and supported by the SMSM – have all consistently displayed an inability and unwillingness to effect significant change and improvement to the governance of the senior game.
Today's EGM is just a freak sideshow, IMO, in the never-ending Hampden circus.
It seemed obvious back in 2012, as it still does today:
any meaningful change to governance would need to be imposed via another source, whether it's from e.g. the fans, TV companies, the government, or even UEFA!
But currently, there is absolutely nothing to give hope that governance standards are ever going to improve at Hampden.
Auldheid 12th May 2020 at
Simple solution, given the current outcry, Celtic support the T’Rangers resolution with an additional request that the investigation goes back to 2000, as you suggest.
Take it to the vote of the member clubs.
My guess, voted down by a high percentage.
The SPFL board wheel out Doncaster to say ‘move along now’.
In that circumstance do you just have to ‘suck it up’ and say that’s the end of it?
Them’s the rules after all, apparently.
StevieBC 12th May 2020 at 09:40
==============
There is no chance of an independent review in Scotland. When Rangers stole tens of millions in illegally unpaid tax several politicians including the First Minister of the time demanded it be overlooked. What chance an independent investigation when those in the highest authority in the land adopt such a stance? The fact that taxes paid in full and on time underpin our democracy seemed lost on them.
The last so called independent investigation was LNS, which had terms of reference clearly designed to get a specific outcome. LNS could only work with the TOR's he was given. Who would set the TOR's for the one Rangers want?
History shows Scottish football is in its happiest place when Rangers are at the top more often than not. If Rangers were well clear at the top right now there would be no issue. Was there an issue when the Bank of Scotland tried to get rid of Celtic while supporting Rangers to a level way beyond what they should have? Was there an issue while Rangers racked up trophies funded by money stolen from the public purse? No is the answer to both. The media rejoiced on both occasions.
'Independent' investigation in Scotland…jeez.
So…
ICT were willing to forego £175,000 to stop CFC’s 9IAR?
What kind crazy economics is that from their CEO (his decision basically right?) when the game in Scotland is going ‘doon the Suwannee’?
And what, I wonder, do ICT fans think of such actions at a time when ‘every penny is a prisoner’!
Not much I should think but then, they are but pawns in his agenda driven game.
In other news, Barry Ferguson (graduate of the London School of Economics) suggested on PLZ Soccer that, in the interests of expediency, the SPFL pays just now for the independent investigation – stating that it might be done done within within 14 days – then wait for it, reclaim the money at a later date from monies due to SEVCO.
Where do you start with that one?
In fairness, Peter Martin did not respond.
Finally, welcome back RC – back with water pistol fully loaded.
For the record, Ewan Murray of The Guardian was also provided the same documents around the same time as the other journalists mentioned by Auldheid.
wottpi 12th May 2020 at 09:52
"..Simple solution, given the current outcry, Celtic support the T’Rangers resolution with an additional request that the investigation goes back to 2000, as you suggest…….
The SPFL board wheel out Doncaster to say ‘move along now’.
In that circumstance do you just have to ‘suck it up’ and say that’s the end of it?
Them’s the rules after all, apparently."
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Forgive me if I am reading you wrongly, wottpi, but I read what you say as indicating that you are comparing the desire of many of us for a root and branch investigation into Res 12 and the 5-Way Agreement as being as dismissible as TRFC's request for an inquiry into how the 'Directors' resolution' was handled?
There is absolutely no valid comparison whatsoever.
The SPL and the SFL(among others) in 2012 committed themselves to a monstrous lie, both to protect a club convicted of despicable cheating from the just punishment its crimes deserved and to favour a new club, newly admitted by themselves into football, by allowing that new club to claim absolutely falsely to be RFC of 1872 and to go to the financial markets on the basis of that claim in order to enhance their IPO prospectus!
Monstrous offences, in my opinion.
In contrast with the scale of such perverted badness, the strongest criticism that can justly be made about how the 'Directors' resolution' was handled is that it was handled cack-handedly under the pressure of urgency of time in a situation of real crisis (as opposed to the financial collapse and ruin of one club)
It not helpful except to the enemies of sporting truth to suggest that that cack-handedness is any kind of equivalent to the indication of corruption such as we witnessed in 2012.
bect67
Finally, welcome back RC – back with water pistol fully loaded.
%%%%%%%%
So there is nothing to see and all the unhappy clubs should just shut-up and go along with the status quo because the SPFL have shown themselves competent and deserving of trust at such a perilous time ?
The water pistol is a more fitting description of the tribal whataboutery that underpins the arguments that I see being made on here featuring BBC Scotland plotting with Rangers on how to smear the SPFL and the conflation of the 8 year old issue through which everything on here is filtered. In the real world it is consigned to history and not even your own club is interested.
If this community wants to remain faithful to it’s stated aims, then surely it has to be in agreement for an Independent Inquiry on the current omnishambles with no tribal and unrealistic conditional calls for scope to go back 8/20/120 years.
Do it seperately by all means but don’t use it as tribal whataboutery for current events.
The irony of all this is that after all the Rangers/Brechin/ICT/Dunfermline statements an independent inquiry might be a good thing!
We don't really have time for one we just need to get this season finished and try and plan for next season
Bill
…an independent inquiry might be a good thing!
%%%%%%
It was interesting to see your new chairman opt to vote for an Independent Inquiry given Aberdeen aren’t involved in any relegation issue.
Do you think he is involved in this masonic plot or perhaps that he just recognises the need for one?
reasonablechap@11.02
The BBC Scotland historical bias towards any team playing out of Ibrox would make an interesting discussion by itself. BBC Scotland in recent times has failed to support its own staff when any one of them dared to speak the truth and the ersatz ban on the BBC by The Rangers gave the organisation a free hand to continue reporting favourably “in the interests of balance”
In the meantime we are all wondering if football will re-emerge from this national emergency in any shape at all and I look forward to the results of the big meeting today with some hope.
Ex Ludo
The BBC Scotland historical bias towards any team playing out of Ibrox would make an interesting discussion by itself…
%%%%%%%%%
Only, the current conspirational discussion here is centered on Tom English and Brian McLaughlin, who are actually doing their jobs and towards the likes of Billy Dodds and Steven Thompson being political animals that actively push pro Rangers agendas.
The one pundit on BBC Scotland who does push opinions/agendas in a sustained and political way is Michael Stewart and to him, Rangers are on the same shelf as Craig Levein. However even he sees the need for an Independent Inquiry (but at the same time takes aim at Rangers).
The one journalist who almost always pushes a slant on the information he has come accross is Chris McLaughlin. The other McLaughlin, Brian, tends to offer more facts and less slant.
reasonablechap 12th May 2020 at 08:17
5
We have reached a dark place at a particularly difficult and challenging time. The game needs to ensure it has the best possible governmental structure and individuals in place going forward.
Any talk of …but this should of happened 8 years ago and we wouldn’t have been in this mess is predictable but of no material use to the current situation, however you twist it.
…………….
8 years ago, did you believe Doncaster and CO. where the best governmental structure and individuals in place going forward?
And why if yes did you believe that and if yes, why do you not believe it now.
We have reached a dark place at a particularly difficult and challenging time. The game needs to ensure it has the best possible governmental structure and individuals in place going forward.
John Clark 12th May 2020 at 10:56
The principles are the same.
Rangers got a Euro License from the football authorities that meant Celtic and, let us not forget, the others in the relevant Euro Slots were disadvantaged.
Rangers ran an EBT scheme for years, that was unquestioned by the football authorities, where all teams in domestic and European competition were disadvantaged.
Via the 5WA, drawn up by the football authorities, T’Rangers were voted into a slot in the bottom of the SFL/SPL structure to the disadvantage of others. I seem to recall plenty on the RTC blog and here pointing to how teams like Spartans were unfairly treated.
Hearts, Partick and Stranraer have been disadvantaged by a poorly thought through resolution developed by the footballing authorities. Brechin for some reason have been saved. Brora and Kelty Hearts have been disadvantaged by scuppering the pyramid system.
Little or no thought was given how to minimise the disadvantage to those teams or offer anything by way of compensation.
As a last minute thought – if final positions were so important and linked to prize money, why did the resolution not include issuing prize money but holding back a percentage, say, 10% from the premiership, 7.5% from the championship and 5% from L1 & 2 to be distributed to those being relegated as at least a financial recognition they were ‘taking one for the team’ in unprecedented circumstances.
The trouble was, as usual the SPFL board were limited in their thinking and wanted a specific outcome.
As pointed out previously, the accusations of bullying and coercion were apparently fine and roundly applauded when they came from Turnbull Hutton’s mouth. Why were they not just accepted as just being ‘robust discussions’ in 2012?
However, now when others (outwith the grumblings from Ibrox) are saying the same modus operandi was used by the footballing authorities, including some of the same operatives, in the recent resolution these are just simply dismissed as part of a T’Rangers conspiracy and anyone taking that stance are somehow viewed with a ‘blue tinge’.
Like Easyjambo, I think I’ll head off to the chemist to look for the chill pills he was talking about a two days ago.
Clubs meet today to discuss and debate the contents of Sevco's dossier. They will vote on it.
However the vote goes, it goes, but what has become clear is the need to investigate those who seek to undermine and influence fitba' governance using underhand means and tactics, deploying dubious and untruthful methods.
With the best will in the world, even the best governers struggle in such an environment.
A fart in the room eventually taints everyone's nostrils. The only hope of fresh air is a cork up the farters backside, or ejection from the room..
Questions must be asked of who gave smelly breeks an invite in the first place.
It must be got to the bottom of.
Wottpi
However, now when others (outwith the grumblings from Ibrox) are saying the same modus operandi was used by the footballing authorities, including some of the same operatives, in the recent resolution these are just simply dismissed as part of a T’Rangers conspiracy and anyone taking that stance are somehow viewed with a ‘blue tinge’.
Like Easyjambo, I think I’ll head off to the chemist to look for the chill pills he was talking about a two days ago.
%%%%%%%%%%
It’s tribal whataboutery pure and simple.
What this episode clearly reveals on here, is that the supposed common purpose of this community regards holding the Scottish football authorities to account (and not Rangers in particular) isn’t really so, at least for the majority.
The reality for most is that it’s first about Rangers and then comes the rest.
Honourable exceptions like Easyjambo, who try to remain as objective as possible, are thin on the ground.
Cluster
Today is today, 8 years ago is whataboutery.
(to answer your question, I thought Doncaster and Regan should have been binded back then)
ICT statement on todays Keith Jackson article ("scurrlious piece of journalism")
https://twitter.com/ICTFC/status/1260163101556707334
Auldheid 11th May 2020 at 21:05
————–
email to the Eye sent. I didn't go into historical detail, simply pointing out that there is a subtext here that they really should address even handedly if they are going to comment at all, that their published comment was little more than PR from one side of a dispute and that I would not regard the DR as an independent and unbiased source. Shame, I have enjoyed and respected the Eye almost all of my life.
Welcome back Reasonable Chap. Hope you had some nice thinking time for your next attack on the blog….and now it's time for the divide and conquer tactic?! Come on, you need to be better than that.
Nawlite
It isn’t an attack, it is a valid observation of what is going on.
Events are doing the dividing and won’t come from anything I have to say.
Tell me what I was wrong about and why….
That will be more difficult than a general comment.
wottpi 12th May 2020 at 12:31
'.The principles are the same.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
No, with respect, there is at least prima facie evidence that deliberate mistruths were told either by RFC of 1872 Rangers of 1872 to the SFA licensing committee or by the licensing committee to UEFA, involving perhaps a criminal attempt to obtain monies by false pretences.
The disadvantage occasioned to other clubs came about deliberately by deception.
Any disadvantage to clubs arising from the 'Directors' resolution' is a consequence of a conscientious attempt to apply the existing rules in an unprecedented set of circumstances in the interests of the majority.
Not one shred of evidence has been proferred in the 'dossier' to support the view that the SPFL Board was acting maliciously or with intent to deceive, however cack-handedly and rashly they may have acted.
At best, there are grounds request for an inquiry into the efficiency and effectiveness of the SPL and its CEO .
Let that be done, certainly. But also let there be a full inquiry into the possibility that actual crimes may have been committed by people in RFC of 1872 and/or people in football governance in 2011/ 2012.
The liars of those years are still around, and still have undue influence.
The manky stable has to be cleared out of 8 years of piled manure, and in the scale of things, the 'directors' resolution' is relatively minor.
Reasonablechap 12th May 2020 at 13:03
I agree with you about apples and oranges but that does not make both matters un-important. Lord Nimmo Smith on player registration rules breaches in 11 seasons saying "guilty, but you can keep the trophies" was and remains a travesty that must be dealt with at some point.
Where is the clamour for a Scottish football re-start EGM / taskforce that would remove the needless finger-pointing, accusations and possible court cases that will serve no-one in the game, except of course those with no real stake in a re-start because they are out of the cup and very unlikely to win the Scottish or Europa league?
Real football matters include those that are unarguably wrong. Lord Nimmo Smith was unarguably wrong. Partick Thistle, Stranraer and possibly Hearts being relegated without completing the season is wrong. Amiens SC in France have also been 'relegated'. They have declared this morning in a press conference that it is essential for them to pursue this to be overturned as a question of 'sporting ethics'. Who in all fairness can blame them? You can expect the same in England if the same arbitrary judgement is made for clubs in bottom of the league positions.
European football must re-start and finish 2019-20. Even if it is in 2021.
reasonablechap 12th May 2020 at 13:03
What are the tribes , and which one should I be in ? (a list would suffice – I can investigate on my own , thanks ).
reasonablechap @ 11.20
———————————————————————
My reading of the AFC/Dave Cormack statement and decision to back an INDEPENDENT investigation is that he believes it to be the only way to draw a line under the episode. (he is an innocent abroad in that case for to be sure it will not!). He specifically mentions the opportunity for Doncaster etc to be cleared of any misconduct. I have no idea if he is a mason (which apparently his predecessor is) or is part of a plot. I would like to think not but it is early days for him and the jury is still out for me.
I don't agree with your quote at 11.02 regarding the 8 year old events (In the real world it is consigned to history and not even your own club is interested) is necessarily true. I agree that it has been established that the Celtic Board don't want to go there but supporters of many clubs, including notably Aberdeen, will never accept the Big Lie or that the current version of Rangers is not a new club. Whether we will ever be able to get that view accepted is regrettably, for me anyway, unlikely but that does not mean we should stop trying. My view is not dissimilar from many fans of Aberdeen and it should be remembered that we were very active in demonstrating against the Big Lie back in the day. Mr Milne wanted to move on not the fans. What have I said: A club Board not following the will of the fans? Celtic anybody?
bordersdon 12th May 2020 at 13:49
I agree that it has been established that the Celtic Board don't want to go there but supporters of many clubs, including notably Aberdeen, will never accept the Big Lie or that the current version of Rangers is not a new club. Whether we will ever be able to get that view accepted is regrettably, for me anyway, unlikely but that does not mean we should stop trying.
==================================
I couldn't agree more BD, and I get your drift entirely, but its more than just a "View"……"Fact" would be a more appropriate replacement…….Otherwise a very brief but concise summary.
Thank you bordersdon, saved me typing it!
what you’re missing RC is that you clearly believe we are back to where we were circa 2010, the Shankly inspired life and death comparison, a duopoly and a board trusted to oversee it. We’re not. What we’re all watching, and have watched for 8 years, is a freak show. A rubbish puppet show with visible wires. As the ageing operators try ever more desperately to maintain the illusion so their efforts become all the more transparent. Covid’s role in this? Think of the black screen falling down behind the show leaving the operator, now scarcely believably looking even more ridiculous dressed fully in black against red brickwork all the while getting his puppets to say yes we do, no we don’t etc etc. The Covid question is not, should never have been, which puppet do you support? To apply that in any form is to completely miss the point.
Today is today, 8 years ago is whataboutery.
…..
8 years ago is not whataboutery if no lessons have been learned, Today will be like any other day if lessons have not been learned.
….
If this community wants to remain faithful to it’s stated aims, then surely it has to be in agreement for an dentnt Inquiry on the current omnishambles.
….
This community has remained faithul to it’s stated aim, it has been in agreement for an Inquiry in to the running of scottish football, the problem now is it has taken 8 years for the rest of scottish football to catch up.
…..
(to answer your question, I thought Doncaster and Regan should have been binded back then)Why did you think that?
….
The same cannot be said about an ibrox club who were very happy for Doncaster to remain back then but now during this current omnishambles they want rid of Doncaster now, why not a word in 8 years?
If 8 years ago they, the ibrox club wanted rid of Doncaster and an investigation, this site would have been right behind them, but we are told to forget the last 8 years and stand behind the ibrox club during this current omnishambles that they in part created.
13 For. 27 Against. 2 Abstained
https://twitter.com/Kheredine2018/status/1260210855926550528
CO
————————————————————–
I entirely agree with your view that my view should have been a FACT.
this current omnishambles is a fail then. One can only hope that the ibrox club have a new lease of life (again)
And will call for an investigation into the running of scottish football these last 8 and more years, after all their sabre ratteling it would be a shame if one defeat held them back.
Well, if TRFC has any decency it will now issue a statement along the lines of;
“…due process was followed, so now it’s appropriate for all clubs to unite behind the SPFL – and focus on managing through this crisis, for the benefit of the Scottish game.”
I know…
https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-clubs-reject-call-for-inquiry
“I have taken careful note of the concerns expressed by the minority of clubs which voted in favour and when we are back to playing football in a safe environment, I will bring clubs together to discuss the lessons learned.
……………
Someone mentioned lessons learned. earlier,maybe we could go back 8 years and learn somemore.
Initial reaction on the EGM vote:-
1. Cue the next round of litigious statements 'going forward' to further (legal) action – led, as ever, by SEVCO. The first one might even be out before I post this!
2. SMSM will report the result (less than one third at around 30%) as a 'moral victory' for the Yes 'tribe', and as a 'pyrrhic victory' for the No 'tribe'
3. Peter Lawell will now be in the 'firing line' for what has been described as a 'rousing speech' – details of which are a bit sketchy right now, but I wonder what his theme was!
What now for the ibrox club for bringing the game into disrepute?
I confess I'm a little conflicted by today's result. Rangers fans are to my mind the worst winners ever, so I really didn't want them to perceive that they had won the vote, yet I really do want to see an inquiry that might lead to a wider look the failings of the SPFL as it was/is structured.
Their lack of competence, lack of foresight, lack of progressiveness, lack of transparency, lack of ability/willingness to improve for the better and fear of anything other than a future totally based on the 2 big clubs and the attendant hatred as a selling point IS undoubtedly good reason for an inquiry.
For today's meeting, I wonder how it was structured. We're told that a small number of club CEOs made speeches, but what really interested me was how much the non-involved clubs heard about the complaints about bullying and the denials of same. Were the reps of ICT, PT, DAFC, DFC brave enough to sit round a (virtual) table and clarify exactly what they said and what they heard to lead to the accusations of bullying so that the other club heads could make up their minds whether or not there was any bullying? That would allow them to decide in favour or against. Did that sort of exploration take place or did clubs just vote the way they did for some other reason?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52631918
Tom English observing that one third of the top flight want this examination to take place, which seems even less impressive than he infers it is when one considers that 2 of the 4 voting for were sponsors of the resolution. In fairness to him he does mention that the Championship was a wipeout for the resolutioners bar ICT.
Repeat: Following their accusations of bullying etc.,ICT were the only Championship club to vote for. What were you saying Mr. Gardiner?
"……We simply cannot afford the distraction of further infighting or legal challenges..'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Will TRFC go to law, to test the 'good prospect' of winning, now that they're not going to fund an 'inquiry'?.
John Clark 12th May 2020 at 16:43
Will TRFC go to law, to test the 'good prospect' of winning, now that they're not going to fund an 'inquiry'?.
===============================================
JC, I thought that Rangers* had a season ticket for the High Court?
Scottish Football needs to use this opportunity to deal with festering sores from 2012. And to do it transparently and fairly without any stitch ups.
According to a couple of guys some metres ahead of me in the queue , and who were wearing 32 Red logoed tops ( other bookmakers are available to impoverish you ) , this bit of local difficulty came about because the marching season was cancelled , and this was the chosen way to demonstrate that TRFC and it's acolytes are relevant and in control of Scotland , and remind the taigs of their place . I'm glad it had nothing to do with football .
ClydeSSB should be interesting tonight and being a fanboy I’m hoping RTC might offer some thoughts this evening.
Corrupt official 12th May 2020 at 15:20
13 For. 27 Against. 2 Abstained
===================================
So, 13 supported the resolution.
Which is the only number that matters.
It's a shame, as an independent inquiry would have been a better result and would hopefully have got to the bottom of things.
Hopefully everyone can just move on now, for the good of Scottish football. Well people have been saying that to me for years now.
All we will hear now is the gnashing and wailing from ra peepul . I would love Celtic to wait a few days and let the wailing build then get up and make a statement along the lines of " This is harming Scottish football lets have the Investigation if you really want one . Let us get back to some form of normality first then have it. To make sure we do it thoroughly lets go back pre 2012 and do it properly and we will once and for all have what every cub wants proper governance. Surely Tom and the BBC would unite everyone round that motion……..Reasonable(chap) suggestion dont you think …….
……Naw ?
And it's statement o'clock.
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/club-statement-95/
WE note the result of the vote taken at this morning’s General Meeting and wish to thank all clubs for listening to our concerns, giving up their time to read our report and for voting.
We also wish to place on record our thanks to our fellow requisitioners, who showed courage and acted with dignity throughout. Furthermore, to those clubs who voted in favour of the resolution, we appreciate your support and recognise your desire for increased accountability at the top of our national sport.
Today’s vote has erased the false narrative of this issue simply being a conflict between one club and the SPFL. All we sought was urgently required scrutiny, respect for all member clubs, fairness and transparency.
Significantly, support for the Hearts, Stranraer and Rangers requisition spanned the four professional divisions. Member clubs, recognising the need for Scottish football to improve its governance and professionalism, have moved beyond sporting rivalries and it would be unwise to regard this result as any kind of endorsement of the SPFL executive.
A light has been shone on the SPFL’s governance and regardless of the attempts to debunk our report, there is widespread acknowledgment that it highlighted serious issues and failings which remain to be addressed.
A management culture which not only fears accountability and scrutiny, but which actively campaigns against it, is unhealthy and breeds continued mistrust. This culture, so deeply embedded, must be addressed if Scottish football is to flourish.
It is clear that many members have lost confidence in the SPFL leadership and the need for change will not diminish.
The status quo cannot hold.
The ICTFC CEO has been defended by his club chairman following the DR revelation claiming that he didn’t pursue a null and void agenda. This has been followed up by the Morton CEO making it clear that DR exclusive was in fact accurate. Will his position at ICTFC become untenable?
As the source of so much of the information that Tom English, in particular, and BBC Sportsound has used to bad mouth the SPFL will they recognise that they have probably been used?
Homunculus 12th May 2020 at 18:02
Doesn't mention the bits they made up or exaggerated . They don't like democracy , do they ? Same reaction to being outvoted on SPFL board .
Me first.
durrrren da da…….
durrren da da………
durrren da da da deeeedly da….
We , the Rangurs , the bears , ra peepul will now smear and taint the SPFL with the help of oor pals at BBC Scotland and the Meeja and try for a vote of no confidence becoz we are about to go down the plughole . We need our own placemen on the SPFL to help us when we do so that we wont have any points deducted and then we can stop that manky green and white mob winning title number 9 and a half WATP !
Extracted from the emotional TRFC statement;
"…This culture, so deeply embedded, must be addressed if Scottish football is to flourish…"
=======
Totally agree with that,
except it should be directed at the Ibrox club / company itself.
All 41 clubs – and their supporters – will continue to suffer with this abhorrent club in its midst.
IMO, Scottish football can ONLY flourish when the SPFL no longer has an Ibrox member club.
So that’s 2 significant votes in the SPFL that have not gone the way of the rebels (it’s not just The Rangers you know) Neil Doncaster gave a recorded interview to ClydeSSB which was measured and matter of fact. He expressed hope that the more immediate concerns of the SPFL would be addressed and preparations for next season could be arranged. Something tells me the rebels have other ideas.
“reasonablechap 12th May 2020 at 12:55
It’s tribal whataboutery pure and simple.
What this episode clearly reveals on here, is that the supposed common purpose of this community regards holding the Scottish football authorities to account (and not Rangers in particular) isn’t really so, at least for the majority.
The reality for most is that it’s first about Rangers and then comes the rest.
Honourable exceptions like Easyjambo, who try to remain as objective as possible, are thin on the ground.”
Maybe wind you’re neck in, and TBH you know who it was that made a mockery of the game in Scotland 2012 and brought on the mistrust of the associations and without doubt quite right.
So it is obvious most of the shambles will revolve round the newest club TheRangers, for without going into the debate it tends to be them with their same crowd who have previous and still bring into disrepute the game, never mind the chill pill as it would be of no use to you, maybe a look at your club of choice and be honest with yourself and look at the complaining and disruption they bring with businesses and football.Jog on.
"It is clear that many members have lost confidence in the SPFL leadership and the need for change will not diminish."
I've been hearing and reading bits and pieces of the significance of 31% votes for. Everybody has to, even reluctantly, admit that the vote was nowhere near what was required for victory. But some are just about saying that it's still significant and nothing to be ashamed of. Listen for it in the next 24 hours!
Imagine this was a general election. Turnout 100%. A result of 31% would be a humiliation. Embarrassing. Resignation time.
It is not almost acceptable. Two thirds voted against!
Jimbo…..Over two thirds voted against…
SFNASA
By way of light relief, let me give you my reply the FCA Complaints Investigator, from whom I received an email response yesterday:
"To: complaints@fca.org.uk Tue, 12 May at 09:54
Ms C…K…..,
Complaints Investigator,
FCA Complaints Team,
Risk and Compliance Oversight Division.
Dear Ms K…….,
Your ref: 206288445
Thank you for your emailed response of 11 May 2020 to my 'complaint'
Of course, my complaint about delay in responding to my original complaint is neither here nor there, given that I was partly responsible for it by not sending all my posted letters by recorded delivery. (That is a mistake I will not make again)
Accordingly, I decline the offer of an 'ex gratia' payment as being in no way necessary or desired.
[I have discovered , however, that it seems that there is such a thing as emails going into 'quarantine' which is some kind of email security function to do with format change in the transmission of emails. Apparently, this can only be discovered if the possibility that it has happened is specifically looked for. Perhaps I can ask you for an assurance that that possibility was considered in relation to my non-received emails? I have always understood that emails once sent ( as mine undoubtedly were!)cannot be lost ]
Of much more importance to me is the question of whether my substantial complaint, namely, that the FCA may have been in breach of its statutory duties in the matter of the authorisation of the IPO Prospectus issued by Rangers International Football Club plc in 2012, is being ,or will be, seriously examined by someone who is independent of the authoriser.
May I take your statement that you have passed my “correspondence to the Hub and they have confirmed that the information you provided will be reviewed and, if necessary, passed onto the relevant team within the FCA to form part of their supervisory work.” as an assurance that it is indeed being so examined?
If it is to be examined, I think I would expect as a complainant to hear the outcome of that examination, else what would ever be the point of raising a query on a serious matter?; but that is something I can take up with my MP, rather than with you.
Thank you again.
Yours sincerely, "
——
[I was offered an ex gratia payment of £50.00]
Having said my stuff had been passed for for review etc, there was this sentence " Due to confidentiality and policy restrictions, I am unable to tell you what action, if any, is taken as a result of this"
Hence my reference to expecting to hear the outcome of investigation, and reference to my MP. What would be the point of complaining about anything if you weren't going to hear something of the outcome?
Redlichtie LOL you wee divil! I've just spent 5 minutes trying to figure out what SFNASA meant. I'm getting old!
JC, A quite determined sounding letter. well done! And very well written.
reasonablechap 12th May 2020 at 08:17 Edit
We have reached a dark place at a particularly difficult and challenging time. The game needs to ensure it has the best possible governmental structure and individuals in place going forward.
The ongoing omnishambles at the SPFL has found that same authroity badly wanting at a crucial time. Why would you trust them in the stormy waters ahead?
We need an Independent Inquiry to shine a light on all pertinent areas so whatever governmental faults, individual responsibilities, etc. that are found, can be addressed with an eye on the future.
The SPFL mistakenly conflated issues within the resolution (infamous Good Friday Vote). Now I see this messageboard looking to conflate their resolution 12 campaign onto the current problems. I’d call the latter, tribal whataboutery.
By all means pursue whatever issues you want but this is seperate matter that needs immediate attention to give us a chance to future proof the game at a time of a real existential threat to Scottish fitbaw.
Any talk of ...but this should of happened 8 years ago and we wouldn’t have been in this mess is predictable but of no material use to the current situation, however you twist it.
===============
You can call it all you like, but the case for including past governance issues has already been well made by others, but for someone steeped in a culture of whataboutery, everything is whataboutery.
It has to be because whataboutery, stops investigation of wrong doing by self, its always the other mobs fault never your own.
On Res12 and LNS sham, shareholders of Celtic have found wrongdoing by Celtic themselves because of their involvement in the 5 Way Agreement that took jurisdiction of matters under the 5 Way away from the SFA to CAS.
Yet Celtic insisted shareholders stick with the SFA judicial process. That was the basis of the most recent resolution to take the matter, where all the evidence points to a licence gained under false pretence to UEFA, yet Celtic insisted it be left with a process rendered functus by a clause they were aware of in the 5 Way Agreement when Res12 first tabled, but refused to press SFA for answers. Poor governance? You bet your life and unlike the current issue all of it backed by evidence meaning more chance of winning the vote just lost, so perfectly valid just from a practical view to raise on SFM and consistent with its pursuit of proper governance.
It is not that covering all bases is of no use to the current situation, it is that the current situation (had it been been supported by majority of clubs) is of no use to the consistent aim of SFM of SFA/SPFL reform if its scope is limited at the start to the current situation that has no evidence to support it.
It would have been useful and more convincing in arguing the case had TRFC, having said it was about proper governace had set out all the documented instances that support an investigation rather than WhatApp conversations.
That trick of limiting scope is one those responsible for governace have been employing from 2012 and you think it appropriate to settle future matters that have been unsettled from 2011 because of limitations set then? Its like putting an elastoplast on a gangrene leg wound and wondering a week later what the smell is.
There seems to have been some commitment by Mclellan to look at the issues around the latest item of poor governace (assuming there is an SPFL left to do it) and I hear the word reconciliation now being touted about and far away that was. So I tweeted to Chris McLaughlin.
@BBCchrismclaug A stinging end to the #Rangers statement following defeat of the resolution to commission an independent investigation into SPFL. Killing off hope of reconciliation anytime soon.
Auldheid replying to
@BBCchrismclaug
Chris. Do you actually know what reconciliation requires? You must know from South Africa and Mandela that Truth is a prerequisite. Not partial truth around latest skullduggery but the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So when SPFL asked SFA to investigate handling of ebts & side letters but SFA denied the request, why is now not the time to include that event & ask SFA why they have stopped pursuing UEFA licence 2011? You cannot have reconciliation without the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth. So for reconciliation truth is needed.”
Which takes me back to your ignorant claims about whataboutery. I don’t mean ignorant as in daft or stupid, I just mean not knowing enough.
Reconciliation requires looking at oneself first, admitting with hindsight that had you the chance to go back and start again and knowing the consequences of your errors where for example no one now trusts you, you decide to make amends and if those errors hurt others seek forgiveness but give it to others also for in Scottish football EVERYBODY wronged fellow clubs in pursuing self interest.
Then and only then when the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is recognised and the past undone, can there be reconciliation.
However if you are immersed in whataboutery the last place one looks is oneself.
Homunculus 12th May 2020 at 18:02 Edit
It is clear that many members have lost confidence in the SPFL leadership and the need for change will not diminish.
The status quo cannot hold.
———————-
So it was only a power grab after all, a change in leadership? Who would have thunk it?
Now lets get after real change now TRFC and BBC have whetted the nations appetite.
Auldheid 12th May 2020 at 20:51
'..So it was only a power grab after all, a change in leadership? .'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
For the life of me, I cannot remember what was the precise wording of the TRFC resolution voted upon today? I remember something about people wanting the CEO and possibly the chairman suspended and an inquiry into the Good Friday vote.
But I have no memory of seeing the actual wording of the resolution put before the members for them to vote upon.
Can someone please post it, please?
"The SPFL and by association the SFA have left us with no alternative but to leave Scottish football and seek pastures new where professionalism and integrity are part of the fabric of their structure . We have been in discussions with Berwick Rangers regards a takeover and we are pleased to announce that the purchase of this fine institution by the 3 Bears is imminent. We shall be applying to join the English League set up at tier 12 as required by the English FA rules and work our way up the structure until we reach Premier League status . Agreement has been reached with Berwick Rangers to transfer ownership of all titles and cups won since 1872 for the nominal fee of £1 . Agreement has also been reached that they will drop the Berwick from their name and will simply be known as Rangers* . As the holding company RIFC and its subsidiary TRFC are no longer functional we will place them in the hands of an administration team along with all debts accumulated under the gross mismanagement of Mike Ashley . We intend to play in Berwick only and until we have fitted a new floating pitch and installed a casino to help fund our drive to Premiership stardom. We are sure our loyal supporters will be as excited as we are at this new venture and will as always support us all the way , that's why we are freezing season ticket prices at Ibrox where all games will be available to watch on our special beam back service . So until the new season kicks off we will sign off with our new PR Guru Tom English singing "We'll meet again" , No Surrender WATP GSTQ "
jimbo 12th May 2020 at 20:09
‘..JC, A quite determined sounding letter. .
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
And I would hope to be as determined as my letter may sound, jimbo.
I am determined to discover whether whoever in the FCA authorised the RIFC plc Prospectus had done so
-in a carelessly unresearched and culpably unprofessionally negligent belief that RFC of 1872 had not been liquidated,
-or had done so in spite of the fact that he may have known the truth but chose for whatever reason to ignore the truth
-or simply had signed the bloody thing off without a thought.
It is a simple legal fact and a football rules fact that RFC of 1872 ceased to exist.
It necessarily follows that any guys trying to market a new club on the basis that it is RFC of 1872 are being economical with the truth.
And the FCA has no business trying to provide validation for such guys.
I would insist on seeing any ‘validation’ they thought they could come up with.
Auldheid 12th May 2020 at 20:51
27
1
Rate This
Homunculus 12th May 2020 at 18:02 Edit
It is clear that many members have lost confidence in the SPFL leadership and the need for change will not diminish.
The status quo cannot hold.
———————-
So it was only a power grab after all, a change in leadership? Who would have thunk it?
Now lets get after real change now TRFC and BBC have whetted the nations appetite.
……….
One has to wonder why the need for change and the way the ibrox club went about the need for change in leadership in the SPFL after 8 years of being happy with the people in charge at the SPFL.
What happened for this sudden need for change? Aquestion i asked at near the start of this and the second placed prize money evolved into the call for Doncasters and Makenzies head, second place prize money would have paid the electricity bill if given out, but would not have been enough to ask for heads to roll.
It may all come out in the wash in the next few weeks.
Timtim 12th May 2020 at 22:01
'…..drop the Berwick from their name and will simply be known as Rangers..'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
May I suggest, in light-hearted good humour a la 'Off the Ball' kind', a wee addition :
'.thus expunging from the record books the scurrilous reference to the supposed 1967 defeat by a supposed 'Berwick Rangers' in opposition to itself!'
There is a place for humour in Scottish football.
John Clark 12th May 2020 at 22:01
For the life of me, I cannot remember what was the precise wording of the TRFC resolution voted upon today?
=============================================
Closest I can get to it John. 7 points to consider
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/club-statement-94/
Corrupt official 12th May 2020 at 23:24
'..Closest I can get to it John. 7 points to consider.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Thank you, CO.
What I was trying to find out was whether the matters put to the vote specifically included the suspension of Doncaster and McLennan, and/or any vote of no confidence in the 'leadership'.
A request for a vote of that kind would obviously signal that the proposer was looking for a demission from office of the 'leaders', so that fresh election to leadership posts would be required.
Auldheid 12th May 2020 at 20:51
Homunculus 12th May 2020 at 18:02
It is clear that many members have lost confidence in the SPFL leadership and the need for change will not diminish. The status quo cannot hold.
———————-
So it was only a power grab after all, a change in leadership? Who would have thunk it?
=================================
But a power grab by who?…..
Seems to me that Sevco had the notion they could say and do anything they wanted with impunity.
I believe that bringing the game into disrepute is the sole domain of the SFA… Bearing in mind this has been an extremely disreputable episode for Scottish fitba', (probably the worst since 2012), will SFA charges follow?
Thank you, CO.
What I was trying to find out was whether the matters put to the vote specifically included the suspension of Doncaster and McLennan
===========
I think they were telt on that one John. “Lets see the evidence first before we do anything”. Hence the “dossier”.
https://twitter.com/maryhill_fc/status/1259843711946633216?s=21
‘‘Tis the season to make statements fa la la la la la la, la la la
Corrupt official 13th May 2020 at 00:01
I believe that bringing the game into disrepute is the sole domain of the SFA… Bearing in mind this has been an extremely disreputable episode for Scottish fitba’, (probably the worst since 2012), will SFA charges follow?
…………..
May 8, 2020
Several of us have also been asked by a number of clubs what action the SPFL intends to take in relation to the gross breaches of confidentiality that have been committed by the circulation of the rangers document, including copying and publishing commercially sensitive information from the SPLS’s confidential Board report server.
It is not appropriate, in advance of the EGM, to comment further, but we will return to this important issue in due course.
Add to that the calls for the suspension of Doncaster and McLennan,the alledged calls of bullying. And they may also have a word with Stewart Robinson for ducking out of an SPFL meeting but could attend a few radio and TV interviews.
Would the Compliance officer deal with most of these matters?
Perhaps it would be good if TRFC do try to take the SPFL to court. Firstly they would have to convince the court they have a case, then they would have to prove whatever it is they are trying to prove. I don't think the courts will be interested in an argument that TRFC don't like Celtic supporters having power in Scottish football, and that honest Rangers men of the highest integrity should be in charge instead. That way the honest Rangers men of the highest integrity will always act in an honest way, with the utmost dignity, and do what they know is best for everyone, because they are better people than everyone else.
That's what it's really all about in my opinion.
Another bone of contention about to occupy Tom English? Celtic being declared Champions?
“Of course ‘The Virus Title’ will be disputed by many from hereafter…..”
(Mahe, SC)
So true. LOL ?
I remember some folk saying that the titles Celtic won whilst sevco were in the lower divisions shouldn’t count in the historical tally. Or should at least be asterisked since it was a one horse race! You would think it was said with tongue in cheek.
What is not so funny is the titles won by Rangers using EBTs with side letters. Those titles should be rescinded.
What is also not so funny is the new club being able to claim the titles won by the old club. Doncaster was one of the main spokespersons for this corruption.
He should do himself, and the rest of Scottish football, a favour before he retires back to England and admit he called it wrong at the time. That he thought it was in the best interests of the game financially or some other such shit. He wouldn’t need to go through official channels and due process. Just one interview and get it out there and get the ball rolling! A personal opinion/apology would suffice.
Good Morning
In my opinion, this dossier which was rightly binned was nothing more than a thinly disguised attempt by The Rangers, aided and abetted by a shady character with dubious credentials from a club in the north of the country, and with an eye on a job at the bigot dome, to deny Celtic their 9th title.
Their faux outrage can be seen through. Where was their integrity when they cheated the rest of Scottish Football for years? It was their last throw of the dice to gain control of Scottish Football.
I know that many have been predicting, and maybe wishing, their demise but if current rumours are true then there is a financial tsunami heading towards Govan and they will go under. This time they must not be allowed the Lazarus trick. Their fans are threatening boycotts to bring everyone else down but it won't work. They didn't bring the league down when they weren't there before.
As for Park, I think he had had his Ratner moment. He should have been more circumspect and realised that his business depends on people buying cars. It's not just Rangers supporters who buy cars. I think he has scored a spectacular own goal.
Finally, all the bluster about going to Court is hot air. Next season could be started and finished before they would get a result. On that point is it not the case that disputes must go to the CAS and not the local Courts under FIFA regulations? perhaps someone could confirm.
Time will tell if I have been unfair in my comments regarding the role of ICTFC in the Scottish football coup attempt but the reputation of the club seems to have been severely damaged by the behaviour of their CEO and whilst the support of the Chairman is admirable there must be considerable doubt as to whether he is in possession of all the facts!
A statement acknowledging that they have been used by a rogue employee, apparently with an ulterior motive, may go some way to restoring their reputation and more importantly be part of process of repairing Scottish football.
The role of BBC Sportsound in giving a platform to instigators and supporters of the coup attempt surely must be investigated. Even although the SPFL has admitted mistakes too many BBC Sportsound employees seem to “turn a deaf ear” to what they say whilst reporting other statements without question.
I also need to get a particular bugbear of mine off my chest. My real name has alternative spellings and I have no problem if people get it wrong on occasions. I am disappointed though when it is misspelled in response to an email immediately below the correct spelling. Tom English has read statements directly from Murdoch Maclennan, usually with disdain, and time after time calls him Murdoch Maclellan. He doesn’t have to agree with what is said but saying his name wrong again and again is just disrespectful!
It is being reported today that Peter Lawell called the dossier "Embarrassing", when he took his turn to address the assembled cast…..I wonder if the words "Perrmanent", "Occasional", and "Disgrace", featured also.?…..Well maybe no, "Occasional".
adam812, good point about misspelling people's names, especially in the circumstance you quote. Very disrespectful. Just remember John Clark's name doesn't have an e at the end and you will be fine!
jimbo 13th May 2020 at 09:37
'Just remember John Clark's name doesn't have an e at the end and you will be fine!'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
There was a poster under the name ' Essexbeancounter' who never let anyone forget that fact,jimbo, always referring to John Clark(e).
I do hope he is alive and well and looking in occasionally.
A bit quiet so far, but I was wondering – is Paddy Power giving odds on today's statement(s) from the (awfi') State of Govania ?
Early front runners:-
Tainted title
Further action v SPFL
We are still 'ra peepul'
Bexct67 – plus claimed bullying of Maryhill FC into making a statement?
Scottish Football needs less statements and more social distancing of problem clubs.
Jeezo it aint half quiet today …Rest assured Im sure Mr. Park and his Motley crew at the BBC and the rest of the gang will be beavering away hatching their next cunning plan…..Brace yourselves
From Barcabhoy on Twitter. There’s more details on the twitter thread but the link can’t be copied.
“What if a Football CEO was a former business partner with someone who was fined £75 Million by the Financial Conduct Authority for operating a fraudulent investment scheme
Would you trust his contentious version of events ?
The messenger matters , (almost) everyone knows that”
Now we can see that TRFC is most certainly NOT going to do the decent thing and respect the EGM result, accept it in good grace – and move on with a wee bit of humility.
It’s simply more toys out of the pram: but it’s just words… because that is all the Ibrox has left!
Mibbees it’s Karma for 2012?
TRFC has won hee-haw – both on and off the field – since it was born 8 years ago.
(Excluding the Court of Session opinion and Petrofac Cup.)
All that the Ibrox club has to show for all its noise, anger, disruption and eye-watering losses… is a failed club teetering on the edge of the financial abyss, as always.
Mibbees TRFC was always destined to be a perennial loser, because it couldn’t find ‘an edge’ over its competitors this time?
John Clark, Yes I remember the (e) thing from a few years ago. Couldn’t remember it was Essexbeancounter though! He was a terrific poster, like you, I hope he is well.
I blagged the piece below from The Bears' Den . After reading , I sent an email to Private Eye reminding them that the club allegedly disparaged by MacLennan (or Shifty McGifty as he is termed ) in 1990 is a different club to the one presently playing home games at Ibrox , as confirmed by statements in court by its founder , Charles Green . I'll post the response if I get one , but you could always them ask for yourself if you're impatient .
roddybhoy 13th May 2020 at 11:59
17
0
Rate This
Jeezo it aint half quiet today
………….
Before the storm.
John Clark 13th May 2020 at 10:4
jimbo 13th May 2020 at 09:37
'Just remember John Clark's name doesn't have an e at the end and you will be fine!'
…………………..
I remember well when John Clarke changed to John Clark.
I think it was to shed some debt but my memory might be playing tricks.
Were you allowed to keep your medals John?
Finloch 13th May 2020 at 14:47
‘..I think it was to shed some debt but my memory might be playing tricks.’.
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Ha,ha, Finloch!
I’m just off the phone to my friend Neil .
He has very kindly offered to introduce me to one of Her Majesty’s Counsel, especially learned in the law relating to defamation, whom he himsef is presently consulting over some sports matter or other.
Ex Ludo 13th May 2020 at 12:21
From Barcabhoy on Twitter. There’s more details on the twitter thread but the link can’t be copied.
===================
I'm not on twitter ExL, but a quick google search threw up "Keydata". Being as it was a record fine there can be only one offender. Stewart Ford is named as a mentor of Scott Gardiner
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/26/investment-firm-founder-fined-record-75m-fca-stewart-ford-keydata
A further search shows Keydata has had a wee mention on SFM previously
https://archive.sfm.scot/not-in-front-of-the-children/comment-page-19/#comment-58788
DR headline : "Rangers consider legal options as club vow to keep piling pressure on SPFL
The Ibrox club failed to secure the 75 per cent threshold to trigger an independent investigation but are determined to fight on."
"Rangers won support from Premiership clubs Aberdeen and Livingston, while 40 per cent of clubs in Leagues One and Two also sided with them."
To put this extremely skewed analysis in perspective :
– only two Premier clubs supported Rangers*
– 64% overall voted against the Rangers* motion.
– only one Championship club voted in favour.
Embarrassing as someone apparently said.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Corrupt official 13th May 2020 at 16:13
'.Stewart Ford is named as a mentor of Scott Gardiner'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Well done, CO: I was going round in circles trying to find that out.
A very short statement from the SFSA. I feel a bit more explanation of how they came to their findings would be helpful. Personally I don't feel it adds anything new to the debate apart from possibly giving Tom English a nice big percentage (84%) to quote without any explanation of what the figure is based on.
https://twitter.com/scottishfsa/status/1260561264851529729?s=19
John Clark 13th May 2020 at 16:47
Name checked here John.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/business/north-of-scotland/1902754/i-genuinely-believe-my-greatest-achievement-has-still-to-come/
It would seem that the only legal recourse for TRFC is to allege that the EGM was invalid and/or corrupted in some way?
In other words the Ibrox club is now moaning out of its metaphorical @rse!
Can someone please tell the Blue Room to just give it a rest now?
It's way past embarrassing for them…
CorruptOfficial@16.13
You may say that but I couldn’t possibly comment.
StevieBC 13th May 2020 at 17:18
‘…It would seem that the only legal recourse for TRFC is to allege that the EGM was invalid and/or corrupted in some way?’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
I think they queered their own pitch. By requisitioning a resolution, they self-defeatingly ensured that the membership as a whole by their majority vote, legitimised the Board’s actions and decisions.
I cannot see how they can now seek legal redress just because they lost the vote: no Court in the land would interfere with a business decision made by a poll of the full membership of a private company.
Unless, of course, the reference to going to law is a reference to suing their lawyers!
Phil latest.
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/05/13/considerable-chagrin-in-the-blue-room-at-their-championship-thrashing/
There was a poster under the name ‘ Essexbeancounter’ who never let anyone forget that fact,jimbo, always referring to John Clark(e).
I do hope he is alive and well and looking in occasionally.
===========================================
He is indeed alive and well and looking in constantly JC(e)…many thanks for your kind thoughts…especially after all these years…how many did you say…?…Eight?
I would remind all bloggers that I still have blagging rights to the John Clark(e) moniker from all those years ago…
Nice to see Hoopy and NR Cat1 re-appearing and posting…is this a harbinger of some cataclysmic or administration event?
essexbeancounter 13th May 2020 at 20:59
'…He is indeed alive and well and looking in constantly JC(e)…'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Well, well, well…..I am really, really pleased to hear that, ebc!
On your blagging rights, can I suggest a good QC? ( see my post of 15.08 this afternoon)
Good to have you back.
On your blagging rights, can I suggest a good QC? ( see my post of 15.08 this afternoon)
=========================================================
JC (ok I will stop!!!), you are defaulting to type here…acting as the “barrack room lawyer” as that miscreant poster described you the other day…
Then again, you have probably spent far too much time in the courts over the years on behalf of the site…
The security question pops up again and tbf if I was going to lend 5m to RIFC/TRFC I would want some rock solid security as well . I had considered whether King has security based on future transfer fees but if an admin event occurred then players could be released from their contracts so that wouldn't work and in any case may well be illegal . Could King have done a ticketus on next seasons STs ? would that show up in Companies House records ? The only other thing of value is the stadium which raises the question of the deeds again , now I really am confused …..again.
Corrupt Official posted at 16.13 a link to the archives in 2013. So many good posters no longer around here!
Then I clicked on 'recent comments' on the page and it took me to 2 Jan. 2018 for some reason! I was there so I had a look to see what I was saying. Nothing of importance! But I noticed a poster I really liked. Miss Jean Brodie! I hope she is well too.
Please don’t forget the current MSSM EBT recipients in these hard times: and dare not question impartiality:
Alex Rae £569,000.00 Clyde SSB
Neil McCann £500,000.00 BBC Payroll
Billy Dodds £169,000.00 BBC Payroll
Steven Thompson £485,000.00 BBC Payroll
Not to mention the MSSM columnists:
Kris Boyd £215,000.00
Barry F £2,500,000.00
jimbo 13th May 2020 at 22:06
Miss Jean Brodie! I hope she is well too.
……….
If Jean looks in i better get my spelling and punctuation up to date.;-)
Timtim 13th May 2020 at 21:54
Could King have done a ticketus on next seasons STs ? would that show up in Companies House records ?
………………
Something i spoke to someone about the other day when i read about the ibrox fans having issues with their season ticket renewals.
….
Rangers supporters who received emails that their season tickets have been cancelled will still be able to renew after it emerged a mixup with payment procedures caused confusion.
Fans were left angry when the website crashed following renewal emails being sent out and supporters then reported that their tickets had been cancelled despite them already paying.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-season-ticket-mix-up-21983796
………..
Just felt something strange about the whole thing.
Maybe i’m just getting too suspicious these days.
Timtim 13th May 2020 at 21:54
'..Could King have done a ticketus on next seasons STs ?'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I don't suppose King personally would be legally able to have done that on his own authority, Timtim.
A majority of the Board ( i.e. any combination of two or more individuals whose combined voting power constituted a 'majority' of the total shareholdings) would have to authorise a decision to pawn the stadium for a wee loan to tide them over to a European success pay-day.
These days, any lender to a company whose business is football would probably think they might be on a good thing in lending to any football club on the security of the property and land owned by that club.
There is a fair chance that the industry of football might die the death , or at best survive only as a much reduced and impoverished sport, and that ,in consequence , a borrower may default on its repayments.
But what would Ticketus do with a football stadium and associated appurtenances? Would they lend to a football club these days?
Whereas, perhaps, someone in, say, Japan, interested in a site that might wonderfully and easily be converted into a brilliantly placed location for a transport logistics company may think a wee loan that might very ,very easily be defaulted upon, might be very happy indeed to lend.
And , perhaps, offer some inducements to achieve that lender status.
Deferred wages shouldn’t be a problem for some. VAT has been kicked further down the road for now. Consider it a short term interest free loan.
If you choose to defer paying your VAT
If you choose to defer your VAT payment as a result of coronavirus, you must pay the VAT due on or before 31 March 2021.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/deferral-of-vat-payments-due-to-coronavirus-covid-19
stifflersmom 13th May 2020 at 22:50
Please don’t forget the current MSSM EBT recipients in these hard times: and dare not question impartiality:
Alex Rae £569,000.00 Clyde SSB
Neil McCann £500,000.00 BBC Payroll
Billy Dodds £169,000.00 BBC Payroll
Steven Thompson £485,000.00 BBC Payroll
Not to mention the MSSM columnists:
Kris Boyd £215,000.00
Barry F £2,500,000.00
======================
It's worth mentioning that Rae, Boyd, and Ferguson all still contribute to Sportsound from time to time and I think it is fair to assume they will receive licence fee money for doing so. So that is no less than six people, who all illegally withheld tax from HMRC, being paid from the public purse and given a platform for their pro-Rangers views.
This is not a new thing of course with the BBC, and over the past ten years we have been subjected to Gordon Smith, Sandy Clark, Derek Ferguson, Craig Paterson, Walter Smith, Alex McLeish, and also pro-Rangers journalists Kenny MacIntyre, Richard Wilson, James Traynor, Chick Young, Roddy Forsyth, Keith Jackson, Darryl Broadfoot. Such a heavy imbalance towards Rangers can be no co-incidence, it has to be by design.
I once had an e-mail debate with a former Sportsound Producer about this. I got his e-mail when the BBC had not answered a complaint I made for months, and a friend gave me the e-mail address of the head of BBC Scotland at the time. The next day I was contacted by the Sportsound Producer. I have dug the e-mail out and two themes stand out
1) There is no requirement to ensure balance in the way there would be on a BBC Political programme.
2) The pundits Sportsound use can be relied upon to be fair no matter their past affiliations.
Make of those points what you will, but it is undeniable in my view that the policy of Sportsound is to employ more people with an affiliation to Rangers than to any other club, and has been for decades. No matter what any Producer past or present says, that is going to result in a lack of balance. Interestingly he at no time denied they employed more Rangers minded people…well he couldn't could he!
Jock Stein once threw the BBC out of Celtic Park. Archie Macpherson has commented on numerous occasions that pro-Rangers bias existed during his time there. What has ever changed, and if it has when did it happen?
stifflersmom 13th May 2020 at 22:50
Please don’t forget the current MSSM EBT recipients in these hard times: and dare not question impartiality:
Alex Rae £569,000.00 Clyde SSB
Neil McCann £500,000.00 BBC Payroll
Billy Dodds £169,000.00 BBC Payroll
Steven Thompson £485,000.00 BBC Payroll
Not to mention the MSSM columnists:
Kris Boyd £215,000.00
Barry F £2,500,000.00
==========================================
Trying to be helpful to our esteemed SMSM perhaps they could ask this simple question of the above gents?
“With the financial crisis in Scottish Football, can you tell us when you will be repaying your interest free EBT loans?”
Just those named above alone are due to pay back around £4.5m.
What’s the likely deficit at Ibrokes?
Note : I don’t recall what the mechanism was for final repayment. There was some insurance deal I think but it was all a bit hazy. I seem to remember the funds then stayed with the Trust? If not they would probably go back to the OC. A result for the long-suffering creditors?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Timing is everything as they say and to underline that point BBC Scotland have done a wee piece on the 2008 UEFA Cup run by RFC. Several EBT recipients feature prominently in the squad which got the club all the way to Manchester. Needless to say there is no mention of the carnage which was inflicted on that city before, during and after the game. It’s like the unsavoury parts of that particular journey never happened.
https://twitter.com/bbcsportscot/status/1260833909857824770?s=21
Re the EGM vote, this 'pearl of wisdom' from Alan Rough has fair cheered me up:-
" What would they have done if it had been 50 -50? "
Now that the dust has settled on Tuesday’s EGM, which saw Neil Doncaster’s unlikely transformation from devil incarnate to evil-slaying deity, it’s worth noting what he also said a few days ago, but which went virtually unnoticed, on the subject of league reconstruction and broadcasting contracts.
Before doing so, I’d suggest that most football supporters would agree with me that we, the fans, are the most important group of people involved in football, not least because without us, there would be no game. Maybe somebody on SFM will prove me wrong but I have yet to meet (or read of) even one supporter who is in favour of either a ten or twelve team top league. Most people seem to favour sixteen teams in the Premiership, while fourteen or even eighteen seem preferable to ten or twelve in most people’s minds, at least according to my admittedly limited and less-than-scientific study.
Club owners come and go, as do Chairmen, CEOs, managers, coaches and players, and while they’re all important, every single one of them is expendable. Fans on the other hand?
Once match attendances start to decline, as they have been doing for decades now, it is all but impossible to reverse the trend, an important factor when you consider that Scottish clubs are heavily reliant on matchday income compared to other nations.
It would probably be worth investigating if there is a direct correlation between the decline in match attendances, the quality of home-produced players and the abject failure of our national team since the advent of matches kicking off at times and on days other than the traditional 3pm on a Saturday.
What has all of this got to do with Doncaster you might ask? Well, he has openly admitted that broadcasters dictate the size of our league – the sixteen team set up that most fans would prefer, in order to avoid repetitively playing the same old teams over and over again, four times a season – isn’t feasible because broadcasters apparently insist on four Celtic/Rangers* league matches per season. As I alluded to in a previous post, what happens if either of these two clubs finish in the bottom half of the league post-split, have a poor season and are relegated, or maybe just lose their <cough> operating company to liquidation? Would the SPFL have to reimburse the broadcaster? Has Doncaster given broadcasters assurances that none of these scenarios will happen? How could he, without 'fixing' the game?
I’m not so naïve as to think that money isn’t essential to the Scottish game, but in an era where we critisise UEFA for creating and maintaining a clique of elite clubs driven purely by money-creating motivation, isn’t it time that Doncaster and the SPFL were told who their ultimate customers are – who they represent – without whom they wouldn’t exist – and that money is secondary to integrity?
If all that Doncaster and the SPFL have in their defence is that they can’t do what the fans want because their hands are tied by contracts they negotiated, contracts worth a pittance compared to those of other countries of a similar size and standard of play, let’s bring in somebody on a £360k salary who is capable of negotiating favourable contracts.
Is it beyond the wit of a football authority to start from a position of optimal league size and set up, before negotiating contracts utilising a professional negotiator with a proven track record, rather than having the league set up dictated to you by a broadcaster whose primary concerns are viewing figures and match scheduling?
https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/18441736.spfl-chief-executive-neil-doncaster-legal-threats-reconstruction-sky-deal-healing-wounds/
Highlander 14th May 2020 at 12:16
All these broadcasting contracts. and league sponserships seem to be up for renewal everytime an ibrox club is at deaths door.
A wee bit of a distraction, this amazing puff-piece appeared in the England-shire edition of the Times on the 5th of May. Not sure if it made the Scottish edition. But looks like we have the ideal candidate to replace Doncaster as he has been a striker, and actor, now a radio pundit but hes also not a bad dad.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ally-mccoist-i-had-a-wicked-relationship-with-sue-barker-she-was-more-than-a-match-for-me-z8ck3hrpg.
It is written by Henry Winter, ex of the Telegraph and now Chief Football Writer at the Times. It contains this gem……. on 2011 when taking over from Walter Smith. McCoist '……It all went pear-shaped with the sale to Craig Whyte.' The bold Henry then informs his readers……
The Scottish businessman bought the controlling interest from Sir David Murray in 2011 but under his financial mismanagement Rangers tumbled into administration and into the Third Divison.
Interestingly Winters studied at Edinburgh University so should have a good grounding in Scottish fitba, he was also the ghost writer of Steven Ge55ards autobiography.
According to this article admittedly coming from the Daily Record, The Rangers have been given a license to play in Europe by the SFA?
#Hmmm #Really
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/how-sfa-rates-your-club-16498008?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
Cygnus X-1, the article you refer to is dated 11.06.19. It’s 2020 now, in case you hadn’t noticed…
‘By Record Sport Online
08:37, 11 JUN 2019 UPDATED 08:42, 11 JUN 2019’
Haha sorry Jimbo seen on twitter and posted it while working at the same time
Just ignore please
Not guilty cygnus!
Was interesting reading anyhow
Fitba' may resume, but that is no indication of club health in Scotland. Being more reliant on bums on seats than other nations, that can only be determined to be the primary indicator. Bums on seats will be dictated by safety factors, from a starting point of zero, progressing at a pace and percentage increase unknown.
Under such a scenario, it is feasible that although clubs may be available at the starting blocks, some may fall a few hurdles down the track, throwing a fixture list spanner into an already rickety meccanno tower, the likes of which may be catastrophic.
Like it or not, smaller clubs budget provides for the arrivals of visiting fans from larger clubs. Should this not happen we may witness a domino event if a larger club trips up. However all is not lost and precautions can be implemented to mitigate such a scene. Emergency rulings can be made if need be. As it is the cash rich portion of the season a bond can be posted, (as per Livingstone),pro-rata priced from large clubs to small, being that the visit of a couple of hundred fans will have little impact comparatively with a budget plan expecting a couple of thousand.
Clubs should be ordered to submit club accounts to the SPFL for independent confidential audit before inclusion in the fixture lists, with the league provided only simple yes or no by the auditors.
Clubs may have thought they had a business plan, but with an unknown starting date, bums on seats figures, and disposable income levels unknown, they really don't and must not be permitted to gamble with the future of fellow club's season.
While there is time, help must be provided to all clubs, (by the league),whatever, and wherever possible, whether it be re-structuring advice, budgeting, even partial bond claw-backs as the season progresses.
This bond, or entrance fee, places clubs in the exact same position as their fans. If you don't have a ticket, you don't get in.
Fitba' without fans is nothing, but fitba' without clubs is also nothing, especially if they bugger off before the 2nd hauf. Its no biggee if watching fans witnessing a pumping do it. They have already paid their entrance fee. Clubs should too.
To hell with what the clubs say, and I am not fooled by the argument that clubs don't want any form of FFP. The SPFL is a members club. Try wearing studded golf shoes into the 19th hole.
There are rules attached to membership imposed by the golf club. Standards if you will.
Scottish fitba' which is still in a precarious position, cannot absorb another crisis on top. There is time to take precautionary measures to if not avoid a club falling, at least to limit the fall-out.
Relevant article but not sure about the opening paragraph?
https://www.begbies-traynorgroup.com/news/business-health-statistics/scottish-football-clubs-pushed-to-brink-of-insolvency-by-coronavirus-crisis-despite-good-management-and-prior-health
Featured in The Herald sport today.
It's a tough time for everybody just now, and it's going to be tough for all senior clubs for some time to come – even after all the restrictions have been lifted.
In that vein: whilst I was perusing the SFA website today, it became apparent that the blazered buffoons are totally detached from reality.
The SFA website is advertising 'Scotland Supporters Club Memberships'. Apart from a couple of freebies and discounts, the main purpose of joining is to get priority access to buy tickets for games.
To join, it's £50 for adults. That's £50 to buy the privilege of being allowed to buy overpriced match tickets.
And that's for a perennially underachieving team, which plays its home fixtures at an outdated Athletics stadium.
Out of curiosity I followed the SFA website link to the merchandising. An adult Scotland top is £65!
A kids top is £50!
And that is before any personalisation with printed name/number on the back of the top.
Even if we had a decent Scotland team of the 70's / 80's, those are still outrageous prices, IMO.
Hell mend the SFA.
Highlander 14th May 2020 at 12:16
Now that the dust has settled on Tuesday’s EGM, which saw Neil Doncaster’s unlikely transformation from devil incarnate to evil-slaying deity …
=======================================
He really didn't, well not anywhere I have seen, and I certainly don't think so.
Begbies Traynor report here :
https://www.begbies-traynorgroup.com/assets/uploads/pdfs/5559_SCOTLAND%20Football%20Report%20final.pdf
amjartmarquez 14th May 2020 at 13:19
tumbled into administration and into the Third Divison.
……..
Tumbled.
Takes note and adds to
Demoted
Relegated.
Dropped down.
Highlander
"As I alluded to in a previous post, what happens if either of these two clubs finish in the bottom half of the league post-split, have a poor season and are relegated, or maybe just lose their <cough> operating company to liquidation? Would the SPFL have to reimburse the broadcaster? Has Doncaster given broadcasters assurances that none of these scenarios will happen? How could he, without 'fixing' the game?"
======================
I agree and I think such a contract places a moral hazard on Scottish football. Picture the scenario, it is the last game before the split, Celtic (or "Rangers") require a draw or win to get a place in the top six. No matter the opposition or worse if against each other, if one or three points are not won then no fourth game between Celtic and "Rangers".
What are the chances of either failing to get the needed result and how unfair if against a team in the same position of needing a point or 3 to get their top six place?
Yet no one questions it. The contract cannot be written in such a way that 4 games are guaranteed and I wonder if it is.
Auldheid 14th May 2020 at 19:32
'..The contract cannot be written in such a way that 4 games are guaranteed and I wonder if it is."
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
If the contract is indeed written in such a way that it could , however remote the possibility, require the League to ensure that a match-fixing arrangement had to be resorted to (as in the scenario you paint, Auldheid) then the contract must be in itself illegal and therefore unenforceable.
No one can be bound in law to break the law!
I imagine that the contract merely insists that 4 games be scheduled but not absolutely guaranteed to take place where the rules of football supervene.
But it would be nice to know for sure, knowing as we do that there are people in football who would not hesitate to fix a match for the sake of filthy lucre or tell downright lies for cash.
Are the real reasons for TRFC'S unhappiness with Doncaster and the SFA now becoming apparent.
I list them below for easy reference:
The SFA, having been bitten once before, have asked for properly audited interim accounts to support the UEFA application and not the work of complete fiction they normally label interims.
Doncaster refused to contemplate the null and void visionary approach to deny Celtic 9IAR.
Doncaster refused to advance TRFC a loan in the absence of any evidence to demonstrate an ability to repay it.
Doncaster refused to advance any of the expected prize money until the League was concluded.
Doncaster was not receptive to their financial plight and proposed restructuring and may have been arguing that the existence of the 5 Way agreement means a 25 point deduction for an insolvency event.
Doncaster was not able to be bullied by TRFC and post the insolvency event a CEO with a bad attitude like that is unacceptable.
I haven't seen anything confirming the DR story about no top tier club having a problem with CFC being named champions , nor have I seen it reported elsewhere . Are the meeting minutes available anywhere ?
Bogs Dollox 14th May 2020 at 21:21
Doncaster was not receptive to their financial plight and proposed restructuring and may have been arguing that the existence of the 5 Way agreement means a 25 point deduction for an insolvency event.
……………
I can’t remember, but i believed they changed the rules on the points deduction for administration. but if they did not i think it would not be 25 points as 5 years have past.
“Because of that it was decided to persevere with the current system, which sees clubs handed a 15-point penalty for entering administration and 25 points if it happens again within a five-year period.
11 Feb 2014
…………
Just a reminder.
bordersdon 14th May 2020 at 15:57
Relevant article but not sure about the opening paragraph?
https://www.begbies-traynorgroup.com/news/business-health-statistics/scottish-football-clubs-pushed-to-brink-of-insolvency-by-coronavirus-crisis-despite-good-management-and-prior-health
Featured in The Herald sport today.
————————
Me neither unless someone made a grant of £10M that is in the books.
Hub stadiums?
https://spfl.co.uk/news/coronavirus-joint-response-group-update-46672
Aye it maybe reduce stewarding costs, but does anyone know how long that wee virus can loiter on plastic seats and other surfaces?. Then there is the public transport to consider.
Begbies beggar belief. Not sure I’d want them as an advisor for any company I was involved with.
Having said that their website sets them out as giving “Confidential Business Rescue Advice” with expertise as “Licensed Insolvency Practitioners – the UK’s No.1 for Business Recovery”. Perhaps they are facilitating future business?
So persistent loss-making, Going Concern warnings, huge debt, cold-shouldering, lack of regular banking facilities and a stated need for £10m just to carry on business in normal circumstances are not red flags. Unsure then just what would be enough to given them pause for thought.
Scottish Football needs strong FFP regulations.
Cluster One 14th May 2020 at 21:53
'.. which sees clubs handed a 15-point penalty for entering administration and 25 points if it happens again within a five-year period.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Of course, in the interests of intellectual consistency and moral Truth, it has to be clearly stated that TRFC has not ever been in Administration., so when it does suffer an insolvency event it will be for the first time so the 5-year period is neither here nor there.
I
From the DR online
by Mark McDougall& Jonathan McFarlane
"….The Hoops are set to be awarded the trophy with Record Sport exclusively revealing this morning that a video conference is to be set for this afternoon…"
On the 4th of May the DR reported that ” The Ibrox side have promised to reveal the partnership imminently” in regards to the leaked kit deal with Castore. As noted before the term imminent can be an inordinate length of time when emanating from Ibrox eg, the NOMAD , the floating pitch, the share issue, the far east investment …… we are still to hear an official announcement that this deal is done , a convenient squirrel at the time or trouble at mill ?
Timtim
Follow the nuts
tony 15th May 2020 at 11:02
I though marching season was cancelled T.
I see Sevco are still having "Glitches" with their ST collections. I was reading this morning that the company involved (Sporting Pay Ltd), was a new start-up one-man band operation. Hardly the kind of firm one would expect the world's most successful club to be using.
FYI
The reply to my email about the Eye’s trivial fix on Shifty McGifty – to the neglect of what we may see as more pertinent FFP concerns – simply plays a very straight bat…
“While of course self-interest is a huge factor in every opinion expressed by Rangers and all other Scottish clubs at the moment, the article in Eye 1521 was specifically about the current Covid-related crisis at the SPFL, in which MacLennan has played a prominent part; Rangers were not the focus of the article. Not that we have ignored Rangers over the years: our own Slicker documented in copious detail the unravelling of Rangers under Craig Whyte.
As for the idea that the fact MacLennan disliked the club in the 1990s might be irrelevant now as this is a new, phoenix club, it seems highly unlikely that anyone who felt that way then would feel any different now just because the company has a different trading name. While the club’s rebirth was a significant legal/business event, in football terms the new club still plays at the same stadium, in the same colours, with the same fans as before.”
Corrupt official 15th May 2020 at 12:17
'.the company involved (Sporting Pay Ltd), was a new start-up one-man band operation.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Company number 11551586 , incorporated 04/09/2018, Statement of Capital £1.00. Shares allotted 1, fully paid up, One shareholder.
Accounts made up to 30/09/20019:
Total assets less current liabilities £ 1,301
——–
No harm to the small businessman [something I've had neither the talent nor the gumption to try]
but for a 'football giant ' to have to penny-pinch in the important area of pulling in revenue?
fishnish 15th May 2020 at 13:13
‘…The reply to my email about the Eye’s trivial fix on Shifty McGifty’
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
That reply, fishnish, shows that the Eye guys are of the same stamp as our SMSM: get themselves tied in linguistic knots trying to avoid the truth:
‘new, phoenix club,’ in one breath followed by ‘just because the company has a different trading name’, followed by ‘ club’s rebirth was a significant legal/business’ followed by ‘new club still plays at the same stadium,(as if it could have played there before it existed!)
There is almost a satonic level of support for the Big Lie!
fishnish 15th May 2020 at 13:13
Signed by Maisie ? Identical to the response I received and probably just the name used in replies regardless which reporter/other responds . ! I've asked how they surmised Mr MacLennan felt the same way about the new club as he allegedly did about the old one ie have they asked him . I'll let you know if I get a response .
I actually noted those “wee linguistic knots” in my response to their reply, JC. Ta. 🙂
Wish I’d coined ‘satonic’, though…. that would have got the Eye gal, who’d written the response, wondering…
ps Just saw your post, Paddy.
Aye – Maisie.
Over the last few weeks some clubs have been playing political games for reasons as yet unspecified.
Some have been equally busy in other ways but you won't read about it in the MSM.
I was sent this today and felt that it shows that football can still be a power for good in any community.
Well done guys.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_4GJ9HxR8A&feature=youtu.be
Phil
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/05/15/difficult-questions-from-ireland/
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/05/15/more-questions-from-ireland/
One of Phil's pieces is about Rangers accounts and a Euro licence.
I could be wrong, but amidst all the flak flying around these past few weeks I am positive at some point Doncaster stated that in the event of the top league being called, the SFA have already told the SPFL who the Euro places go to, and Rangers were one of them.
Sorry I have long since taken Phil's predictions from "impeccable sources" and "rugger guy" (are they more intelligent than fitba guys?) as so much click bait! Don't take them seriously at all these days. Very quiet on here today? Where are the jambos? I miss them! Surely this site will not morph in to just a Celtic site? Yes JC the Big Lie needs to be exposed but there are other issues? I have been berated for suggesting such before but I fear that the site is doomed to be just that.
bordersdon 15th May 2020 at 21:03
'..,'Yes JC the Big Lie needs to be exposed but there are other issues? I have been berated for suggesting such before but I fear that the site is doomed to be just that.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
There are of course other issues, bordersdon, many of them getting an airing on SFM by people with good points to make and interesting ways and reasoned ways of making them .
The underlying truth, however, is that unless the Big Lie of the 5-Way Agreement is rescinded , and the Res 12 issue properly investigated, there is no honesty in the game.
Covid-19 might help get rid of the rotten fruit, and force our Sport to reform and adapt itself for the betterment of all.
Otherwise, who will seriously give a tuppenny toss, -or a fistful of fivers to attend a match in a sport which is living on a lie?
tony 15th May 2020 at 11:02
Timtim
Follow the nuts
———–
I did just that Tony but they all bolted
JC @ 21.25
Otherwise, who will seriously give a tuppenny toss, -or a fistful of fivers to attend a match in a sport which is living on a lie?
—————————————————————-
50K season book holders at Celtic park for a start John! Your principles are admirable and I admire your indefatigability (tm G Galloway) but as in most things sadly money will win.
bordersdon 15th May 2020 at 21:03
Very quiet on here today? Where are the jambos? I miss them!
………..
They have only been away a couple of days. If i was in their shoes i also would have a few days of quiet reflection. If you have a look around a few sites they are all quite when there is no football.
….
Big Lie needs to be exposed but there are other issues?
…
The stage is yours.
………………
Surely this site will not morph in to just a Celtic site?
……….
There has only been 4 mentions of celtic on this page, 2 in the same line as rangers and 2 mentioned in your own posts and one CFC mention by someone. hardly a celtic site.
Can I say that there have been zero refereeing controversies recently ? I can't mind if we're meant to be supporting them against unfair criticism , or castigating them for a catalogue of bloomers . How do you blow a whistle through a mask ? Will the refs be fit ? Fit for purpose ?
paddy malarkey 15th May 2020 at 22:37
The last whitle-blower went for a pea Paddy, and splashed not only his own brogues, but also an Inverness Caber Tosser standing beside him. Seems his whistle was full of holes…Clearly his flute lessons were a waste of money.
Don't want to be/sound controversial BUT just a thought about a lot of the clubs/fans who are complaining about governance etc etc. Surely they have nothing to complain about, the reason I say this is that over the years didn't they have the chance to change the voting structure but each time they failed to take it (can't blame the 2 cheeks as other teams fans often describe them) it was the boards of the various teams that failed their fans. As for the predicament that Hearts find themselves in is really down to Anne Budge this season for some reason keeping faith in a manager/director of football(surely you can't do both at the same time) when everyone could see he was struggling as the manager so really it is the boards of your clubs that you should be asking questions off. I also think while the CFC board have handled the last few weeks really well they have dirty hands as well ref resolution 12 etc and obviously the SPFL board have looked very amateurish as they have done for a long time, so I think it is correct for the fans to ask questions but please ask the boards of the clubs who are threatning legal action etc first. SORRY FOR THE RANT HOPE I DIDN'T OFFEND TO MANY PEOPLE
Finloch 15th May 2020 at 16:47
==============================
Fan-tastic.
Clearly Spartans is an organisations which would be a positive in the SPFL.
It's a pity they didn't get the SFL place when they were entitled to it.
J.C.
DM'ed you.
Kentes 15th May 2020 at 23:34
Offended me with those loud words at the end .
Bundesliga resumes today, 4 matches behind closed doors. On BT Sport from 1400.
bordesperson @ 21.03
I, for one, certainly do not apologise for venting my feelings about ridiculous propaganda being promoted principally affecting CFC – this site gives me the freedom to do this in a (hopefully responsible) manner!
So, regarding the fatuous and 'mythical' asterisk – which has grown 'arms and legs', driven by Sevco and its apologists…
Who, other than the embittered 8 year old club and its retinue/apologists (SMSM, legends like Alex Rae , Gavin Rae – around 70 appearances between them) is going to endorse and/or accept this wholly embarrassing fantasy? SPFL? UEFA? Impartial observers and reporters? Celtic?
We're not talking about an injustice here ffs!!!!
It's an added irony that there will be no talk on these shores of these notations for Liverpool ( could you imagine the stooshie that would cause?) and winners of premier trophies in other countries. Oh, and well done Dundee United!
In the real, wider footballing community i.e outside the narrow, pathetic confines of Govan where no contrition for 'inherited' past misdemeanours, humility, acceptance, acting in the honourable manner exist, there will surely be no asterisks.
Finally, I can honestly say that, having been brought up on a different value base from that as practised by those of the WATP mentality, I would have accepted the situation had the 'boot been on the other foot'.
I would not have 'given myself a riddy' by behaving in any other way, debasing myself and abandoning my principles.
I have a sense that there will be statements regarding the 'asterisk' saga (SG anyone?) but for now I would say to anyone trying to detract from Celtic's achievement ..
The milk has been spilt – deal with it!
bect67 16th May 2020 at 11:56
================================
The asterisk is nonsense, what is it supposed to denote.
The league can be finalised (3 of the 4 parts of it already have been). It's already in the rules.
A4
Season means the period of the year commencing on the date of the first League Match in a Season and ending on the date of the last League Match in the same Season or otherwise as determined by the Board and which excludes the Close Season;
So as far as I am aware there is nothing stopping the SFPL board saying, it will be impossible to play the last games of the season. With a majority of the clubs' agreement we have decided to finish the season as per the leagues own rules, which allows us to pay out the "prize" money each team is owed.
Most people now believe this will happen in the top division as well, which makes perfect sense.
If it is done, then it's not a case of awarding the title to anyone, it just happens as a matter of course.
C38
The Club occupying position one in the League at the end of a Season shall be declared the Champion Club of the League and shall hold the "The Scottish Professional Football League Championship Trophy" until the next Season's League Competition is concluded.
Given that the league (in it's entirety) would be closed then the team at the top of the league would be champions, that is Celtic. It's as simple as that.
So the league would be finished, Celtic would be the champions, no need for any asterisk.
As a famous cricketer once said, when his opponent complained "That was never out". "Have a look in the papers tomorrow, I think you'll find it was". Paraphrasing obviously.
Homunculus 16th May 2020 at 13:38
The asterisk is nonsense, what is it supposed to denote.
=================
I think we all know that it is designed to somehow demean Celtic. It is quite incredible that many of the people promoting it were part of a period in time when Rangers were illegally using taxpayers money to fund success on the pitch, and benefited from that illegal tax evasion on a personal basis.
On another note it seems reconstruction is back on the table after Friday's meeting. If something can be done to help clubs who were going to have relegation forced upon them then I for one will be happy.
The rest we can leave Rangers to address through the courts if need be
I watched the first half of Dortmund (2) v Schalke (0) and was underwhelmed . It's like a pre-season friendly .
Totally baffled at the statement below from the BBC website on the resumption of reconstruction talks
It follows a top-flight club meeting yesterday where key members, including Rangers, Celtic and Aberdeen
What possible reason could there be not to write Aberdeen, Celtic and Rangers in natural alphabetic order? No doubt many will see that view as petty, but it shows just where we are regarding many in the media. Why must Rangers be mentioned first more often than not?
Is the Ibrox club going to stage another very public tantrum – this time against the SFA, if it dares to refuse a Euro license because TRFC is, erm, fu… I mean skint!
Still unsure about this though as Petrie – of the 5WA in 2012 – seems to be the main decision maker at the SFA today.
But then again, Doncaster bent over for the Ibrox club as well in 2012, yet he has now been ungratefully targeted by the Blue Room.
Would be quite helpful if RIFC/TRFC went bust before we get into planning for next season.
It’s the least they could do…
There is apparently a big reveal by RIFC/TRFC at 09.00 tomorrow . Interim accounts ? New strip supplier ? Refunds for unplayed games ? Signing Hagi ? Congratulating CFC on their record-equalling achievement ? Scott Gardiner appointed media supremo ? January's investment cash finally arriving ? Share issue ? Any other suggestions ?
paddy malarkey 16th May 2020 at 20:34
Any other suggestions ?
=================================
The largest squirrel in ever released into the wild.
Der schottische Fußball braucht einen starken Arbroath ??
al62 16th May 2020 at 21:02
Der schottische Fußball braucht einen starken Arbroath ??
====================================
Ja!
paddy malarkey 16th May 2020 at 20:34
There is apparently a big reveal by RIFC/TRFC at 09.00 tomorrow…
===========
At 9AM on a Sunday morning – during a lockdown???
Who’s going to be awake?
Unless it’s to satisfy a different time zone audience?
Oh, I know, I know!
Morelos is finally off to China for £40M / £50M / £60M …?
paddy malarkey @ 20.34
In a squirrel’s nutshell! …
“We’ve seen the error of our ways, and will now send ourselves onto the naughty step”
From The Guardian .
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/may/08/covid-19-impact-on-football-10-years-get-back-where-we-were-managers-players-scout
paddy malarkey 16th May 2020 at 20:34
…….
Another statement about nothing
paddy malarkey 16th May 2020 at 20:34
'.There is apparently a big reveal by RIFC/TRFC at 09.00 tomorrow .'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I don't doubt it, pm, but can you give your source, please?
Some of us auld guys are not quite into twitter or the blogs of other clubs or other electronic sources.
Sorry , JC , my daughter told me , and she saw it on either Rangers Media or Follow Follow . I trust my sources !
The old memory is perhaps not as absorbent as it once was, but on reading back a page or two I was struck by the name of a poster and could not for the life of me remember having seen the name before.
'Kentes 15th May 2020 at 23:34'.
I can't quite see what he may be driving at.
He makes the points that over the years
'..it was the boards of the various teams that failed their fans ' when it came to 'changing the voting structure''
and that
'.the predicament that Hearts find themselves in is really down to Anne Budge this season for some reason keeping faith in a manager/director of football
and that
'..while the CFC board have handled the last few weeks really well they have dirty hands as well ref resolution 12 etc '
I'm not sure what he meant by
'.. I think it is correct for the fans to ask questions but please ask the boards of the clubs who are threatning legal action etc first.'
It would be helpful if he would expand on what he meant by that?
paddy malarkey 17th May 2020 at 00:04
'… my daughter told me , and she saw it on either Rangers Media or Follow Follow . I trust my sources !'
""""""""""""""""""
And in no way, pm, will I, daughterless as I am, challenge any man's daughter.
But it is legitimate to quote secondary /tertiary sources, just as you have now done.
And well done to your daughter in her interest in keeping her dad up to the minute in matters football!
Paddy Malarkey.
Your sources are correct and the statement will be released at given time.
It is a lengthy document that outlines the feelings if the Board and also their next steps.
A leaked summary is as follows.
Since the disgraceful and democratic and legal demolition of our dignafied (sic) resolution by a large majority, our board has met to consider our dignafied response. It runs to 632 dignafied and indignant pages.
The board will deliver the statement to the SPFL tomorrow; by brick.
In essence.
"We will scream and scream until we make ourselves sick".
No change there.
So the big Rangers announcement was a kit deal everyone already knew about with an unheard of Company. According to Rangers, this unheard of Company 'deliberately chose Rangers as the world's most successful club'.
As a Celtic shareholder I will today be writing to the PLC Board to ask why our club is stuck with the massively inferior Adidas brand as our new supplier.
Well at least they do now have a kit deal so congratulations. Not sure how it would look seeing the World's most successful club* running out at the Bernabeu in their vest and pants .
Rangers seal huge Castore kit deal as details of new partnership confirmed
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-announce-huge-castore-kit-22040424
How do they know it's a huge deal.
From the details supplied by Castore
"In a clean break from how things have been done in the past, Rangers Football Club will benefit directly from every product we sell. The more we sell, the more money flows straight back into the club."
That reads to me like the income will be based on a percentage of sales, rather than a fixed sum with bonuses for exceeding target sales. I'm not sure how that can be described as "huge" before it even. It may well be, who knows, that's the point.
The article did note that there was no image of the new kit.
Like all things Ibrox it is huge, until it ends in tears.
Why put out an announcement on Sunday morning, most of which was known, and not even have an image of the product.
Did Sports Direct pass on their opportunity to match the deal or will they hold fire and then demolish it in court.
On the bright side, it will be ready for the 150th anniversary, in 2162.
Re Castore deal:-
“The more we sell, the more money flows (!) into the club”. Aye right!
What dae ye think o’ that Mike?
Off the radar sales to fund war chest screams DR?
Hi JC 16th May 00.21
Sorry if my post was unclear it looked fine to me when writing it and even as I checked it, maybe I should have had my Lagavulin after I wrote it?.
What I was trying to say was, the fans should be asking questions about Scottish football governance but if they think back to at least 2012, then they should realise that their respective clubs boards have failed them. While the boards always talked the talk about changes they ultimately always backed down if they had followed up their talk then things today covid 19 apart Scottish football could and should have been in a better place.
In regards to the CFC board I think they have handled things well in the recent weeks but that is not to say their hands are spotlessly clean in regards to the now infamous 5 way agreement and of course thanks to Auldheid and others we know about the delaying tactics with resolution 12 answers to these to problems need to be given not only to CFC fans but to all fans.
About Hearts being a manager at a big club is difficult but to be the DoF aswell seems a strange choice especially when a blind man and his dog could see he was struggling as the manager so it made it difficult to sack him because would you have to sack him as th DoF aswell. In regards to the threat of legal action it was Homonculus I think who showed the rule about the SPFLboard having the right to call the league so how can anyone state it would be unfair to relegate a team who is bottom when the league is called, I think it is maybe a bit of a smokescreen to cover for her mistake in keeping levein as the manager when struggling if that is wrong then I apologise but that is what it seemed like to me.
Hope this is clearer this time no Lagavulin was involved this time
Den 17th May 2020 at 08:14
The board will deliver the statement to the SPFL tomorrow; by brick.
In essence.
"We will scream and scream until we make ourselves sick".
============================================
Den, was that quote from Just William of Orange?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
I wonder if Dodgy Dave knows who Castore's new investors are?.
So Morelos is staying at Ibrox for now then.
And could CFC be named SPL Champions tomorrow?
Otherwise, why all the good news, TRFC stories today across the SMSM?
The 'huge' kit deal – but with negligible detail shared.
TRFC being 'linked' with 2 new transfer targets!
A £250K refurbishment of the Megastore.
And the best one: when Minty 'missed out' on signing that great player back in the day: Gianlucca Vialli!
It's all going great down Govan way…
Sorry about the politics (and lack of competence to import the image !)
So Scotland , Wales and Northern Ireland are to satay at home ?
Sounds more like the World Cup finals .
https://twitter.com/partickthistle/status/1262016220330627074?s=21
The above tweet is in relation to the back page of the Sunday Mail. I know times are tough in the newspaper industry but what the Mail have done today is unbelievable.
Ex Ludo 17th May 2020 at 15:23
I think they have just committed suicide . No apology will remove the stain .
Ex Ludo 15:23 totally out of order , they should be hammered for that but they wont be. Gutter Press does'nt come close to describing that . Thank god I stopped buying that "newspaper " years ago .
Perhaps, the Sunday Mail is copying TRFC tactics ?
Create a commotion out of nothing to gain attention, to still feel relevant – and maybe even generate a much needed, financial boost?
A last throw of the dice before this pitiful rag disappears?
Hopefully.
Yes StevieBC so many similarities when comparing the 2 of them, they deserve each other
Kentes 17th May 2020 at 12:12
‘..JC 16th May 00.21………………………..
..Sorry if my post was unclear ..’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Thank you, Kentes, and apologies.
I was reading it through the bottom of my wee glass of cheap hooch!
My fault entirely for not grasping the point.
Hi John Clark 17th May 19.32.
Not a problem it is a reason that I don't post so often as I find it easier to say what I think rather than writing it down. When I look at some of the posts I think geez I feel as though I couldn't hold a candle to some of you guys with most things being written so concisely.
Anyway glad I wrote it out again I was just getting a bit frustrated seeing a fair few posts popping up complaining about governance etc and again some I felt were trying to make it into the usual 2 cheeks of the a**e drivel.
Right hopefully that's cleared it up now I can enjoy my wee malt
Cheers
With them not being in the 'football' loop, do you think Castore might be completely unaware of the possible issue regarding Sports Direct? I can hardly imagine so, but equally can't imagine SD having walked away from their court-approved matching arrangement. We all know how easily a desperate TRFC can be for cash/good news to announce that I CAN imagine them forgetting to mention it if Castore were unaware.
I take it SD has made no comment either way?
Almost absolutely and entirely OT on this quiet night, let me say that I am by no means a man of business, as I think I've mentioned before.
But I do have an enquiring mind, always ready to learn by questioning.
Recently, as I also mentioned before, I was researching 'Castore' in relation to TRFC, and learned that it is a two -man outfit which just has a clothing 'brand' , and does not actually itself manufacture clothing.
I concluded (I can be quite sharp, at times!) that Castore must therefore get a manufacturer to produce the clothing that will carry the 'Castore' brand name.
Tonight, it being very quiet, I had some interesting and educational fun looking into that world- the world of the production of clothing.
On the fringes of my mind was the possibility that an Asian business newspaper may have carried a story about a company in the UK that had won the contract to produce 500 000 000 football tops etc for the self-styed 'most successful club in the world'
But of course there is no way that I am equipped ever to find out whether an Asian manufacturing company/companies (where a huge percentage of the world's clothing is manufactured) or a European company, may be in contract with Castore to produce the Castore brand of football clothing for TRFC.
However, I enjoyed learning , as an intellectual exercise without any reference to the 'saga' , that there is an organisation called Clothing Manufacturers Asia (CMA Ethical Manufacturing, so probably wouldn't ever deal with unethical clients)
If, like me, you are beginning to feel some slight effects of the 'lockdown', you might enjoy a visit to
https://www.clothingmanufacturersasia.com/about-us/
and read through its interesting and informative pages.
Its FAQ page must be one of the best of its type that I've seen.
Their PR people know what they're about.
I should maybe say that my reference to it being a 'quiet night' (my post of 23.46 last evening) does not signify that I am indifferent to the scabrous, venomous choice of images that appeared in a dirty rag of a newspaper ,that were aimed at and would appeal to feeble minds easily stirred to violence.
There are some very, very bad folk in the newspaper world, whose children will be ashamed of what they did for a living.
May the Sunday Mail die the death of Liquidation.
The manufacturers appear to be in Portugal John. They must be a super efficient outfit, having gone from replying to Sevco's advert just three months ago, to having their name leaked in connection only last month. (I think Spee & Dee Gonzales handled the negotiations and legal matters, and Roe Drunner will be the preferred courier service.
).
https://www.drapersonline.com/people/the-drapers-interview/castore-the-brand-chasing-sporting-glory/7033416.article
There are of course two similar sounding companies listed. "Castore Ltd", and "Castore Limited". One was a mail order company, now dissolved, and the other a newly incorporated……errrr mail order company….(unless somebody is giving them a wee lend of a pop-up superstore or something).
I expect the pre-order, money up front, details will be released as soon as somebody draws a wee picture of a jersey.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09967258 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/12540295
Looks to me like the two brothers are going to be performing FRONT of house duties. Wyle e Coyote will be much too busy for interviews and the like.
.
John Clark 18th May 2020 at 01:02
May the Sunday Mail die the death of Liquidation.
=================
While I agree the photo yesterday was over the top, the same paper years ago had a hearse and undertaker photographed outside Celtic Park, with the headline RIP Celtic. The media thought that was fine and other fans thought it was a hoot. That completely ignored the fact that a Scottish owned bank was trying its hardest to put Celtic out of business, while affording an almost limitless overdraft to Rangers. There has been much talk recently of investigations. The Bank of Scotland's involvement with Rangers when under Scottish ownership is due one of its own in my view.
So, Castore isn’t a cultured Italian sweeper seeing out the golden years of his career in Glasgow then? I obviously haven’t been paying attention.
Seriously though the kit deal of the century has all the hallmarks of a Kirstie Allsop make do and mend operation fronted by two young guys from the Barra’s. I’m no PR guru but appearing in a publicity photograph wearing Adidas training shoes is a bit of a faux pas.
It's worth remembering that the company run by the Beahon brothers is not called 'Castore', but the J. Carter Sporting Company Ltd, company number 09670915 : 'Castore' is the brand name, and the Beahon boys have , presumably , made a deal with a manufacturer to produce the gear on their design.
It was when I saw that the J Carter Sporting Company had only 2 employees (i.e, the two brothers) that I went exploring how that all works, and that led me on the visit to the CMA .
I looked at Asia rather than Europe because it's in Asian countries that the cheap, sweated, labour force is found.
Not that I would suggest for a minute that the Liverpudlians would enter into contract with manufacturers who exploited their labour forces.
It should be easy enough to identify which manufacturer in Portugal won the contract? I think it may be that there is a middle-man there on an agency basis, who in turn will be linked via CMA ( which embraces lots of bigger manufacturers).
A pleasant hour or two of 'lockdown boredom' time-passing beckons.
Here's to it!
John Clark 18th May 2020 at 11:07
It's worth remembering that the company run by the Beahon brothers is not called 'Castore', but the J. Carter Sporting Company Ltd, company number 09670915 : 'Castore' is the brand name, and the Beahon boys have , presumably , made a deal with a manufacturer to produce the gear on their design.
===============================
You might be interested in this JC.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EYNdk7VWsAAocnN?format=jpg&name=360×360 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EYNdkkrWkAAgWpi?format=jpg&name=360×360
Remember when they done the switcheroo?…..Would this be as funny, or funnier?
https://twitter.com/Heavidor/status/1262318611928145921
Today's herald sport section. Mark Hendry going big on the £25m multi year deal. Quote from Tom Beahon.
"The largest shareholders in Castore, other than myself and Phil, are one of Britain's wealthiest families. Despite what I have read a couple of weeks ago, it's not Mike Ashley! They are very private guys, multi-billionaires who have really given us their backing".
Those are a couple of interesting links, CO. What can they mean? I like David Low’s tweet from within the 11.58 one – “Well, if there’s no kit deal, there’s nothing for His Mikeness to match? That would mean Castore is just a flag of convenience, wouldn’t it?”. When Castore was first announced (and so being investigated), I think I remember reading on here and on TRFC sites that Castore had taken a big loan at the start of the year with the implication taken that this was to finance their expanse into the football mass-market world, starting with TRFC. That soothed many a worried head on TRFC sites as it seemed to explain how this small company could possibly support the HUUUUGE fanbase of “the Rangers”. What if those funds (£7.5m from memory) weren’t a loan but a takeover, hence the ‘Cessation of interest’ documents you posted at 11.40? It couldn’t seriously be Big Mike, could it, but that could explain my query from last night as to why he appears to have walked away. Is that just naughty wishful thinking on my part? Bordersdon’s post seems to be Castore still saying “It’s kosher, guys, honest”.
I think there are a couple of possibilities Nawlite. My guess is that the Sevco Superstore has replaced the pop-up shops, (a dry-run?), and Castore have just put El-mich-Eal Ashlee, an Istanbul market-trader, out of business.
Or dodgy Dave has done a £20 for me, £2 for you, deal via David Jason (Delboy, believe it or not) McLaughlin, of Castore Limited, using Castore Ltd branding….Links on my post of 02:27 last night.
League called. Possibility of a lifeboat for Hearts via temporary reconstruction 'expanding the top flight'.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52646282
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Corrupt official 18th May 2020 at 11:58
Remember when they done the switcheroo?…..Would this be as funny, or funnier? https://twitter.com/Heavidor/status/1262318611928145921
==============
Absolutely!
I'll stick with my original guess: TRFC will play in unbranded kit next season, if at all!
It is shocking – even for the Ibrox omnishambles – that such a high profile contract which the supporters would take particular interest in – has supposedly been handed to a tiny business without the required experience, sales channels, partnering network, etc…
I wouldn't guess that Big Mike has any involvement though.
However, it's such a weird / amateurish set-up that I could readily believe that someone at Ibrox, (or SA?), is trying to pull a fast one to skim off a personal cut?
David Low is busy today.
https://twitter.com/Heavidor/status/1262356000625102849
StevieBC 18th May 2020 at 13:29
'..It is shocking – even for the Ibrox omnishambles – that such a high profile contract which the supporters would take particular interest in – has supposedly been handed to a tiny business without the required experience, sales channels, partnering network, etc…'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
If you have a look at the link I gave earlier, Stevie, and read through,
https://www.clothingmanufacturersasia.com/about-us/
you'll see what seems to be a normal practice followed by designers of clothing : they will patent their design, and send it off to manufacturing companies (perhaps using CMA) which have the mills, and the fabrics, and the labour forces and machinery, using the manufacturer's specifications sheet showing exactly what they want -the fabric, the colours, the logos, lettering , the sizes range.
The manufacturers will take it from there.
Even I could fill in the specification sheets, I suppose, if I was a dress-designer familiar with the trade language, and knew a seam from a gushet.
I've no personal animus against the Beahon brothers and their shareholders (except that they are prepared to deal with a business that I myself wouldn't touch with a barge pole, and buy into the untruthful crap that emanates from Ibrox.
What would be of interest is how much per shirt, shorts, stockings , jackets on which the brand name 'Castore' is stitched does the J Carter Sporting Club get from the selling price.
I read that they have a hoodie or a jacket that is silver coloured by day, absorbs the light of the sun, and turn green at night which will sell for £600.
They'd need to watch that their brand name doesn't lose value by being on a common or garden fitba'tap available to much lesser figures than Andy Murray.
‘John Clark 18th May 2020 at 15:07
…They’d need to watch that their brand name doesn’t lose value by being on a common or garden fitba’tap available to much lesser figures than Andy Murray.’
#######################################
The auld cynic in me thinks that they’ve discovered the market for ‘mid-level’ clothing is very tough to break into, even with/despite a non-playing Andy Murray’s support. If last year’s figure of £750k turnover is accurate, that’s not a lot of sales at their quoted prices.
I suspect that their fitba’ related gear will be treated as a cheaper, ‘diffusion’ or ‘bridge’ line (more fashion lingo for you to assimilate, John!), with prices perhaps less than half of their current ‘signature’ (ooops, mair lingo!) offerings. We’ll see in the coming weeks.
Let us hope the SPFL clubs agree to reconstruction, even if only for a season or two. It is the right thing to do and suits the majority of the member clubs. Well causes detriment to the lowest number is probably more accurate.
Celtic now offering refunds for the cancelled games now that the league has been called. If you do not request a refund your money remains in the club. Personally I won’t ask for a refund but not everyone can afford to do that.
I imagine any season ticket holder from any club will have a statutory right to a refund should they wish.
Homunculus 18th May 2020 at 18:16
I think I may have inadvertently started an SFM Poll on the reconstruction issue.
Should I thumb up myself, it just seems wrong.
upthehoops 18th May 2020 at 18:51
I would imagine that would depend on the individual T&Cs people agree to when they got their ticket. However I suppose some could do it as a gesture. I just don't see clubs being able to afford that just now.
From a SFM point of view I will be glad when all of this stuff from the past month is no longer a hot topic. I want the Jambos back for instance.
I can understand that the blog has appeared more Celtic centric recently. Because of the connections between;
Hampden – Rangers/sevco – governance – 2011 onwards – corruption – mistrust – club's self interest – priorities – etc etc.
But mixed up in all that was relegation. Personally I feel for PT more than any other. Sorry Jambos! The least worst option for me would have been the temp. solution. 14 team premiership. But the whole set up needs a longer look and permanent. With FORESIGHT.
And we had the weird feelings with a lot of Celtic supporters, like me, who had as much love for Neil Doncaster in his roles at Hampden as we did for Regan et. al., but almost supporting him because the club from Ibrox were the ones who had the bare faced cheek to be leaders in the demand for better governance. Anne Budge got caught up in this for her own reasons. But does not come out of this smelling of roses. She should have distanced herself and Hearts much, much more forcefully from the dubious reasons and ambitions of TRFC. Whatever they were. (chuckle). She should have stuck to her guns on relegation. To blindly support TRFC, by her own admission, was foolish. Would have been better if she came up with her own resolution.
I know I'll not be speaking for other Thistle supporters in saying that , although we weren't the worst team in the division , we'd played ourselves into the position we were in when the season was ended . We actually looked like we were turning the corner , and if we'd turned the draws into wins , especially at home , we would have been safe . It's not nice to be relegated (again!) but it gives you hope that we might win a game or two when football resumes (thought that this year too !) . Apart from the financial setback , I don't see where Ann Budge is coming from – Hearts were by far the worst side I've seen in the past couple of years , including us , and she should accept that it was her loyalty to an incompetent manager that put paid to their season – we had one in Caldwell . Look to the future !
Homunculus18th May 2020 at 19:04
========
I never really considered the terms and conditions question. It's a fair point.
TBH I think most fans if they can afford to will not ask for a refund. It's what fans do when their club needs help, and the season tickets will have been paid for some time ago.
John Clark 18th May 2020 at 11:07
I looked at Asia rather than Europe because it’s in Asian countries that the cheap, sweated, labour force is found.
……………
Looking for some help here with the memory.
I seem to remember David murray i think switched the manufacture of the ibrox replica kit to a far off distant land, but never told the fans as they were still paying top dollar for a kit made for a small outlay. Problems arouse when the replica kit after one was started to bobble (looked as if it had been worn and washed a hundred times) the material looked the same as the official kit but the material was of a lesser quality and could not stand up to the wash.
If i remember hand wash only was the remedy but most wanted a cash refund or a better quality shirt for the price they paid.
Any help with this memory, or is the mind playing tricks?
Homunculus 18th May 2020 at 19:04
upthehoops 18th May 2020 at 18:51
…………..
Celtic and the ibrox club’s terms and conditions.
https://twitter.com/JBLuvsCeltic/status/1262453415898001408/photo/1
Celtic. If the club is umable to complete a match fixture to provide a result for the purpouse of the football authorities due to causes beyond the control of the club,and the match fixture is not re-scheduled, the holder will be compensated for any corresponding reduction in services.
…..
The ibrox club. The club cannot eccept any liability for any expense incurred even in the event that the match is cancelled.
To keep with the Fleetwood Mac theme of the blog title – I am someone who has been running in the shadows for many years.
I can't help feeling that clubs are getting their knickers in a twist over who are in which leagues next season for no reason. We will not know for a few months what teams will be playing in Scottish Football next season. For now all teams should be listed in one table top to bottom as the concluded leagues state. Planning should be undertaken by the leagues on the basics like the hows and whys football can be played here, the safety of players, officials and fans. Most importantly, the clubs should be considering whether putting additional stress on our front line services by playing is morally and socially justified. The composition of the leagues can wait.
We are being driven towards finalised league structures not by the sport but by the businesses. The teams that are being relegated are complaining of the loss in revenue brought about by playing in a lower league but at the same time are accepting the money from the broadcasting deals. It is the finalisation of these deals that would appear to be the driving force behind the league structures being known now. Is that what we want for our sport?
Our fight against COVID19 is with us for the long run and all the talk of starting the new season should not be driven by financial necessity. Football is no different from any other business in the country and those involved in it deserve no preferential treatment. So when chairmen or players bleat about the possible loss of income our view in return should be to balance their concerns against the same threat to tradesmen, factory workers our council employees. In fact, the bigger earners in our sport should be treated with a lesser concern as, if they were unable to build a rainy day fund, their profligacy is what has put them in the position the find themselves.
Cluster One 18th May 2020 at 23:18
omunculus 18th May 2020 at 19:04
upthehoops 18th May 2020 at 18:51
…………..
Celtic and the ibrox club’s terms and conditions.
https://twitter.com/JBLuvsCeltic/status/1262453415898001408/photo/1
Celtic. If the club is umable to complete a match fixture to provide a result for the purpouse of the football authorities due to causes beyond the control of the club,and the match fixture is not re-scheduled, the holder will be compensated for any corresponding reduction in services.
…..
The ibrox club. The club cannot eccept any liability for any expense incurred even in the event that the match is cancelled.
=========================================
C1, I saw and commented on the Rangers* clause some time back. I’m not a lawyer but it didn’t seem to me to be a clear cut statement that there would be no refund if matches were cancelled. What it did say was that they accepted no responsibility for any “expense incurred even in the event that the match was cancelled’.
Does that imply that they DO have responsibility for a partial refund of the season ticket? If not, why not also make that crystal clear in the same clause?
Rangers* only appear to exclude a responsibility to cover an expense incurred. There was no definition of ‘expense’ or ‘expense incurred’ in the passage I saw. Does ‘expense incurred’ include the cost of the ticket? Is the “expense incurred” the costs resultant on the changed match timing or cancellation? Arguable I suspect – any legal precedent?
The Celtic* clause covering this seems fairly clear to me. “If the Club is unable to complete a match fixture to provide a result for the purposes of the football authorities due to causes beyond the control of the Club, and that match fixture is not re-scheduled, the Holder will be compensated for any corresponding reduction in services.”
For reasons beyond Celtic’s control the matches cannot be completed and are not being re-scheduled = a refund.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Celtic* – joshing, folks… 🙂
redlichtie
Maybe it's ticketus the fans should be claiming, just a thought
I believe the basic rule with any contract is that if there is an area of dubiety then it should be read to favour the party which did not draw up the agreement.
That could however just be something I got into my head, I have no way of substantiating it whatsoever.
It might be called contra proferentem.
Homunculus 19th May 2020 at 10:38
I believe the basic rule with any contract is that if there is an area of dubiety then it should be read to favour the party which did not draw up the agreement.
That could however just be something I got into my head, I have no way of substantiating it whatsoever.
It might be called contra proferentem.
==================================
I’m with you on this Homunculus.
The Competition and Markets Authority might have something to say about that clause too. https://www.coronavirus-business-complaint.service.gov.uk/ (“Report a business behaving unfairly during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak”)
Rangers* will have insurance to cover it anyway. Won’t they?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Cluster One 18th May 2020 at 23:02
'..Looking for some help here with the memory………I seem to remember David murray i think switched the manufacture of the ibrox..'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Sadly, Cluster One, I can't recall : but it sounds like the kind of flanker a loyal knight of the Realm who used a dodgy tax scheme would pull!
Further to my post @ 9:25
The fans of the teams that are "disadvantaged" by the final league placings should consider why they are objecting. Their teams are disadvantaged at a business level to a degree that changes could be called for to compensate that but at the football level I do not believe there is a fairer alternative. The rules are clear that the leagues can be called and I do not believe that there can be any more straight forward reason to call them than the risk to the health of a large amount of people. Accept that and how the positions have been decided is far and away the least unfair. This has not been done by "freezing" the place that all teams are at the time the league is ended. It is working the positions from the average performance of the teams over a seven month period. To argue "Aye but we could have …." is delve into the unknown. Those that argue this way would be happy, in the main, to have the leagues finished at a later date and not called now. That would have definite "known" disadvantages for some teams who may have to field weaker teams because player contracts running down. There is no method that would be completely painless.
Of course we are hearing calls for changes to the leagues but this too will adversely affect some clubs. The call by teams like Hearts to make the changes, but only if it is guaranteed to be temporary, are forcing clubs to adjust their financial model to play in a higher league only to be forced to return to the lower league when we have a 3 or 4 team relegation in a couple of seasons.
Many teams will be disadvantaged by the calling of the leagues (my own, Hibs, will lose c.£100K) but what we have at present is far and away the fairest to my mind.
Mickey Edwards
Thank you for putting into words what I've struggled to do! Agreed that relegation might not be fair but any temporary change, which Ann Budge was promoting, will inevitably lead to more unfairness in the future.
Take the words of Stephen Pressley, in the Daily Record online, where he has criticised the SPFL for their decision to relegate Hearts and promotes the idea of 14 team leagues as being the fairest way forward. He then goes on to suggest it'll be just one of those things that 3 or 4 clubs may have to be relegated in a season or two! Not a surprise that he also accuses others of self interest!
Adam812 @ 14:36
In a business context self interest is not only acceptable but should be encouraged as it is what is expected of directors of any company. Where it becomes unacceptable is when a handful of companies hold power over the majority by having a de facto monopoly written into the conditions of a trade organisation that itself can prevent non-members from operating the same business in the country.
It gets worse when that business is responsible for running a sport. The two are incompatible.
The sport is not considered when chairmen argue over loss of income. This is most glaring when a business signs contracts that guarantee conditions that the sport cannot provide with the certainty that contract law requires. Four Celtic/TRFC league matches in one season spring to mind.
In the case of Hearts, Ann Budge is looking for the sport's rules to be altered to compensate for the dent in the company's balance book that this season's mismanagement has created. It goes further back than one season with uncontrolled personnel spending and a new stand that is c.£10M over-budget. Perhaps she should look not to the sporting administrators for monetary recompense but to the business associates and contractors that allowed a building project to run so far out of control. The fact that the control of this project was awarded to one of her own family might be an appropriate starting place.
But we are talking business again and the sporting aspect is being ignored.
https://twitter.com/oldfirmfacts1/status/1262751175071289349?s=21
Lord Foulkes just a wee bit behind the curve.
Neeext!!!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52728938
See Phil's posted it on his, too. Auldheid?
The Scottish FA has dropped charges against Rangers over alleged irregularities in paperwork which allowed them to compete in the 2011/12 Champions League.
It had been considering legal action in the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland, but has now effectively killed off any prospect of disciplinary action over the long-running issue.
The saga began when “contradictions” were found between information in Rangers’ application for a licence to play in UEFA’s premier club tournament and testimony given during the fraud trial of former owner Craig Whyte.
Rangers claimed in the application they had no tax debts – which must be declared to qualify for a licence – but former directors said in court that the club knew they had an overdue bill.
ADVERT
The Scottish FA brought charges against the club, but due to the ‘five-way agreement’, which allowed Rangers to play in the Scottish Football League after liquidation in 2012, any dispute between the parties has to be heard by the specialist sports court.
An SFA-convened independent panel upheld that jurisdiction agreement 18 months ago, with the governing body sent away to consider its next steps.
After a lengthy internal review and receiving legal advice, the Hampden board has now decided to drop the charges rather than fight a lengthy and expensive legal battle.
The club were originally charged under the 2011/12 rulebook, which only allowed for a standard fine of £5,000 for breaking the rules, or a top end fine of £10,000 in extreme circumstances.
ADVERT
The Scottish FA hierarchy felt the costs of pursuing the case in Lausanne, which could run to six figures, were prohibitive to a charge that would merit only a maximum £10,000 fine. The board were also advised that the prospects of victory at CAS were not high.
A brief statement on the Scottish FA website read: “A Judicial Panel convened to consider a Notice of Complaint raised against Rangers FC in 2018 – in relation to alleged new evidence regarding representations received prior to the awarding of a European licence for season 2011/12 – determined at a preliminary hearing that it did not have jurisdiction to determine the matter.
“Instead, it concluded that jurisdiction lay with the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
“Following consideration of the implications of such a referral, including legal opinion, it was the board’s unanimous position that this matter should not be referred to CAS.
“The Scottish FA now considers the matter to be closed.”
……………..
The cost is too nuch and are afraid of the implications, is that what they are saying?
Cluster One @ 16:13
Oh well, at least big Peter vill be happy..
And all perfectly timed , while Celtic fans are celebrating their title win and Rangers fans crying in their beer. , says it all really about the SFA . Im sure Celtic knew about this and hoped that there wouldnt be too much of a stink as their as their fans would be distracted by title celebrations . .Come to think of it , How the hell have Rangers been allowed to play in Europe next season ( if they are still with us ) . No way do they meet UEFA ffp
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52728938
Quelle Surprise!!!!
The SFA know they are every bit as guilty as RFC in this matter and have never wanted it investigated.
Crowd fund the Res12 guys to take it to court
"The Scottish FA brought charges against the club, but due to the ‘five-way agreement’, which allowed Rangers to play in the Scottish Football League after liquidation in 2012, any dispute between the parties has to be heard by the specialist sports court."
Confirmation the SFA has no jurisdiction over 2angers.
normanbatesmumfc 16.51
crowd fund Res 12 guys to take it to court……..I think that be a popular proposal
I wonder if Auldheid and the gang would be up for that
Well, there we have it then! "..“Following consideration of the implications of such a referral,"
Gutless wonders , feart that some people might have to face criminal charges. Proof positive that our Football Governance is based on fear, greed, falsehood and moral turpitude.
Bad cess to the wicked , wicked unprincipled swine. May their personal rewards/fortunes from the business of football die with their football clubs!
What absolute mugs we would be to think of contributing even one penny to line the pockets of such as those.
Mickey Edwards 19th May 2020 at 15:10
“Ann Budge is looking for the sport’s rules to be altered to compensate for the dent in the company’s balance book that this season’s mismanagement has created.”
No, she’s looking for the opportunity to address the unfairness of being punished for the entirely random acts and timing of an unprecedented global pandemic, a situation other clubs agree nobody should suffer as a result of, yet bizarrely vote in financial self-interest against the only action which would avoid such unfairness.
Yes, Budge and Hearts have been abysmal in most of the thirty league games played, but not one single person can say with guaranteed certainty that they weren’t going to haul back a four point defecit within the 24 points available to play for.
St Johnstone spent many weeks firmly rooted to the foot of the table before a six game golden spell saw them leap up the table to the safety of sixth place. Ross County couldn’t buy a win before the season was ended early.
Rangers* looked like leapfrogging over Celtic at the top of the table at the tail end of December, yet Celtic pulled 13 points clear a handful of games later, further demonstrating that nobody can accurately predict what would happen in the final eight or nine matches.
Do Partick Thistle deserve to be relegated despite being only two points behind with a game in hand on Queen of the South, or did their off-field business not contribute to their perilous league position in the same way as Hearts?
If the SPFL genuinely wanted to look after all its 42 members, rather than just 39 of them, I’m sure it could have found a way of tying such a proposal into the release of prize money, just as it did a few short weeks ago amid such acrimony.
I know it must be difficult for the Celtic-minded majority on here to put themselves in Hearts, Partick Thistle and Stranraer’ position, but I can assure you there isn’t one club or support who would sit back and do nothing in the face of the expulsion forced on those three clubs in such unprecedented circumstances.
Highlander 19th May 2020 at 18:04
'…to address the unfairness of being punished for the entirely random acts and timing of an unprecedented global pandemic'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
…whereas our wretched Governance people are rolling over , happy to let RFC of 1872 (RFC 2012) and people associated with the Res 12 issue escape any scrutiny, in spite of that club and at least some of its officers being definitely guilty of sports cheating and possibly guilty of much worse.
Hearts indeed are innocent of any charge of cheating and are deserving of better consideration.
RFC of 1872on the other hand and its then officers were guilty of sports cheating on a grand scale yet will escape any kind of forensic investigation into their murky actions a decade ago.
It's pitiful that we are so incapable of finding honest brokers in our Sports governance.
The SFA continues to take the p!ss out of the paying punters.
Can us fans not agitate to ditch both the SFA and the SPFL from the Scottish game?
It might not be our ball but it’s definitely our game – and these 2 bodies continue to fail US spectacularly season after season, and nothing seems to change or improve.
Highlander 19th May 2020 at 18:04
Thistle ST holder here , Highlander , who reckons that we might be taking one for the team , but also reckons that it's time to accept that this league season has ended . The unplayed matches have been decided on a points-per-game basis , and the tables finalised . By all means look at reconstruction , but let it be for the right reason , and not to save poorly performing clubs from being relegated . Are we to go through reconstruction every time a "big" club underperforms and finds itself relegated ? My sympathy, if any , lies with the clubs denied a chance of promotion . We should accept that we are where we are , and be working , as a single ,disciplined unit , on plans to take us where we want to be . Unfortunately , all I see are vested interests and selfishness .
RES12 wasn't about Sevco, or Rangers(I.L.), but their co-accused, The SFA.
The fact that the SFA bottled out of charging their co-accused, has no bearing on the allegations the SFA faced. The SFA may well consider the matter closed, but that is not their domain to decide. The RES12 bhoys will be the ones who decide if the matter is closed. I hope they pursue the matter further. Fraud is fraud.
Imagine the scene.
PC Plod….."Did you smash that windae?"
Wee ned….."Aye, but the matter is closed!"
PC Plod…."Fair enough, On yir way then".
Time for an SFM petition open to any other stakeholders to join?
"Scottish football supporters have no confidence in the SFA and SPFL."
Scottish Football needs to register dissatisfaction with the football authorities at this critical time.
Highlander,
The season is what it is because of an unprecedented world event. In any sport you can only work with the known knowns to settle the outcomes. In a sporting context there can only be an end to the uncertainty by framing the result within the rules at the time of the cessation. The rules do not have anything about extending the leagues to prevent "unfairness". To blame self interest as the reason for Hearts possible relegation is turning a blind eye to Budge's assertion that she would chair the restructuring group only if they stuck to her demands- the change MUST be temporary. What were you saying about self interest?
As a olive branch may I offer what I said in my first post. I believe that Hearts will be in the top division when hostilities resume. For just one top tier club to go to the wall will mean every other club will move up one place in the structure and every team that fears they are about to be relegated will still be in their current league.
Of course, if today's events are anything to go by a spanner may head into the works if it is TRFC that hits the buffer. I expect everything possible to be done to ensure a team is playing out of Ibrox next season. I suggest that that is the time to sharpen up your pitchfork.
I think efforts should be made to force the publication of the five-way-agreement , as it seems to supersede all football rules and regs in Scotland . I would suggest that TRFC and CFC fans are united in wishing to see this aberration in the public domain as they see it as being detrimental to their club's wellbeing . and the rest of us see it as being detrimental to the game up here as a whole . If I recall correctly (quiet at the back!) , we were told that it was BDO who had objected , and don't know if anything can be done , if that is the case .
I wouldn't like to guess what Auldheid's reaction to this news will be. He has, I think, not ruled out going to court in the past. His group do not have direct access to the CAS, so without the co-operation of eg Celtic then the Court of Session it would have to be. I think!
If crowd funding is required count me in! Likewise a petition.
A court case might just be the tool or spark to see significant reconstruction on football governance in Scotland.
The Scottish FA brought charges against the club, but due to the ‘five-way agreement’, which allowed Rangers to play in the Scottish Football League after liquidation in 2012, any dispute between the parties has to be heard by the specialist sports court.
……………..
The question now is if any other charges for anything are brought against an ibrox club, will the 5 way agreement come into play?
A lot of journalists these last few months have been crying out for transparency, i wonder if we will hear their voices in the coming days?
The club were originally charged under the 2011/12 rulebook, which only allowed for a standard fine of £5,000 for breaking the rules, or a top end fine of £10,000 in extreme circumstances.
the Hampden board has now decided to drop the charges rather than fight a lengthy and expensive legal battle.
The club were originally charged under the 2011/12 rulebook,
………….
There are charges to be brought but the SFA don’t want to pursue them ias they believe it will cost too much and also shine a light on the SFA.
Cluster One 19th May 2020 at 21:23 Edit
If that is you or any other SFM contributor jousting with JasBoyd on Twitter I would save my fingers.
He is evidence resistant in that anything that challenges his narrative becomes an never ending semantics tennis match.
He might have a point somewhere in there if there was no question that what the SFA were given on 30th March 2011 as proof that no payable existed at 31st March, was a letter stating that a payable did not exist at 31st Dec. A potential liability existed then but from 21st March a payable existed.
RFC tried to get the bank to agree to pay and HMRC were ready to wait a while if the bank agreed but when you approach the bank to pay you are not talking about a potential liability you are talking about a payable.
So the proof offered describing a payable as a potential liability on 30th March was a lie under UEFA terminology. In fact UEFA only use the term "payable" and not liability in their rules.
However apart from it not being about whether a payable existed (overdue or not) Jas states Auldheid shelled out £30k of shareholders money as if they were being led a dance.
1. The amount was a third of that so he is lying.
2. The main contributors (3) knew exactly what they were funding.
3. The one crowd funding attempt was in fact independently carried out by CQN by sale of T Shirts and the excess raised (over £800 from memory) was given to Marys Meals.
He also goes on about Celtic lawyers saying internally at Celtic there was no case to answer. Well that is news to the requisitioners A feature of this whole debacle has been Celtic's reluctance to make a statement one way or another in respect of did a case exist, particularly after being handed the evidence that a payable existed at 31st March and how that influenced the non application of the relevant rule, with suggestion Celtic approach UEFA privately to get an answer and if UEFA confirmed no case then the matter would be closed. Celtic never did. So again a pack of lies that Celtic knew no case to answer.
I refuse to engage with the guy for the above reason he is so desperate to be right he tells lies and if he is prepared to do that how dependable is the rest of what he writes?
He does his fellow Rangers supporters no favours by lying to them about Res12 attempts to do what his club have suddenly realised, Scottish football governance is corrupt and if he does not see that add hypocrisy to his mendacity.
Auldheid 19th May 2020 at 22:26
For jas i have a tolerance level. I like to see how the other half work. and i don’t have the heart to block (although i should and save my fingers)The dregs he drags along with him are stretching my tolerance level of him though.
Sometimes an old dog has to be put down though, even when it goes against what you want.
My previous leads nicely to where the SFA have put Celtic and the governance of Scottish football by their statement without an explanation for closing the matter.
Only an explanation that sets out whether the licence was processed within the rules in 2011 (and there is one about telling the truth) and that there was no breach of the Article governing overdue payables OR the other Article requiring Rangers to notify the SFA of any change in circumstances since they granted the licence on 19th April 2011, a change which happened on 20th May six days before UEFA were notified of Scottish clubs to whom licence had been granted on 26th May will bring closure. All else is avoidance.
Anything less is dereliction of duty by the SFA to carry out their responsibility to administer THEIR judicial protocol on which the credibility of Scottish football depends.
When supporters buy an ST for loyalty reasons what assurances can clubs give that the rules on which the game depends are being upheld without fear or favour?
What protocol allows Petrie an architect of the 5 Way Agreement to sit as Chairman on The SFA Board that have decided to stop investigating the basis of the decision by the Licensing Committee that Petrie chaired in 2011?
Celtic still are answerable to their shareholders at AGMs, which is where this will go next unless they make a statement either that no deception took place and support it or that it did, but in the long term interests of Scottish football they will not pursue the compensation that the evidence at https://www.res12.uk/ suggests they are entitled to seek.
Its still not over.
With the old rangers dead the spotlight would have shone on the SFA, It is no wonder they want it dropped.
jimbo 19th May 2020 at 20:24
‘.I wouldn’t like to guess what Auldheid’s reaction to this news will be.’
“”””””””””””””””
I suspect that it will be the same as that of any of us who simply cannot believe that the SFA can so contemptuously dismiss the prima facie evidence that falsehoods were told by the club that was seeking a UEFA competitions licence.
And that that falsehood may have been endorsed by the SFA licensing committee.
These are serious matters that an already very suspect ‘governance body’ cannot be allowed to sweep under the carpet!
God’s truth! What have we got here? Rotten bastards as rotten as some of those who cheated the taxman or those who created the monstrous Big Lie?
Men of straw, unprincipled as the tykes that killed RFC of 1872?
Yes, that’s what we have.
Would you give a penny now to any of the owners of/ major shareholders in any football club?
Hell mend ye!
[I now see that Auldheid has spoken: sorry about that, I hadn’t refreshed afore I posted!]
Auldheid 19th May 2020 at 22:52
'..Its still not over…'.
"""""""""""""""""
Absolutely.
I think that I would now want to test the integrity of the COPFS.
I, as a humble citizen, believe that a crime may have been committed.
Would I be safe in going to a polis station near me to report my concerns?
Would I feel safe?
Not in the least.
and I live in Edinburgh!
Where ,as it happens, the arch-cheat of football has 'managed' to get permission for a big 'development'!
https://twitter.com/ChrisSuttonCSC/status/1262786510715342855
Celtic have offered season ticket holders a refund on the unplayed matches. Some will accept the refund, and some not, and it is very hard to predict a percentage either way.
Of those who will refuse the refund, I wonder how many would be happy to write a wee letter saying that they are only refusing it on condition the monies are used to bring justice, to RES 12, and equally, those who will be accepting the refund, how many, would be happy to have a change of heart, subject to the same condition.
As I see it the maj shareholders had the power, but this would be a power not in their hands, but in the hands of fans.
“Of those who will refuse the refund, I wonder how many would be happy to write a wee letter saying that they are only refusing it on condition the monies are used to bring justice, to RES 12, and equally, those who will be accepting the refund, how many, would be happy to have a change of heart, subject to the same condition.
As I see it the maj shareholders had the power, but this would be a power not in their hands, but in the hands of fans.”
Corrupt Official, An admirable idea. It would give the Celtic PLC board a get out in terms of the Hampden suits – our hands were forced by a fan base. But this procedure would require the agreement in the first place by the Celtic board. I strongly suspect they would not be minded to go with this.
Did Fergus McCann worry too much about going to a civilian court? Stuff UEFA. They knew and know exactly everything that has gone on and sat back and did nothing! Did they even think about taking the SFA to CAS?
Celtic are not dependant on fan donations for legal fees. Without knowing any details I believe they have a law firm on retainers? Aside from that, Celtic, and especially it’s major shareholder, could easily afford the risk of a six figure legal bill.
They got the silver bullet, but they do not have the gumption to fire the gun I fear.
Does anyone? Just bring it up at the next AGM again. Play the long, long, long game.
The truth will come out in the end. Just like the Royal family whose dirty secrets are kept hidden until about 2 generations after the death of the perpetrator/s.
Auldheid 19th May 2020 at 22:26
I don't know what "jousting with JasBoyd on Twitter" has occurred but I know I won't be wasting my time finding out.
JasBoyd on Twitter is yet another iteration of Spoutpish; aka Niall Walker, The Lawman, Steerpike, Ernest Becker and others too numerous and tedious to recall but each claiming to be a reasonable chap.
jimbo 20th May 2020 at 07:41
Just bring it up at the next AGM again.
……………
I believe that may be the only time we get a response from celtic
And so the day after the SFA, shamefully, decide to ignore a significant issue in terms of football governance in this country, the cutting edge journalism and headline story from BBC Scotland is an article from Tom English recalling the 20 “daftest” moments over the last season in Scottish football – tells you all you need to know about the agenda and ethics of both the organisation and the journalist himself.
As per the whole basis for the existence of this blog, the media in this country seem determined to aid and abet the continual failure of the bodies that govern the game.
Cluster One @12.12
I’ve given up all hope of Celtic leading the charge in righting the wrongs. They appear to be too complicit.
That is why I ask the question ‘Does anyone?’
The obvious answer would be Auldheid et al. But do they/he wish to go down the legal route? What about money? I’m all for crowd funding them but could they raise enough? Who knows. (unless you try?) They most definitely have the best knowledge and data base and the experience of this issue since 2013.
Is there a rich individual or group of individual willing to fund this. With or without the assistance of the resolutioners.?
What is the alternative to going to court? I haven’t a clue! As I said, keep bringing it up at the AGMs? Trying to shame the board into action? Bring a blow torch!
One thing is for certain, the media will not argue the case.
I don’t trust the SFA.
I don’t trust the SPFL either.
This latest, SFA dereliction of duty – and the offhand manner in which it was announced – is probably no surprise at all to the informed Internet Bampots.
However, I am extremely disappointed in my own club’s silence on this Euro license fraud.
My own club is – by default – complicit in maintaining the status quo in Scottish football governance.
My own club is not interested in doing – or being seen to do – the right thing.
I always believed, (naively perhaps), that my club was better than that.
If a supporter can’t trust his own club, then where does that leave the future of Scottish football?
jimbo 20th May 2020 at 07:41
Corrupt Official, An admirable idea. It would give the Celtic PLC board a get out in terms of the Hampden suits – our hands were forced by a fan base. But this procedure would require the agreement in the first place by the Celtic board. I strongly suspect they would not be minded to go with this.
————————————————————————————–
I'll see your "Strongly suspect", and raise you a "Not a cat in hell chance" Jimbo. Everyone knows Celtic will do nothing until it becomes financial. What I am suggesting is not a boycott, but the response may lead to one. I'd suggest using the refunds as leverage stands more chance of provoking a favourable response, than an AGM at the end of the year, when the ST window is closed.
Pressure must be applied now while the fans have a bit of clout. Club finances are already strained and any pressure applied now will be magnified.
In effect, fans will not be damaging the club financially, as the club already has those monies in its possession. Fans will simply be asking the PLC, "Are you worthy of our goodwill?"….
I'll bet it is a goodwill hoped for and to an extent, expected.
How the PLC reacts to a withdrawal of that goodwill is their business……Literally !
A well run business would choose to keep the monies and ward off a boycott at the same time.
At a year end AGM they will be warding off nought but a few cat-calls.
I've just realised that Juventus will complete their very own 9IAR if they win the Serie A this season.
But they are only 1 point ahead of Lazio, whereas Lazio has a better Goal Difference by +11 goals.
They have both played 26 games of 38.
The league is planning to decide what to do about this season on May 28th.
Could you imagine if that was the scenario here between the top 2 SPL teams…?
StevieBC, Civil War !
Corrupt official 20th May 2020 at 06:54
29
2
Rate This
Celtic have offered season ticket holders a refund on the unplayed matches. Some will accept the refund, and some not, and it is very hard to predict a percentage either way.
…………….
Some will accept the refund, and some not,Of those who will refuse the refund, I would hope many would be happy to write a wee letter saying to the PLC, “Are you worthy of our goodwill? and Trust? If the Answer is yes you can keep my season ticket refund. If the Answer is NO i will be happy to take my season Ticket refund and donate it to charity.
This lets the board answer a question, if they do supply an answer, and it lets the season Ticket holder know were they stand with the board.It also lets the board know many fans are not happy.
Cluster One 20th May 2020 at 16:03
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I'm not sure why you have to ask the Board again. This answer has been painfully clear ever since Res12 was tabled all those years ago.
As JC says further up this thread. If there is evidence of a crime having been committed then the Res12 guys should pass it to Police Scotland via their lawyer and ask for it to be investigated.
StevieBC 20th May 2020 at 14:04
Stevie, the club and fanbase may be green & white, but the PLC board is most definitely the colour of money…..No surprises there I'm afraid.
Ian Maxwell is on Scotland Tonight tomorrow (if that makes sense
) at 1930 on STV. He’s speaking on how Covid-19 has affected & will further affect Scottish football.
You can email in questions for him:
scotland.tonight@stv.tv
Also via Facebook & Twitter…
Corrupt Official, I have sent you a DM re your query.
Bogs Dollox 20th May 2020 at 16:33
'…As JC says further up this thread. If there is evidence of a crime having been committed then the Res12 guys should pass it to Police Scotland via their lawyer and ask for it to be investigated.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Oh, that the FBI and the United States Attorney General's office had locus in the matter!
The account of how, using United States banking legislation ,they were able to nail the FIFA world cup bribe recipients who weren't even US citizens was a joy to read!
Sadly, it seems to me, alleged jiggery-pokery in the matter of say, a club in Scotland ,or anyone associated with a club in Scotland , profiting from that club allegedly lying in order to get money from UEFA to which it may not be entitled appears not to fall within the purview of the US Attorney General or the FBI.
And, of course, our COPFS and our gendarmes are not in the same league [ no pun intended] as the US Attorney General's office and the FBI when it comes to gathering evidence and prosecuting alleged conspirators.
Pity.
You know, the more I try to educate myself in the ways of the world of companies and shares the more ignorant I find myself to be!
Instead of taking Mrs C to Portobello beach today (as we thought of doing, but decided as good citizens, to 'stay home') I spent some time trying to educate myself in matter of companies, shares, and how all that kind of thing works.
I tried to follow and understand the information provided on the Companies House website, taking as my 'case study' the company that we have speculating about on this SFM blog…. J Carter Sporting Club Ltd.
I spent some considerable time on it.
My findings are:
that the company founded by the two brothers Beahon , incorporated on 6 July 2015 with a share capital of 100 shares of 50p each, the brothers each having 50 shares, subsequently subdivided into 50 000 shares of nominal value £0.001, had on 6 March 2020 a share capital of 103 760, after an allotment of 4223 shares .
The price paid per share at that allotment was ….. £338.67.
One of the early shareholders is Tom Singh . Never heard of him but he's one those guys that own a chain of department stores , and his personal wealth is estimated be in the region of £254 million. He holds only 2731 shares, and is only one of 29 shareholders.
Further, I see that somewhere in the most recent Articles of Association that a company called Redrice Ventures Ltd is mentioned, and the letters IPO are in there somewhere possibly in connection with a flotation on the market.
And at that point I lost the will to live.
No doubt everything is legal , and I'm not for one minute suggesting anything else, and every company in the UK has similar .
But I'm still blowed as to how a company that doesn't itself actually make anything makes money for its shareholders!
ps. My neighbour told me earlier this evening that the polis were hunting people aff Portobello promenade.
Jingso.Jimsie 20th May 2020 at 19:27
‘..You can email in questions for him:’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
What price a question about the decision not to go to CAS on the Res 12 issue getting an airing?
No fecking chance whatsoever.
That so many, many individuals and organisations are prepared to put up with such a rotten to the core Sports governance body , lying and cheating at every turn is a terrible indictment of Scottish sport.
A plague upon them, as Shakespeare has my Lord Suffolk saying;
[Act III ii 318 Henry VI prt 2]
“A plague upon them! wherefore should I curse them?
Would curses kill, as doth the mandrake’s groan,
I would invent as bitter-searching terms,
As curst, as harsh and horrible to hear,
Deliver’d strongly through my fixed teeth,
With full as many signs of deadly hate,
As lean-faced Envy in her loathsome cave:
My tongue should stumble in mine earnest words;
Mine eyes should sparkle like the beaten flint;
Mine hair be fixed on end, as one distract;
Ay, every joint should seem to curse and ban:
And even now my burthen’d heart would break,
Should I not curse them. Poison be their drink!
Gall, worse than gall, the daintiest that they taste!
Their sweetest shade a grove of cypress trees!
Their chiefest prospect murdering basilisks!
Their softest touch as smart as lizards’ sting!
Their music frightful as the serpent’s hiss,
And boding screech-owls make the concert full!
All the foul terrors in dark-seated hell—
On which literary note ( googled, of course!), I bid you goodnight.
LUGOSI 20th May 2020 at 08:23
71
3
Rate This
Auldheid 19th May 2020 at 22:26
I don't know what "jousting with JasBoyd on Twitter" has occurred but I know I won't be wasting my time finding out.
JasBoyd on Twitter is yet another iteration of Spoutpish; aka Niall Walker, The Lawman, Steerpike, Ernest Becker and others too numerous and tedious to recall but each claiming to be a reasonable chap.
———————–
For the avoidance of doubt someone who likes playing sematic tag with him sent me a copy of recent tweets including the lies I mentioned.
I've better things to do with my time than indulge in his fantasies but when he tells porkies I think it right they are shown up as such.
Auldheid 21st May 2020 at 03:27
For the avoidance of doubt someone who likes playing sematic tag with him sent me a copy of recent tweets including the lies I mentioned.
I’ve better things to do with my time than indulge in his fantasies but when he tells porkies I think it right they are shown up as such.
…………………
I Don’t enjoy playing sematic tag with him, but when he tells porkies and drags his minions into the open.I think it right they are shown up as such.
Insolvency guru Blair Nimmo (Do you have to have Nimmo in your name to speak rubbish?)
Anyway.
Insolvency guru Blair Nimmo. Finance expert Nimmo previously involved in the administration of Airdrie and Hearts amoung a dozen scottish clubs has called for the SPFL to change their own rules so there's no repeat of clubs like rangers being Dumped down the divisions for entering Administration.
………………………
Now a Financial guru involved in the Administration of a Dozen scottish clubs would know for a fact you don't get Dumped down divisions for going into Administration.
…
He goes on.(I know by now you would have thought he would have chucked it.)
If a football club's going to the wall could anything be done to help. If this all ends with club's being insolvent will the SPFL stick to their rules, (yes by this time i was laughing).
Stick to their rules and go through the same progress as in the past?
Unless you're totaly anti-rangers, i don't think many people would say sending them down the divisions when they did was a good thing for scottish football.
Nimmo head of business recovery at accounting giants KPMG the only thing you got right in that article was when you said "I don't think"
Cluster One 21st May 2020 at 12:29
"…Insolvency guru Blair Nimmo…"
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
If there are others as crassly and insidiously stupid in KPMG as Nimmo then no wonder we have reports like this
"Reports that accountancy firm KPMG is facing a £250m negligence lawsuit over its role in Carillion’s collapse highlights the need for Government to address the UK’s ‘rotten system of bandit capitalism’, urges Unite
According to reports, the official receiver is preparing a lawsuit against KPMG for declaring Carillion ‘profitable and sustainable’ in 2016."
https://www.pbctoday.co.uk/news/planning-construction-news/negligence-lawsuit-kpmg/76262/
We all witnessed the 3 or 4 weeks of incessant SMSM coverage of TRFC’s assault on the SPFL.
TRFC also made personal attacks on 3 SPFL individuals – even dragging up ancient, unsubstantiated allegations from ‘Private Eye’.
But, the SMSM generally provided TRFC full, supporting coverage, and obediently copied/pasted assorted nonsense.
Then, we have just had a monumental decision handed down by the SFA – to not refer the TRFC Euro license complaint to CAS.
A huge story.
That was on Tuesday: today it’s dropped off the radar.
No analysis or follow up questioning. Just dropped.
And shamefully, you will now be hard pressed to even find the reporting of the SFA decision at BBC Scotland online.
Reading that the Albion car park is earmarked for some housing. Now we know the car park is needed for a licence to be granted for the club deck to be open and we know that close brothers held security over the Albion car park, what i and maybe others do not know is has the security been cleared or not? then who has sold the land or part of the land. Not much information in the smsm about this, but all over the Albion car park land when it has been used as security for loans by different ibrox boards.
StevieBC 21st May 2020 at 13:30
……………
Dropped like a hot stone, even the coverage in the smsm was hard to find a small section a few pages in from the back saying the SFA have dropped it. No questions of why, no detail no journalism no Scrutiny and yet only days before call ing for transparency independent investigations and clarity. Maybe they just burnt themselves out asking questions days before.
JC/Everybody
You might be interested in the lyrics of this song, written in the aftermath
of the second gulf fiasco and a certain T Blair.
Just as relevant today and not necessarily exclusive to politics
Every Bloody Emperor
By this we are all sustained: a belief in human nature
and in justice and parity…all we have is the faith to carry on.
Imperceptible the change as our votes become mere gestures
and our lords and masters determine to cast us in the roles of serfs and slaves
in the new empire's name.
Yes and every bloody emperor claims that freedom is his cause
as he buffs up on his common touch as a get-out clause.
Unto nations nations speak in the language of the gutter;
trading primetime insults, the imperial impulse extends across the screen.
Truth's been beaten to its knees; the lies embed ad infinitum
till their repetition becomes a dictum we're traitors to disbelieve.
With what impotence we grieve for the democratic process
as our glorious leaders conspire to feed us the last dregs of imperious disdain
in the new empire's name.
Yes and every bloody emperor's got his hand up history's skirt
as he poses for posterity over the fresh-dug dirt.
Yes and every bloody emperor with his sickly rictus grin
talks his way out of nearly anything but the lie within
because every bloody emperor thinks his right to rule divine
so he'll go spinning and spinning and spinning into his own decline.
Imperceptible the change as one by one our voices falter
and the double standards of propaganda still all our righteous rage.
By this we are all sustained: our belief in human nature.
But our faith diminishes – close to the finish, we're only serfs and slaves
as the empire decays.
HS
Mr Nimmo seems to have changed his tune.
"“I wouldn’t pretend to know the ins-and-outs of Rangers’ finances but they’re just like any other business."
This a direct quote from an article regarding the sale of Boydichenko to Birmingham City in 2009. Quite why Mr. Nimmo was the go to guy in those days maybe hints at his recent interest in current Scottish football financial affairs.Oh for the days of Neil Patey, another character from a blue chip accountancy firm who used to give solace to the liquidated club fans.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/archives/news/18792/blair-murray-is-right-to-sell/
Cluster One 21st May 2020 at 14:12
'..has the security been cleared or not?'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Still shown as 'outstanding' on the TRFC Companies House website
Created
26 February 2019
Delivered
1 March 2019
Status
Outstanding
Transaction Filed
Registration of a charge (MR01)
Persons entitled
Brief description
(1) all and whole the subjects on the west side of broomloan road, glasgow registered in the land register of scotland under title number GLA68492; and (2) all and whole the subjects known as edmiston house, harrison drive, glasgow, G51 2YX, being the subjects registered in the land register of scotland under title number GLA29534 and GLA62016.
Contains negative pledge.
IF that is where the proposed housing development is to be?
Development footprint here
https://merchanthomes.co.uk/sites/default/files/AHI_Public_Consultation_Information.pdf
Higgy's Shoes 21st May 2020 at 16:24
'…Every Bloody Emperor..'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Just had a look and listen on youtube. Very interesting, indeed-both lyrics and tune.
'Truth beaten to its knees' is a perfect way to describe the 5-Way Agreement and the recent SFA announcement.
Re the Ibrox planning application:
https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/article/17401/View-List-of-Planning-Applications
…leads to:
https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=49332&p=0
…and on page 20:
Reference: 20/00870/PAN Community Cnl: Ibrox & Cessnock
Address: Site At Edmiston Drive/Paisley Road West/Skene Road/Hinshelwood Drive/ Broomloan Road Glasgow
Proposal: Erection of residential development (160 units) and associated works
Additional Consultations Required Date Received: 19.03.2020
Earliest Date for Planning Application: 11.06.2020
Prospective Applicant: Merchant Homes Partnerships Limited
Agent Details Contact details for prospective applicant: Merchant Homes Partnerships Limited, Merchant House, 365 Govan Road Glasgow G51 2SE Tel: 0141 420 2026
Ward: Govan
Type: Proposal of Application Notice Case Officer: Alan Graham, 0141 287 6045
Listing: Cons Area: Map Reference: (E) 255314 (N) 664531
Edit: beaten to it by Corrupt Official at 1924! From the Merchant Homes package:
‘The site continued its use a greyhound track until the 1960s
when it was purchased by the football club and redeveloped
as their training ground. It was used for this purpose until Ibrox
Stadium itself was redeveloped in the 1980s and the training
ground changed use to act as the Albion matchday carpark
which it remains as currently.’
Just watched STV's Scotland Tonight programme, about the future of Scottish football, with Maxwell in the studio for the last 10+ minutes.
First time I've watched/seen him on TV, as he tends to assiduously avoid engaging with the SMSM.
First impression: looked like he had strolled in from the street in an open necked shirt. I prefer to only wear a tie at work when I think it's 'necessary'. Maxwell should have worn an SFA tie on a rare TV appearance, IMO.
He was very unimpressive. Not reassuring, not confident and rather vague in his answers generally, IMO.
He received only a few soft ball questions.
And, of course, no mention of the SFA decision issued on Tuesday about dropping the Ibrox Complaint and CAS.
It could be argued that if the SFA had handled that matter better, then the SFA could count on more goodwill amongst supporters – e.g. to potentially attend a 'hub stadium' – which undoubtedly would include the dreadful, unfit for purpose Hampden.
Maxwell should have stayed in the bunker.
Had a look at the plans for Albion Road and the proposal covers half of the site for the new dwellings while retaining the other half for its current use as a car park. It is not clear if this facility will be for the residents or not. It would be a hard sell without including parking and will obviously need to be secured somehow. I wonder if it is to be a joint development involving TRFC and Merchant.
Merchant Homes have confirmed: "A Proposal of Application Notice was submitted Glasgow City Council on 17th March 2020 outlining the intentions of Merchant Homes Partnerships Limited to develop the site."
https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/rangers-ibrox-flats-albion-car-18285635
gunnerb 21st May 2020 at 20:58
gunner, I think a joint venture of Sevco and just about anybody, can be ruled out.. They can't even afford their own fan-zone.
They can't really sell it, as its the muster-point for the club deck, and a safety cert requirement.
I think its more likely Sevco are just seeking planning consents trying to increase its paper land value, to use as loan security. Considering the assets Close Finance required to secure a pittance, it obviously doesn't have high value as is.
gunnerb 21st May 2020 at 16:32
Why was Nimmo able to comment on Rangers finances back then?
Err – because he one of the leading Insolvency Practioners at the time and had access to financial information/intelligence and gossip and knew what the state of Rangers finanicial issues were.
It was apparent even to Hugh Keevins back then the Old Rangers share issue failed in 2006(?) when the effect was to shift the debt (£52m) into the Murray group. He even said so on Radio Clyde.
Nimmo supports Falkirk btw and given the state of their finances maybe that's where he is coming from. But heyho. There's only two teams.
Given that the 'charge' over the car park is still outstanding one concludes that TRFC still own the property, and (presumably) have decided to build houses on it.
Under Paras 6.3 and 6.4 of the 'charge', they absolutely need the consent of Close Bros before they change the use of the property or arrange for a planning application or convey or transfer the property.
In so far as Merchant Homes Partnership has submitted a planning application permission Close Bros must have given consent.
Merchant Homes Partnership is a 2-Director house-building outfit, with ( last accounts 2018) about 26 employees , and a turnover of £13 million and profit of £276K.There is a third shareholder.
The two directors are Alan Brander and Ms Linda McCluskie each a Person with Significant Control ( the share Capital is 100)
Bogs Dollox 21st May 2020 at 22:26
Nimmo supports Falkirk btw and given the state of their finances maybe that's where he is coming from. But heyho. There's only two teams.
————————————————
Suitably admonished BD, I was unaware of Blair Nimmo's Falkirk connection but the point I was trying to make was to contrast his recent comments re special cases to be made for insolvent football clubs with his just like any business approach of yesteyear.
Neil Patey
Use to be the go to guy back in the day. Wonder why they brought out the Nimmo guy at this time ?
Read somewhere that the close brothers loan was due no later than June 30, 2020, Almost time to pay back that loan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAajf_jxw14
Is there a more scenic football "stadium" in the world?
HS
John Clark 21st May 2020 at 22:31
Given that the 'charge' over the car park is still outstanding one concludes that TRFC still own the property, and (presumably) have decided to build houses on it.
Under Paras 6.3 and 6.4 of the 'charge', they absolutely need the consent of Close Bros before they change the use of the property or arrange for a planning application or convey or transfer the property.
===============
They absolutely needed to offer Mike Ashley the right to match their Hummel / Elite kit deal, but didn't. The cost to them of not doing so is potentially very damaging. Perhaps they think Planning Law is covered under the Five Way Agreement.
This might be of interest .
https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/2020/05/21/the-contracts-that-sold-rangers-to-craig-whyte/
In the neverending refusal by some to accept the conclusion and outcome of the 2019/2020 SPFL season some words get bandied about in, presumably, a hope to diminish or negate the value or worth of being Champions.
Words such as "tainted", "undeserved", "given" and "unsporting" often appear and the favourite seems to be the oft suggested obligatory inclusion in the records of an "asterisk".
I note that SuperSalary McCoist is on record as being an "asterisk" man and his voice must carry some weight. You cannot ignore the views of someone who while managing a brand new football club in the lowest Division possible in a small country in the north of Europe was worth paying an annual stipend greater than David Cameron, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany and Barack Obama, President of the United States of America. Accordingly, this guy has to be good. Combined. Did I mention combined? Cameron, Merkel and Obama's salaries when added together were less than Mr McCoist's paypoke. One wonders how much more he could have earned if he actually read his contract before he signed it.
I'm with Mr McCoist on the asterisk point but I think his view is simply to append an asterisk beside this year's outcome which would be meaningless. The whole point of such an asterisk would be to draw attention to an explanatory footnote or annotation. I have no difficulty in such an asterisk and explanation being used. My suggestion would be that the 2019/2020 Champions be named, followed by an asterisk and an explanatory footnote: "Epidemic Beset Title".
The same principle should apply to every Title or Trophy when an explanatory footnote is required. By my reckoning since 2000 about seventeen asterisks will precede the one this year.
If it saves time the abbreviation of this year's explanatory footnote could be used for all asterisks.
Higgy's Shoes.
If you have an idle moment do a Google earth flyover of the Faroe Isles (where I think that's taken) focussing in on almost all of the major towns and you'll immediately see, easily, 5 or 6 such constructions.
There is a point to be made on the politics, republicanism (of Europe) and financing of such investment.
But Im not making it!
theredpill 22nd May 2020 at 08:51
'.This might be of interest .
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
And so it is, trp. Great to see RTC the person back again. Thanks for posting that link-I might otherwise have missed it.
upthehoops 22nd May 2020 at 06:50
Under Paras 6.3 and 6.4 of the ‘charge’, they absolutely need the consent of Close Bros before they change the use of the property or arrange for a planning application or convey or transfer the property.
===============
They absolutely needed to offer Mike Ashley the right to match their Hummel / Elite kit deal, but didn’t. The cost to them of not doing so is potentially very damaging. Perhaps they think Planning Law is covered under the Five Way Agreement.
…………………..
Loan to be repaid soon, so let us feck up the terms of the loan, kick the repayment plan down the road. That is the kind of thing we have come to expect from down ibrox way.
BP or Tris, there was a long post by BRTH on CQN yesterday
BROGAN ROGAN TREVINO AND HOGANon 21ST MAY 2020 12:59 PM
I didn’t want to presume by copying and pasting it on here but I feel that it gets to the heart of the Res 12 issue by someone who has been closely involved in it from the beginning.
Might be worth putting it up as a new blog post with BRTH’s permission?
As a Thistle fan , I'm intrigued by the support and urging from TRFC fans to take legal action against SPFL over our being placed in a lower division , much as they believe happened to them eight years ago . Hopefully somebody can direct me to the legal action they took when they were similarly dispossessed by SPL (in their eyes – I know they died ).
Now that much of rancour and recriminations related to ending the season have subsided (for now), I can probably resume posting without fear of venting my frustration or anger through my posts (again for now).
We are just a few days from UEFA’s self imposed deadline (25 May) for countries to advise how/when their respective leagues will be completed. Following on from that, I expect that UEFA will be in a position to outline both when and how the CL and EL for season 2019/20 will be completed, together with any considerations for clubs who remain unable to play due to their governments’ restrictions.
With that in mind, the CL and EL entry list for season 2020/21 should be closer to being finalised. However, we have had no indication, as yet, about when the qualifying rounds will played, if at all. The first CL preliminary qualifying round was originally scheduled to start on 23 June, with Celtic scheduled to play their first qualifying round tie on 7/8 July.
Maintaining that schedule seems to be impossible, so what will UEFA do? Can games be scheduled in August or early September, or will UEFA make a unilateral decision to dispense with qualifying for the CL and just go straight to the group stage.
Any change to the qualifying format could affect Celtic depending on the entry criteria applied. It could either see Celtic granted direct entry to the group stages, or equally so excluded from the tournament, given their normal QR1 starting point.
Celtic’s UEFA coefficient is probably just high enough to see them seeded to progress to the group stages through the “Champions qualifying route”, but isn’t high enough to see them ranked among the top 32 clubs from the full CL entry list. It may depend on which method UEFA uses and how much scope there is for scheduling qualifying rounds during July and August.
It may be that the fear of exclusion is driving the SPFL’s desire to restart football in July and for then to exert pressure on the the Scottish Government to treat football as a special case.
How would Celtic fans feel if UEFA chose to dispense with CL qualifying and saw the club consigned to the EL group stages?
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/05/22/did-the-scottish-football-association-and-sevco-do-a-deal-in-2018-to-bury-resolution-12/
……………
Phil’s latest questions to the SFA.
Aurellio Zen 22nd May 2020 at 14:16
BP or Tris, there was a long post by BRTH on CQN yesterday
I didn’t want to presume by copying and pasting it on here but I feel that it gets to the heart of the Res 12 issue by someone who has been closely involved in it from the beginning.
===================================
I read that post yesterday. It's a good summary of how Res 12 got to where it is and the issues encountered along the way.
Re Brogan, Rogan, Trevino and Hogan, I know who the last 2 are but I'm not familiar with the other 2 names. Is there a joke in there I'm missing?
I'm sure a knowledeable member on here will be able to enlighten me.
After the SFA decision on Tuesday to drop the CAS referral, I thought it might be worthwhile to check the SFA website to see if its own goals and objectives had been changed/updated since the arrival of the new CEO and (Executive) President.
Nope, looks the same.
And this latest decision probably tops off ‘Vision 2020’ quite nicely… in the eyes of the blazers anyway!
For your amusement / annoyance, below has been copied from the SFA website, just in case anyone had forgotten what they are supposed to be doing on the 6th floor at Hampden.
===================
“Our Strategy & Values
In 2011, the Scottish FA underwent the most radical changes in its history, enabling us to lead the game into a new era. Fundamental changes were implemented in governance, branding and operational structures, and the launch of our strategic plan,
Scotland United: A 2020 Vision
outlined the ambition, values and goals that underpin the organisation and its many facets. The plan encompasses four strategic pillars:
• Perform and Win
• Strong Quality Growth
• Better financial returns
• Respected and Trusted to Lead
The strategic plan is the basis of everything we do, and includes our mission, our values, and our objectives to 2015.
Our Values
We are committed to the principles of development and fair play and expect everyone in the Game to do the same
We are ambitious and we do all that we can to fulfil ours and the game’s potential.
We respect each other and the football family overall. Diversity brings success.
We promote and cultivate a positive and inclusive team ethic both internally and externally. Togetherness is our strength.
The Scottish FA takes its values seriously.
They are more than a set of words: they represent the organisation as a whole, to ensure the highest standards of professionalism are achieved and maintained.
The Scottish FA’s values are reflected in all that we do, both internally and externally. ”
========================
Ballyargus 22nd May 2020 at 17:44
I'm not familiar with the other 2 names.
I'm sure a knowledeable member on here will be able to enlighten me.
==============================
A couple of Celtic full backs from yesteryear.
Ballyargus:
I see ej has replied but I thought trevino and hogan referred to golfing greats. Mibbees I'm wrong.
Doh.. Just realised EJ has me hook line etc LoL
I always thought it was a line from “Delaney’s Donkey” ?
I'm just delighted to see you back EJ. I've missed you. AJ and Wottpi, where are you guys? I for one have missed your insightful contributions.
Ballyargus22nd May 2020 at 17:44
Trevino and Hogan- (very) famous golfers.
He writes very well on a variety of sports and is worth looking up.
easyJambo 22nd May 2020 at 17:01
———
I would not be in favour of anyone returning to their place of work while there is a risk of them catching COVID-19, and since there is some evidence that the virus leaves an effect on the lungs, heart and kidneys in the short to medium term at least, professional footballers would be particularly well advised not to. I would rather CFC players therefore did not play any matches until that risk has been removed or demonstrated to be negligible. Should this result in being "relegated" to the Europa League under UEFA proposals, then so be it and suffer it. It's only for one season, we'll be back next year.
macfurgly
ive not stopped working in construction this year as government deemed my site of national interest,so no furlough,i just come home every 3 weeks for a couple of days,a few of my mates are wanting to get in the same place as they are now skint,the traffic on motorway in england was back to being busy whilst scotland was empty,weird feeling with england nearly back to normal and scotland still quiet,sorry wee off the fitbaw comment
Your welcome JC
easyJambo 22nd May 2020 at 17:01
How would Celtic fans feel if UEFA chose to dispense with CL qualifying and saw the club consigned to the EL group stages?
=========
There wouldn't be much we could do about it I'm afraid. There are so many unknowns right now.
tony 22nd May 2020 at 20:02
——–
Good luck to you and your mates, I hope you stay healthy, but I'm sticking with H+S.
I see professional sport is in Phase 2 of the unlockdown, which would seem to be from the last week in June if all goes well.
I have a nightmare vision of French Eddy contracting the virus. Fans of other clubs will have similar I'm sure.
Cluster One 21st May 2020 at 23:14
'…..Read somewhere that the close brothers loan was due no later than June 30, 2020, Almost time to pay back that loan'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Release from the Standard Security SC425159 0015 over the Albion Car park is obtained 'upon the expiry of the 'Security Period', and 'Security period' is defined 'the period beginning on the date o this standard security and ending on the date [ edit: I'll reduce the verbiage, and use ].. 'when all the secured liabilities have been discharged"
That is, it's not a loan with a fixed date of repayment. However long TRFC owe monies to their lender, their lender is making money through any repayments + interest until the whole borrowed sum has been repaid, secure in the knowledge that if a default event occurs, they can grab the properties itemised in the standard security.
The loan you remember seeing which had a repayment date of next month may be another , perhaps a smaller loan of a more ordinary type?
I don't know, of course, but I'm enjoying myself reading about that kind of stuff, and trying to make sense of it.
But it's galling to think that tykes like CW and the members of the Ibrox board know their way about in that world, a world in which I would be as a babe in arms!
easyJambo 22nd May 2020 at 18:35
""""""""""""""""""""""""
Welcome back, eJ!
Maybe it’s his take on “Hogan, Logan and Mary Ann Macgraw”.
Most people don’t know that Val Doonican was a grumpy old B and picked on and gave out constantly to one and all especially a pal of mine who was a student at the time working at a theatre one summer in the early 80s where the Val Doonican Show was playing.
Having had weeks of abuse and living in fear of his next bollocking he got his own back.
When Val sat on his rocking chair at the end of a show to sing the last song and smile sweetly at his aged female fans he got a surprise
He quickly realised that his beloved chair had just been varnished and he was sticking to it.
So while he was singing and in character trying to look like everyones favourite whatever the audience were unaware he was varnished to his seat and all the long abused crew were pissing themselves.
Uncle Val, pro that he is finished the song then went ballistic throwing a hissy fit after his smiling curtain call.
And this is a football story as the varnishing student went on to be one of our top football refs!
John Clark 22nd May 2020 at 22:03
Thanks JC.
The Chairman of the Scottish Football Supporters Association, (SFSA), has penned a few blogs recently and I referred to their site today to read the coverage of the SFA’s decision on Tuesday.
There was a mention, including;
“…I’m no expert but have been told the decision raises more questions than it resolves and none of the decision makers come out of it with any credit.
My sources said too much is in the public domain for this one to slip into the oblivion the authorities would like.”
========
Would anyone know if the SFSA has any plans to publicly convey the level of disappointment / concern / anger of football supporters about this decision – and/or to the SFA directly?
StevieBC 23rd May 2020 at 13:45
—–
Their last newsletter, dated May 16th., would have been distributed before that announcement was made. Watch the space, but I doubt it would be paid much attention if they did.
easyJambo 22nd May 2020 at 17:01
How would Celtic fans feel if UEFA chose to dispense with CL qualifying and saw the club consigned to the EL group stages?
……………
For me it is what it is in these times, i suppose things are not perfect (as if they evere were)IF Sacrifices have to be made they have to be made, just my opinion.
StevieBC 22nd May 2020 at 18:01
• Perform and Win
• Strong Quality Growth
• Better financial returns
• Respected and Trusted to Lead
……………..
I don’t have my Glasses on but is that an Asterisk in front of the 4 values ?
Not going down well .
Finloch 23rd May 2020 at 07:24
Finloch has a thumbs down. Could reasonablechap be Val Doonican's mum? I think we should be told.
I don’t know the veracity of information I received today, but it was suggested that the collapse of “Specialist Leisure” (Shearings, Wallace Arnold etc.) will have a direct impact on the Parks of Hamilton group, as the travel companies used Parks coaches with their own liveries. Most business failures tend to have a knock on impact on the supply chains, so this one could be little different.
It’s worth noting that the Parks have taken more than £20m out the business in dividends in the last couple of years. (some of that will have found its way into the Ibrox coffers)
We could mibbes take a leaf out of Turkish football's book by having life-sized cardboard cutouts of ST holders placed on seating for behind-closed-doors matches . Give the occasion a more normal look (it would still look too frenetic for Firhill , though !).
easyJambo 23rd May 2020 at 18:25
============
I imagine all coach companies must be feeling the pinch. Parks is also a car dealer so there will be an impact there too. I wonder if Mr Park will no longer be able to fund his £50,000 a season Executive Box at Celtic Park!
Paddy malarkey, LOL
jimbo 23rd May 2020 at 22:16
Hadn't seen this at the time – moneyspinner !!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52771326
Paddy, that and some sound effects might just be the answer! I'd hold back on fireworks though!
paddy malarkey 23rd May 2020 at 22:24
‘..Hadn’t seen this at the time – moneyspinner !!’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Geez! There’s the answer to the ‘behind closed doors’ problem;
A real fan sitting at home watching a match through the eyes of a dummy of himself which he remotely controls and a speaker in that dummy that he also controls and which will shout out his comments as he shouts at the TV!
Dyson, if you pick up this idea-I’ll only take 10% of the millions you might make.
And several thousand SFM readers are my witnesses!
Quick, where’s the address of the patent office, afore some dirty tyke gets in there afore me!
JC, you could be onto something there!
Virtual Reality is improving all the time.
You could be sitting at home wearing your headset, experiencing the 360' immersion in the stand.
And better still: no need for a real stadium to host the game.
That reduction in overheads must just appeal to certain clubs…
easyJambo 23rd May 2020 at 18:25
'.It’s worth noting that the Parks have taken more than £20m out the business in dividends in the last couple of years.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
That sent me straight to the Companies House entry relating to Parks of Hamilton (Holdings) Ltd.
I note that there are 19 'charges' on properties owned by Park's ,created since 4th March 2020, 17 of which were created on 13th March.
Although I'm not at all very knowledgeable about these things and am always open to correction, I understand 'charges' to be the rough equivalent of my old man's demob suit : something put in hawk for a loan.
Not, however, being an absolute ingenu I know that very respectable and sound businesses and corporations borrow money as a matter of course, even when they pay substantial dividends to their owners and shareholders.
I've no real problem with that : they are in business to to make personal gain! And borrowing in order to expand business and make even more profit is fair enough.
A sudden rush to borrow in times of trouble is a horse of a different colour.
It betokens a difficulty, or anticipated difficulty in cash-flow – a huge gap between expenditure and income.
It might conceivably be that a too-readiness to take dividends could result in defaulting on the obligations incurred under the standard securities 'charges'.
Might. But what do I know?
While catching up on the latest on the Dominic Cummings alleged playing fast and loose with Lockdown rules/advice/guidance/legislation affair there seems to be a familiar pattern. We have a seemingly clear transgression which is at first ignored, then airily dismissed, then denied, then justified, then held up as evidence of higher moral and ethical standards and to deflect we have Statements, sorry, Tweets from most of the Cabinet (Regan, Doncaster, McCoist, Rage, McCann, Young, Jackson, English…) defending their man. While the public are making their minds up it transpires Defence Version 1 (OK, he drove +250 miles but once there he "stayed put") might not be true (OK, once there he went on a 30 mile jaunt for a day out) and it further transpires that after the first trip he went back to London (where he lives) and then made a second 250+ miles journey at a time when the Stay Home message was being insisted upon on a daily basis by every one of the Cabinet/Tweeters.
I await today's developments but will not be surprised if whoever draws the Coronavirus Daily Press Briefing short straw (and we know it won't be The Boris a) because he doesn't do weekends and b) he doesn't do much on any day:- last week the score for Daily Press Briefings was Nicola Sturgeon 59, The Boris 4 ) settles matters. It will be declared that there is indeed a case to answer but due to a Five Way Agreement nobody who could actually do anything about it has jurisdiction and the matter will have to be further considered. Then, in about eighteen months time, there will be a one-line press release saying that due to implications (unspecified) the whole affair is being binned. Oh, and before anyone starts to get cute, there is no way this is getting referred to Johnny Foreigner, European Court Of Anything…Brexit Meant…Borders? No, that doesn't sound right…
Might be simpler to just fill in a few forms and come back as T'Dominic.
Ian Maxwell was on BBC yesterday talking about a wide range of stuff.
He wasn't asked about the decision earlier in the week that I read about on Phil's blog and here to drop the much talked about and delayed CAS progression of the Resolution 12 case.
I haven't read or seen anything about it anywhere in the press or heard it mentioned anywhere on the radio or tv and can't find it as a press release on the SFA site.
What was the Celtic reaction?
Finloch 24th May 2020 at 07:43
………..
What was the Celtic reaction?
…………..
As i said the other day. Can’t see any reaction until the next AGM. Silence is Golden, someone once sang.
paddy malarkey 23rd May 2020 at 22:24
‘..Hadn’t seen this at the time – moneyspinner !!’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Geez! There’s the answer to the ‘behind closed doors’ problem;
A real fan sitting at home watching a match through the eyes of a dummy of himself which he remotely controls and a speaker in that dummy that he also controls and which will shout out his comments as he shouts at the TV!
Dyson, if you pick up this idea-I’ll only take 10% of the millions you might make.
And several thousand SFM readers are my witnesses!
Quick, where’s the address of the patent office, afore some dirty tyke gets in there afore me!
……..
Is it Hold my Beer they say ?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/football-club-forced-apologise-using-22044226
“We wanted to bring some fun elements to the no-fans game
"The Great Big Football Lockdown Survey"
The DR has a link to their survey, "to get the fans input" on Scottish football currently.
Initially I thought, ok at least they're asking… but what's the catch?
I know I shouldn't, but thought I'd complete it anyway out of curiosity.
A cheapy Survey Monkey effort.
First 19 questions are lame questions with a selection of answers. Nothing controversial and of course, nowhere to add comments.
But, then the real purpose of this 'Survey' kicks in.
Questions 20 to 27 are very specific about your demographic: age, sex, etc and even salary bracket!
And for completeness – and to no doubt receive all sorts of junk mail – they want your name and e-mail address.
The SMSM can't even run an honest survey.
"The Great Big Football Lockdown Data Grab" would be more accurate.
Cluster One 24th May 2020 at 10:46
Is it Hold my Beer they say ?
==================================
They could make a really "blue" version that deflates with half an hour still to play.
I wonder who Jim Spence could be talking about here? I have a couple of contenders in mind but couldn't possibly say.
@JimSpenceSport
Cummings was so media savvy that he didn’t suspect the papers would’ve been on to his scam. Good journos always have something up their sleeve, as one over confident but empty football figure may learn soon.
upthehoops
traynor?
easyJambo 22nd May 2020 at 17:01
How would Celtic fans feel if UEFA chose to dispense with CL qualifying and saw the club consigned to the EL group stages?
========================================
To answer your question, albeit a couple of days later.
Disappointed obviously. However I also accept that these are unprecedented times and that there are more important things than football matches. We have to be willing to adapt and accept that these are far from normal times.
I would also be a bit surprised that the CL had to do away with qualifying rounds, but the Europa didn't. That doesn't make sense to me.
I think it would be more likely that the teams who would normally be in the qualifiers for the CL would instead compete in the Europa. Starting with champions then moving down through the ranks.
So two competitions with no qualifiers, straight into group stages.
I haven't checked the numbers but it shouldn't be that hard to come up with 32 for the Europa using final places and co-efficients.
What would annoy me would be champions (from whatever country) not getting into either competition and lower placed teams from some countries getting a place.
The other option of course is to dispense with the Europa entirely, I think that is less likely though. Probably too much money involved nowadays.
Homunculus 24th May 2020 at 15:19
I would also be a bit surprised that the CL had to do away with qualifying rounds, but the Europa didn't. That doesn't make sense to me.
I think it would be more likely that the teams who would normally be in the qualifiers for the CL would instead compete in the Europa. Starting with champions then moving down through the ranks.
====================================
What I had in mind was that UEFA would dispense with CL qualifying completely with the group stages reserved for those direct entrants plus the clubs seeded to progress to the group stage from the qualifying rounds.
The EL would similarly be affected with the group stages reserved for those already qualified, those clubs deemed to be CL qualifying "losers" with a fallback to the EL, and the other highest seeded teams from the EL qualifiers.
Clubs deemed to be losers on the basis of their seeding would receive the normal prize money based on which rounds they were expected to progress to, e.g, if Aberdeen was seeded to lose in the 2nd qualifying round of the EL, then they would receive the distribution appropriate to having participated in two qualifying rounds.
We may end up with one or two qualifying rounds instead of four in each of the tournament, but the issue of who takes part and how they other clubs should be compensated remains.
There are other issues that will have to be resolved should any qualifying be curtailed, such as the allocation of coefficient points.
From UEFA's point of view, it wouldn't cost them any more in prize money than in a normal season. There is no UEFA TV deal for qualifying matches either, so the overall prize fund would also be unaffected.
tony 24th May 2020 at 15:00
===============
Is Traynor a football or media figure? Spence followed it up with another cryptic tweet which makes me think it is the CEO of a Championship club he is referring to.
upthehoops
been reporting on football for about 40 years,so i would say he's a football figure
Is Traynor, the ‘PR expert’, now advising Downing Street?
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot, whilst simultaneously digging a bigger hole for yourself…
Boris desperately needs a huge, massive, fluffy squirrel to distract the angry masses.
Is lockdown now unofficially over…?
Unbelievable.
StevieBC 24th May 2020 at 00:11
21
1
Rate This
JC, you could be onto something there!
Virtual Reality is improving all the time.
You could be sitting at home wearing your headset, experiencing the 360′ immersion in the stand.
And better still: no need for a real stadium to host the game.
That reduction in overheads must just appeal to certain clubs
…………………
I never had time earlier but ment to add.
Had a go on one of the latest goggle things that you put on and a grid is drawn digitaly on the floor that if you step out off you are put back in the picture type of thing.
Are you still with me at this point ?
Once all set up i was put in a 360 star wars world…..Wow! you could see your hand lift things, open doors pick up a light sabre, you could walk around (Although walking on the edge of a building and looking down my legs were still shaking.
It was cast to the TV so everyone could watch what you were doing, you get lost in a star wars world, pretty amazing and i’m not a big fan. But it became or was so life like. Hence after that i don’t believe watching the game by way of this medium is not far away.
You could virtualy get on a train walk to the stadium walk up the stairs and sit down on a seat to watch a game all from the comfort of your own house. Pay for a game and the experiance through a head set thing.
….
Ps. if you ever get the chance to try one of these things ( i can’t remember the name of it but if anyone wants to know i will find out)
Anyway if you get the chance try it out, you will see what i mean for a future football experiance.
….
Pps. Don’t try the haunted house one, you have been warned.
Cluster One, it's the Oculus, Quest or Rift. I've had the Quest for a few months and the DK2 before that. Bloody Brilliant! Although they are other models available, from other makers at all good outlets. I think that covers it!
By the way. I kicked Darth Vaders arse!
I've got an Oculus Quest. Forget football – Beat Saber is the future
https://youtu.be/gV1sw4lfwFw
MercDoc 24th May 2020 at 20:10
…………..
You will understand the all round 360 effect and how life like, that i was trying very badly to explain. And how this medium one day could become part of the football experiance.
spikeyheid 24th May 2020 at 21:10
…………..
Just make sure you move the furniture out the road first, and again stay away from the haunted house.
You can watch recorded events ( Concerts, Sporting ) from different view points. I took a visit to Venice, down the canals. Google street view is fantastic.
MercDoc 24th May 2020 at 20:11
'.. I kicked Darth Vaders arse!'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Was jabba not around? There's an arse that surely deserves a right good kick!
MercDoc 24th May 2020 at 22:31
'.You can watch recorded events ( Concerts, Sporting ) from different view points. I took a visit to Venice, down the canals. Google street view is fantastic.'
""""""""""""""""""""
Aye, very good, MercDoc!
You had me all agog- until I looked at the cost of virtual experiences!
Geez!
Real, actual experience might actually be cheaper( once this covid-19 thingy permits)!
( But maybe your blog name suggests that you might drive a Merc? and that money is no object?
)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52745468
' how do you survive when you're spending way more than you earn?
That's from some feckin would-be American writer!
God Almighty, that we have BBC folk changing our language !
U.S. cultural imperialism? You bet!
And just afore I go to bed on a promise, can I say that my mention of U.S. cultural imperialism should not put anyone off reading the great wee stories by that sports journalist Damon Runyan.
He writes brilliantly of the wee flashes of goodness in the hearts of very bad people.
But of course he was writing before the Liquidation of RFC of 1872 and the nonsense of the 5-Way agreement.
I think even he would have found it difficult to find any spark of goodness or truth in the governance of Scottish Football in 2012, or in 2020.
Decent interview with Tom English for a change
https://youtu.be/1XapVF3y5JI
Since SFM is about asking questions that the SMSM won’t, here is a curious observation about The Glasgow Times.
We know that on the footy side, The GT, Chris Jack, etc. cover all things Ibrox like a fanzine, with plentiful copy/paste articles with zero journalistic input.
We know that its print circulation is falling off a cliff, like all the other newspapers and the GT seems to have stepped up its pleading for monthly subscription payments, from £3/month.
So…
there is currently a major Scotland news story: a man was shot dead in his Ardrossan home yesterday about 5pm. In the last hour a man has been arrested in connection with this incident.
Tragic story that this is, it has been reported, as expected, by e.g. the BBC and The Daily Record. The DR online reported the shooting at 7.30pm last night. The BBC online has reported the update about the arrest within the last hour.
But, on The GT… nothing.
As at 10AM today there was absolutely nothing in The GT online about either the original shooting or the subsequent arrest.
Does The GT have any news journalists?
Is nobody manning The GT online – over a Bank Holiday weekend?
I’m assuming that there is no IT issue as the website has been accessible as normal – and there are updated stories today e.g. in the Sport section.
This surprising omission suggests that The GT must be in a pretty poor state of affairs if a major Scottish story is simply not covered.
Curious.
paddy malarkey 23rd May 2020 at 22:24
John Clark 23rd May 2020 at 23:08
Corrupt official 24th May 2020 at 11:42
Is it Hold my Beer they say ?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/football-club-forced-apologise-using-22044226
………………………
Good to know today’s smsm have been looking in.
Celtic Diary Monday May 25 : Part One : Resolution 12 : Where Now ?
………………..
http://etims.net/?p=15707&utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork
……………….
Hope it is ok to post. A long read but for anyone not up to speed, it will get you close enough.
Cluster One
cheers for that
Somebody had to say it.
https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/sport/football/former-celtic-scotland-boss-gordon-18307808
I understand the point he is making and In his usual acerbic style of course. But equally there’s a huge part of me now that would rather travel 10 mins to enjoy all the social elements of my part timer £80 per week diddies than waste time and money on his expensive, formulaic league of what? 4,5 maybe?
Cluster One
that is an outstanding post by Brogan Rogan Trevino as per usual. As a Celtic fan I have thought for a long time now that the fact that Celtic would 'nt pursue the whole Res 12 in my book meant they were some how caught up in this whole Fraud ( for that is what it is ) . After reading that any doubts I may have had have sadly disappeared . Its hard to grasp why Celtic let themselves get so involved in this as out of all the clubs who have suffered from this debacle , Celtic probably lost more than anyone else , financially at least . The thing that really sticks in the craw for me is when Celtic were on their knees and Fergus McCann came in, for it all to work , ordinary fans had to play an important part . They were encouraged to dig deep into their pockets to buy shares . They did this !! For most fans this was a step in the dark , most fans probably had never bought a share in their lives before . Many probably could nt even afford to buy shares but they did. Many fans would have made REAL sacrifices to buy shares but they did . They did so because of the love they had for their club and they wanted it to survive so much . WHAT A SLAP IN THE FACE for those fans who along with Fergus McCann saved the club . Not Dermott Desmond , not Peter Lawell not Ian Bankier etc etc BUT Fergus and the fans saved the club . The same club that the likes of Peter Lawell does so well financially out of . How dare they treat their own fans as if they are insignificant in all this . I genuinely hope that the more informed people like Brogan Rogan , Auldheid and many many others do take this further , this must be dealt with . It is a festering sore on our game that cant be allowed to eat away any longer. The SFA needs cleared out and people who engineered the ( multi million pound ) fraud hopefully do jail time . I suspect if it goes to court it may mean resignations for the likes of Peter Lawell who is looking more and more part of the dirty cover up by way of the 5WA . I would be saddenned by this but hey you went into bed with the devil.Peter. Yes the media would be up in arms over this but F~~k them . This is about governance NOT a celtic v Rangers thing . Get our governance right, then our rule book , get the right men in place , take the new SFA and set them up in somewhere like Aberdeen away from the west of scotland masonic cabal and watch our game flourish . Power to the Res 12 guys
From the Guardian .
https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/may/24/my-favourite-game-dundee-shock-rangers-in-seven-goal-thriller
roddybhoy 25th May 2020 at 16:30
'.. This is about governance NOT a celtic v Rangers thing . Get our governance right, then our rule book.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Yes, roddybhoy, it is about Governance.
It was/is very convenient for
the SMSM and
the then SPL and SFL and
for those now whose 'fortunes' were founded on the myth that TRFC are the same 'Rangers' that allegedly (but , prima facie, with pretty sound grounds) may have lied in order to obtain a few million quid to which they were not entitled
to pass off the allegation as nothing more than inter-fan 'old firm' rivalry and therefore ignore, or try to, ignore it.
Very convenient.
Who knows which rotten bast.rts may have been uncovered as having been party to a fraud if a serious investigation had ,as it should have, been undertaken by the SFA?
The decision NOT to investigate in spite of the serious nature of the allegation and the prima facie evidence on which that allegation is based itself raises serious questions about the Governance of our 'Sport'.
My personal belief is that some individuals are guilty of crime and should be held to account for it. If I thought I would achieve anything by going as a private individual to the police to report my suspicions then I would.
But I realise that my going to my local cop shop would be a waste of time. A football club telling a porkie to get some money is, in their eyes [especially if it is their own club!
] nowhere near serious enough compared with the huge financial crimes perpetrated by huge corporations.
I believe also that those who should know better and who portray themselves as honest men honouring the memory of their spiritual founder should be ashamed of themselves , whether for their complicity or for their moral cowardice based on venality.
There was once a man who so put principle before 'business' that he was prepared to exit his club from Scottish Football on a matter of principle unconnected with any fraud or other criminal act by any club or by the SFA.
He will be revolving in his grave.
His successors have much to be ashamed about for not calling out the Governance body of Scottish Football.
It was one short week ago today that the SFA slipped out their decision to not refer to CAS – and in a typically sleekit manner.
And the frustrating / depressing realisation is that – in terms of governance – Scottish football has made zero/nil/nada etc. progress. It is still as corrupt, as incompetent and as unaccountable today, as it was back in 2012.
We still have Petrie and Doncaster pulling the strings.
We have all witnessed the 42 senior clubs supporting the status quo over the last 8 years.
It’s painfully clear: Hampden doesn’t want change – and the clubs don’t want change either.
What the fans want is irrelevant – but they do want/expect our cash!
Governance change might only come when it’s already too late.
https://www.change.org/p/uk-parliament-dominic-cummings-must-be-sacked?source_location=petitions_browse
Struggling to make this post football related but here goes.
A Scottish linesman who is also an MP, Douglas Ross, has resigned as a junior minister in the government. Because of the behaviour of an advisor to Boris J. the prime minister. A Mr. Cummings. You may have heard of him.
There is a petition to get him sacked, it has reached almost 3/4 of a million signatures so far.
jimbo 26th May 2020 at 18:42
A Scottish linesman who is also an MP, Douglas Ross, has resigned as a junior minister in the government.
==========================
It must be the biggest decision that an assistant referee has got right all season.
Who’s the Fine, upstanding, principled, courageous egalitarian in the black…..
who’s…..
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/05/26/a-matter-of-trust/
………………
Phils latest.
……………….
Maybe the SFA have seen the ibrox club in action these last few months, and thought feck that noise sign them through.
One can only hope the walls don’t come tumbling down around them, as this time there will be no hiding place.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ianis-hagi-completes-rangers-move-22090653
How can they afford this ?
Cluster One 26th May 2020 at 20:11
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/05/26/a-matter-of-trust/
=================================
PMGB may well be proved right eventually, but for a club that he has repeatedly suggested that is close to financial ruin, they seem to be surviving not too badly.
Sometimes there is too much wishful thinking when it comes to TRFC’s finances.
easyJambo 26th May 2020 at 19:00
This Douglas Ross , showing Boris the red card ?
https://twitter.com/i/status/972823987976884224
Anybody else hear that Genk suggested that TRFC pay the Hagi monies direct to CFC as Genk's payment for Kouassi but were told we don't do things that way here ?
easyJambo 26th May 2020 at 20:56
=====================================
Sorry, but you are having a laugh.
Substantial losses in every year of their existence. Loan after loan from directors and associates just to keep operating. Converting loans to worthless shares. More loans this season to cover losses. De-listed from the stock exchange, unable to get proper banking facilities. Going concern warnings in the accounts every year.
Yeah, doing fine financially, just like the previous club were, right up to the point of administration then liquidation.
You understand the accounts more than most people, are you seriously suggesting that Rangers are not a mess financially. What they have is people willing to put more and more money in. If that stops they are fecked.
They don't have a business model they have an expensive hobby.
tony 26th May 2020 at 20:54
This years Ryan Kent. They couldn't afford him either, but the directors have put money in to cover the losses.
I wonder if the deferred wages were used as a downpayment for Hagi, many a disgruntled squad member if it is so. The SFA must be sure of their ground on this occasion or perhaps like a TrumpCummian attitude we little people should respect our betters.
Homunculus 26th May 2020 at 22:2
This years Ryan Kent. They couldn't afford him either, but the directors have put money in to cover the losses.
—————————————————————————————
But can they do this without transgressing ffp rules? Their has been no further share issue so no debt for equity swap.I thought ffp was in place to stop financial doping of this sort unless the licence has been waved through as a force majeur effect of CVid.
https://twitter.com/BBCSportScot/status/1265367953479958529
It is now being reported that the Hagi deal is not complete.(as per CO above with twitter link)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52796014
Hagi: ha!
When you type in his name, predictive text inserts "hagiography'!
(A big word I learned on this site, of course.
)
I'll have a guess at a collapsing deal.
Hagi "wanted too much money, was greedy, and TRFC no longer want him".
Loan deal terminated with immediate effect, (by TRFC of course.)
According to the Ibrox 'PR expert' anyway…
Very quiet today. Mr Cummings causing too much of a distraction maybe!
First time I’ve posted here but I’ve been about since the blog rose from the RTC ashes.
I’ve got two things to get off my chest. One – the why don’t CFC back Res 12 question. Could it be that if SFA were guilty as charged, then a possible punishment would be banning Scottish clubs from Europe. Not in Celtic’s interest.
Or could it be that Celtic know shifty things were happening, retrospectively of course, with Euro licenses but as Celtic benefited from a higher Euro coefficient then they could be seen, as SFA representatives, as having deprived another club from a higher ranking and maybe even CL football. Again light being shed on this not in Celtic’s interest.
Or is it just they don’t get it. I though Martin O’Neill’s recent ramblings – on the 9 in a row show – showed, as a Celtic man, that he was well out of step with the views of most Celtic fans. Maybe 10 mins with people running the club would produce the same conclusion. Who knows!
Second thing. I read on here a couple of weeks back talk about the same club myth and that all the other scottish bankrupt clubs had gone under never to be seen again. We’ll that is a myth about the same club myth. That something special happened to Rangers that has never happened before. However, the reincarnation of the rangers team had to start lower than the reincarnation of Toulouse, Fiorentina, Derry City and others. And last season I sat in the North Stand at CP and looked out at a banner among the Hibs fans with 1875 (I think) on it. No one mentioned that Hibernians went bankrupt in the 1890s and a new club Hibernian came about 18 months later claiming to be the same club. For me the new Rangers – as the FIFA website stated before their first game – is a reincarnation of the dead club. Same brand. Just like Hibs. That’s what football does. Dead then resurrected. And that’s why Celtic should focus on their own unbroken history rather than cause themselves trouble pointing out that other clubs are ghosts.
Just my thoughts.
QF
Over a week ago, it was being reported in Belgium that Genk were keen to sell, and Sevco keen to buy. Fee was agreed, so all good there then, but the "Payment methods" were under negotiation. Empty Irn-Bru bottles are not considered legal tender in Belgium apparently. Probably a Brexit thing.
Since then, Michael Stewart has questioned Sevco's ability to fund such a deal, and based on known knowns, a legitimate question, but Alex Rae assured him all was fine. Hagi's agent had also tweeted, believing it was a done deal, before it was revealed it wasn't. Now we have similar from Genk itself.
It would appear to the layman that "Payment methods", are proving rather a difficult barrier to overcome……"Methods" is the term google translate returned, but could mean many things/contexts, ranging from third party suitably provenanced sums, to simple deposit and instalment terms.
Whatever the difficulties, to date it would appear promised payments either haven't materialised, or were in an unacceptable form and rejected.
No such difficulties have arisen from Genk's other transfer businesses.
https://www.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20200518_04964788
Corrupt official 27th May 2020 at 01:45
'. No such difficulties have arisen from Genk's other transfer businesses.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The link is all Greek to me, Corrupt official!
So yet again we have a proposed temporary 14-14-14 league structure for next season. This in the same week that the majority in the bottom two leagues and a number in the championship proposing mothballing their clubs until closed door games are no longer needed. For these teams financial meltdown is very likely if they are forced to play behind closed doors. Mothballing would give them a chance of survival.
To make 14-14-14 possible the leagues would have to ignore 60-70% of the clubs. Nothing new there then, waste time and effort planning for the improbable.
Our league needs to face up to what the rest of us know, that while there is no vaccine normal life and football is unpredictable. For now list all the teams in their finishing order from last season and then plan when things become clearer. If forward planning is desired then ask the clubs about mothballing and design with what is left, probably about 15-20 clubs.
Anybody for just one league next season?
Hamilton Accies’ auditors issue a going concern warning, in their accounts just published at Companies House.
I would expect similar "going concern" warnings in most clubs accounts going forward with the auditors covering their backsides.
Been off the site for a few days. Hagi? Really? What about the deferred wages? Players being let go etc. Anyway, back to Machiavelli & CO. You have to admit it’s better than Netflix or Amazon Prime.
easyJambo 27th May 2020 at 11:19
I would expect similar "going concern" warnings in most clubs accounts going forward with the auditors covering their backsides.
===============================================
I suspect you are correct about that EJ, but I did notice that this concern was registered prior to the league being called. I doubt that has significantly altered the precariousness of their situation, but it has clarified one of the unknowns.
Until the other unknowns are chipped away, clubs will remain on a knife-edge of uncertainty.
From the Guaria in February . Some learning outcomes for the SFA ?
https://www.theguardian.com/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2011/feb/23/belfast-celtic-ifa
Homunculus 26th May 2020 at 22:23
……………………..
AD Hoc i think Dave king described it at his last AGM, he also said this method was not sustanable and that a working group would be set up to look at generating income from player sales. Even king knew the way they were doing business could not go on forever.
…………………
gunnerb 26th May 2020 at 22:38
This years Ryan Kent.
But can they do this without transgressing ffp rules? Their has been no further share issue so no debt for equity swap.I thought ffp was in place to stop financial doping of this sort unless the licence has been waved through as a force majeur effect of CVid.
……………….
The euro licence has been as you say waved through.
8 ibrox players have left the building so to speak, their combined wages will more than cover this years Ryan kent. The Close to £mill deal is to be paid over three years. This will be the ibrox club’s biggest signing unless they can somehow sell a player.
QF 27th May 2020 at 00:18
First time I’ve posted here but I’ve been about since the blog rose from the RTC ashes.
………………..
I will be Gracious with a responce.I’ve been about since the blog rose from the RTC ashes.But you have taken nothing in that you have read.
UEFA to relax FFP regulations ‘to help cash-strapped clubs survive coronavirus crisis’ as the deadly virus continues to wreak havoc across globe
UEFA have elected to relax their Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations in order to help clubs that are struggling for cash to survive the coronavirus crisis.
European football’s governing body has extended the deadline for clubs to show that they don’t have any ‘undue payables’, consisting of unpaid tax bills, transfer instalments or wages, from March 31 to April 30.
In addition, UEFA stressed that the principle of ‘force majeure’, meaning greater force, will be taken into account when the finances of clubs are being assessed.
………………….
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-8136627/UEFA-relax-FFP-regulations-help-cash-strapped-clubs-survive-coronavirus-crisis.html?ito=amp_twitter_share-top
paddy malarkey 27th May 2020 at 13:32
"The Celtic directors, without ceremony or much public statement, gradually sold all the players, then withdrew from football forever"
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
It's not an exact parallel ,of course, to the circumstances obtaining in the 'Res 12 matter,' but it's worth mentioning that those directors had principles and the balls to adhere to them.
Who, seriously, wants to play 'sport' in a rigged organisation? And meekly accept a point-blank refusal by a governance even to investigate a complaint made seriously and with some evidence clearly pointing t the need for investigation?
Just as well I buy a copy ! From the Guardian again
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/may/27/liverpool-among-clubs-argue-against-paying-330m-rebate-broadcasters-premier-league
Re Hagi signing for Rangers.
In my view it doesn't take much working out what will happen.
During his loan period some Scottish media outlets were willing to run with reports that this player was one of the best in his position in Europe, could be a £100m player, and that major Spanish and Italian clubs were after him. From all of that he has gone on to sign for Rangers for an undisclosed fee being paid up over several years. Genk were clearly not interested in keeping him, despite initially shelling out £4m for him.
Now that Hagi is here and whenever football begins again, we already know that the same media outlets will have his value up to around £15-20m very soon, maybe even higher. That will be the case even if it is based only on his performances in the Scottish league. There is already evidence they are willing to do that with Rangers players. Morelos for example before this season, when he has done well in Europe, was previously touted as being worth £20-25m based only on goals in Scotland. We were also asked to believe Glen Kamara went from a £50k player to one worth £6-10m in a few months. Based on what was the part they didn't tell us.
People will no doubt point to the buy low, sell high policy at Celtic, which has had some major successes, but those fees were based on what the players achieved in the Champions League, not Scotland alone. Going back to Hagi, he would have to do the same, and against real top quality teams. Otherwise the inevitable media attempts to secure Rangers a major fee will hit the same wall as all the other attempts. It won't stop them trying their hardest though.
It's just the way Scotland is.
We discussed this in a somewhat tongue-in-cheek way some time back. From today's Times:
"A Japanese company has created a phone app that allows sports fan to cheer or boo their team remotely at sports events from which spectators are excluded because of the fear of the coronavirus.
Users of the Remote Cheerer app use their mobile phone to record their reaction or to select pre-recorded messages of encouragement or denunciation which will be relayed digitally and played through speakers at the ground.
The company behind the app, Yamaha, tested it this month at the 50,000 seat Shizuoka Stadium, southwest of Tokyo, during training by two team in Japan’s football J-League.
Fans can select from which one of 58 speakers their cheers will be broadcast, allowing them to respond to action in a particular part of the ground.
“At one point during the system field test, I closed my eyes and it felt like the cheering fans were right there in the stadium with me,” Keisuke Matsubayashi, a manager at the stadium, said. “That’s when I knew that this system had the potential to cheer players on even in a stadium of this size.”
The company says that it was in discussion about selling the system to sports grounds in Europe. It is working on voice recognition to censor foul or insulting language."
I read that the Aberdeen chairman reckons that it is time to streamline Scottish football by scrapping either the SPFL or The SFA, and things would improve if we switched back to one authority.
Cormack attracted criticism from his own fans after backing the ibrox club. But he is adamant hi standpoint was purely about governance.
…
Would a new one authority mean that a secret 5 way agreement signed with only one club in the SPFL be rendered meaningless and not woth the paper it is written on ?
upthehoops 28th May 2020 at 07:08
Re Hagi signing
……………
Hagi will be this years Morelos.
The Morelos project failed because the value speculation rose every time you picked up a paper. Will lessons have been learned down ibrox way of speculation on a players value? I very much doubt it, (Glen Kamara went from a £50k player to one worth £6-10m in a few months. Based on what was the part they didn’t tell us. ) Kamaras performance could not hold up to the value they were saying.they will try the same approach again, it is in their DNA.
Expect his worth to rise the more desperate for money the ibrox get, the more value put on his head the more desperate the ibrox club are. And the valuation has begun to rise already and the first down payment to Genk has not even got through the door yet.
upthehoops 28th May 2020 at 07:08
I think this whole thing about players value being increased by Scottish tabloid newspapers is a bit of a fallacy.
It is possible that it attracts clubs to have a look at a player, and if that player performs well may secure him a move. However I just don't see clubs who spend that sort of money putting any real stock in what a hack in the daily record has written.
As I say, in my opinion it may have a bit of an effect on them looking. However once that has been achieved they will have a whole scouting system in place, probably even different levels to go through. They will make the decisions on a, whether the club wants the player and b, what they are willing to pay.
Re Hagi himself. He has played a grand total of 12 games on loan at Rangers, scoring 3 goals. Of those 3 goals 2 were in the same game. A big European game which was probably his best performance for the club. From what I saw, other than that game he wasn't hugely impressive. Not a bad player but nothing spectacular.
Clearly they don't have as much to spend on this years messianic figure. He is no Ryan Kent.
The question I ask myself is this, would I want him. The simple answer is this, who would I take off the bench to put him on it. I can't think of anyone.
Grudgingly – of course – I have to admit to yet more scratching of the napper, as the financial basket that is RIFC/TRFC apparently buys another player. I just don't get it!
Yes, the payment terms could be very favourable for TRFC, with a minimal down payment. There might be a corresponding, heftier than normal sell-on clause for Genk. But, at this time you would think that freezing recruitment / trimming the squad and general overheads would be the priority?
Is Hagi going to sell X thousands extra ST's? Is this reasonable, 21 year old player going to transform TRFC into a title winning team? If not, then why add to the the mushrooming financial risk at Ibrox now?
I can only surmise that there is significant information that we just don't know, currently.
But the Ibrox club continues to kick that battered, old can down the road, and continues to confound Internet Bampots with every kick!
Re Hagi:
It’s worth remembering that TRFC hasn’t signed him yet. According to FIFA, the Scottish transfer window doesn’t open until 10.06.20.
He may sign, but he may not. I’d assume that the player isn’t in Scotland & probably not in Belgium either. I’d expect that TRFC would require a current medical, performed by their own staff, before committing to spend £3m.
Much could happen in the next two weeks.
J.J good shout!
Yes, at the very least it is "subject to a satisfactory medical".
And, IIRC, did TRFC not decline to sign a player and leaked that he had a (suspected) knee problem???
Can't remember who it was, but thought it was shoddy behaviour at the time.
The Romanian word for 'squirrel' is 'veveriţă'.
StevieBC 28th May 2020 at 11:14
Is Hagi going to sell X thousands extra ST’s? Is this reasonable, 21 year old player going to transform TRFC into a title winning team?
…………
Well if you are an old ibrox player dug out of the back of beyond and asked to give your opinion, well yes he is thay guy, so roll up roll up and get your feel good season ticket.
………………….
StevieBC 28th May 2020 at 11:36
not decline to sign a player and leaked that he had a (suspected) knee problem???
……….
The ibrox club were on the verge of signing John Hartson but (suspected) knee problem???
Did ok for celtic after that i believe.
Edit. Forgot to post link for above post.
https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/sport/football/celtic-could-stopped-new-rangers-18322322
Homunculus 28th May 2020 at 10:50
I think this whole thing about players value being increased by Scottish tabloid newspapers is a bit of a fallacy.
===================
I don't necessarily disagree, I just find it pretty pathetic that they try so hard. Of course, modern day newspapers are subject to huge cost cutting and need to fill space easily, so perhaps the easiest way to do it is to accept bullshit stores from club PR in order to appeal to the largest fan demographic.
upthehoops 28th May 2020 at 20:07
The stuff in relation to Morelos has been particularly stunning.
Particularly when the manager is on the record as saying there had been no bids for the player, at that time.
In fact I believe he has said it on more than one occasion, last summer and in January of this year.
The media had his price going up and up, with a load of clubs being interested in him.
To be honest I think they may have been instrumental in him losing form in January. He must have believed the hype and basically didn't kick a ball from January onwards.
It's similar to the situation with the previous club. The media would not print or broadcast a bad news story, right up to the point it was too late to do anything about them. They don't do Rangers any favours, whether they are trying to or not.
Homunculus 28th May 2020 at 20:37
It's similar to the situation with the previous club. The media would not print or broadcast a bad news story, right up to the point it was too late to do anything about them. They don't do Rangers any favours, whether they are trying to or not.
===============================
We laugh at the man with the key to the Sevco crayon box, but it's obviously a skeleton key for the SMSM box…..Who can forget how rapidly the Alfie assasination attempt was sprouting legs, until a private investigator handed himself in at his local station, and halted it in its tracks. ….That wee tale was half an hour short of, "Red-haired man in green & white jersey spotted running from the scene", said a guy on twitter.
There is a lot wrong with Scotland.
Homunculus 28th May 2020 at 20:37
‘.It’s similar to the situation with the previous club. The media would not print or broadcast a bad news story, right up to the point it was too late to do anything about them. ‘
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Eating too much succulent lamb had them hooked and they lost any kind of journalistic integrity in their desire for easy pounds per column inch of ‘copy and paste’ utterances ; and their craving for privately provided ‘exclusives’ for whichever pretence of a newspaper they wrote for made liars and cheats of them.
Whereas if they had shown any kind of willingness ,or ability as journalists , to ask questions of SDM and of that arch-cheat’s means of funding the biggest ‘ineligible players ‘ scam that any football league has ever seen, then SDM might have been caught by the short and curlies early enough to amend his cheating ways, admit the footballing offence , lose a title or two to avoid expulsion, and then find it easier to reach a deal with HMRC before the tax debt reached levels which meant that even the richest Bear couldn’t contemplate taking it on if he thought of buying RFC of 1872 out of Administration.
The succulent lamb eaters certainly contributed to the death of RFC 1872.
And their current equivalents are of the same stamp in relation to TRFC, the new club.
And they’re not even getting succulent lamb dinners in SA, with the best wines from the major shareholder’s best SA wine-cellar. ( Or was that taken by SARS?)
Or are they?
nhttps://www.samh.org.uk/
Homunculus 28th May 2020 at 20:37
===================
I think we also have to ask what favours Rangers actually did for Morelos, in particular during the aftermath of the game at Celtic Park on 29th November. Clearly by the reaction of the Rangers Management, players and the media, they thought that was their Rubicon crossing. In fairness they were well deserved winners at a place they had to win if they were going to win the league, and it put them in a great position. Yet right at the end Morelos was sent off following an umpteenth case of ridiculous simulation since coming to Scotland, and then went on to make a throat slitting gesture towards Celtic fans. Rangers management of the situation was quite incredible, and what followed was accusations of sustained racism towards Morelos, an interview broadcast with the player where the subtitles were deliberately altered to demean Celtic fans, and accusations that the brakes on his car had been tampered with which were also shown to be lies. All of these falsehoods were backed by many in the Scottish media, but who was feeding it to them? The upshot was that the form of Morelos flipped completely. I just can’t help thinking a club with more humility, and a manager of more experience, would have handled things differently from what was at the time a position of strength. Perhaps if their pals in the media made it clear they were not going to be part of it in future things would change. After all, it takes two to tango!
Upthehoops
With all the covid stuff , governance of the game , title getting called , Res 12 being killed off etc etc it took your post to remind me about all the other stuff . Stuff that has once again been ignored and in Celtics case probably happy that it has been swept under the carpet . Im talking about Morelos throat slitting gesture , Kent firing imaginary bullets at fans. Sky TV doing an assasination job on Celtic PLC and fans . We have come to expect the SFA to turn a blind eye , but it is sickening that my own clubs bosses are such a cowardly spineless lot. And while Im at has Douglas Park been set a date for by the SFA to answer questions about bringing the game into disrepute ? Naw /… I didnt think so
It would seem the Ibrox club are not alone in having over inflated valuations for their players. Yesterday social media (not the tabloids yet!) were reporting on Kristoffer Ajer of Celtic having a transfer value of £25m! Now he is a good young player with potential but £25m? Really?
Hope Celtic get it
Not holding my breath though.
Having said that, it might lead you to wonder why the tabloids have not picked up on that rumour?
Hyping up his price.
jimbo29th May 2020 at 10:51
===========
The difference is supposed to be that on social media people can post what they like, while the mainstream claim they only print what a reliable source has told them, and that there is substance to it.
On the subject of Ajer I am as sure Celtic would get nowhere near £25m as I am that the tabloids wouldn't run with it any case.
Going back to Hagi, I see there is a story in today's Herald that he 'will be even better' next season. I have given up trying to work out conclusively what that means, but most likely it means he has already increased in value according to them.
Barry Anderson@BarryAnderson_
Scottish football clubs can begin training in June after a meeting with Government today. Plan is to start the new season on 1 August but not all leagues will be able to play then.
easyJambo 29th May 2020 at 17:16
That means a safety-first approach, with games initially played behind closed doors and a range of measures to protect players and staff.
“The return of crowds is something we all want to see and we will be working with clubs, Government and medical professionals to return safely to playing in front of fans as soon as we can.”
………
and a range of measures to protect players and staff.
Just how much is that going to cost clubs with no match day income, with games being played behind closed doors.
Was their not a club that were strongly apposed to playing games behind closed doors.
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1266397093586972673/photo/1
…
I can see a statement coming.
upthehoops 29th May 2020 at 15:31
Going back to Hagi, I see there is a story in today’s Herald that he ‘will be even better’ next season.
…………
It is always next season with this ibrox thing, someone should award them a can kicking trophy as they are the champions of it. Last season after winning nothing again it was ok because Gerrard had put the smile back on the fans faces.
If anything down ibrox way they know how to flip a bad news story on it’s back and make it sound a good one.
With maybe no fans at the start of the season? could this be the first time the ibrox club get a lot of away fixtures for the start of the season? seam to remember the last few seasons they started with a few home games first (get that income in) happy to be corrected. Interesting to see when the fixtures come out, (but it is all computerised apparently anyway)
Cluster one – 27 May
Thanks for the acknowledgement. I’m not really that bothered if everybody scrolled passed my debut and penultimate post as I was just putting thoughts down and the act itself was cathartic.
Gracious – did you really choose the correct word there however?
It might have been more gracious to just scroll on past. Enjoy the belly button fluff!
QF
QF 29th May 2020 at 20:10
gracious definition: 1. behaving in a pleasant, polite, calm way
………………
I believe i did both. It would have been easier just to scroll past, but as you say a long time lurker and first time poster, i believe i was Gracious in my reply.
I see that Alex Rae EBT was on the wireless and referenced an article/post by a Bruce Archer (an ITK TRFC man) suggesting that the vote to end the season was not unanimous , and that two clubs were against that scenario playing out . Anybody here got info ?
paddy malarkey 29th May 2020 at 22:34
'….an article/post by a Bruce Archer (an ITK TRFC man)……Anybody here got info ?'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Have a look at
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1286009/SPFL-season-ended-Neil-Doncaster-Celtic-Rangers-Hearts
from which I extract this :
"The SPFL ended the season on Monday with a statement claiming that Premiership clubs had reached a ‘unanimous agreement that the top flight cannot be finished’.
However the unanimous part of that statement is understood to be factually incorrect. At least two clubs were against curtailing the season and saw no reason why a decision needed to be rushed through so soon."
Well, where does that leave us?
Where else but in the position of having to choose whether the SPFL are lying, or whether the SMSM man is making uncorroborated insinuations?
We know from the experience of the past that neither the SPFL nor the SMSM rags and their (generally) embarrassingly inadequate 'sports journalists' operate on the basis of Truth!
It is fun to see the one lot being criticised by the other!
Honest to God: that I should have lived so long only to see the perverted nonsense at the heart of Scottish Football governance being supported by a perverted, distorted 'sports Press'- when in Minneapolis and Hong Kong even as I write there are real journalists being arrested or in risk thereof for factual reporting or for trying to investigate!
Headline and quotes extracted from The DR;
“SFA and SPFL chiefs concerned over getting fans back into stadiums as bosses point to European examples.
[Doncaster said], “The return of crowds is something we all want to see …to playing in front of fans as soon as we can.”
[Maxwell said], “As the governing body, we will continue to engage with government and key stakeholders to provide a similar plan for the return of the game at all levels of Scottish football.”
==========
Whilst Hampden – and the clubs – continue to ignore the fans’ demand for improved governance, they are now desperate to get us back into the stadiums – with our cash of course!
And does Maxwell now regard fans as “key stakeholders”?
I know it’s wishful thinking, but just like in 2012, the long suffering, paying punters are in a rare position to dictate change – to their liking – to the governing bodies and clubs, by simply threatening to withhold their money.
Must admit, I’m not in any rush to return to a football stadium – regardless of the virus.
The SFA’s CAS decision last week has just left me scunnered with the whole, senior game to be honest.
In my post of 23.34 I mentioned the SMSM .
I have had a wee read at
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52840999
And I ask: did Jane Lewis
go to our Donald ?
or did he come to her, cashing in on his fame and status?
Did she go to any other club to seek their views on Anne Budges’ proposal?
Did she attempt any kind of objective analysis of the views, and the reasons for those views, of all the other clubs?
Or was she simply handed a wee script , to be faithfully passed on, with minimal effort on her part, as ‘journalism’ at £x per word, or column inch, or whatever way hacks get paid?
She’s with the BBC, of course, and presumably follows the party line, like English and the others
QF 29th May 2020 at 20:10
“I’m not really that bothered if everybody scrolled passed (sic) …”
So just a tad bothered?
No need to be at all bothered.
218 folk were ungracious enough not to scroll past and afterwards awarded the post a Thumbsdown.
Pity QF has gone (and I’m sure he’s a man of his word and we’ll hear no more from him) as we will never find out how reasonable a chap he is.
I wonder if he lives in Eastwood?
Hi Folks
Apologies for our absence the past few days. We have been spending most of our time dealing with a less deadly – but still potent – virus as both SFM websites have been attacked on a daily basis by a Trojan Virus, exploiting some weaknesses in the PHP platform (which the site runs on).
It is (so far) not a problem to put the site back together again within minutes of being alerted to the attack. The trouble is preventing a repeat of the attack – or if either of us are asleep when the alarm goes off 🙂
So far we have been lucky regarding the timing, but if there is any unexplained downtime, please avail your yourself of this explanation in advance 🙂
My attention was drawn via another forum to a call last night on Radio Clyde, which I then listened to on the Podcast. The caller directed a question at Alex Rae about people deeming Celtic’s title this year ‘tainted’. Rae danced all over the place with his answer, but would not distance himself from the notion there should be an asterisk against it. The caller then neatly moved on to the five titles Rangers won when millions were illegally withheld in unpaid taxes, of which Rae himself was a beneficiary. The host of the show, Alison Conroy, got very agitated when the point was made. The call descended into slight farce as they tried to hurry the caller on claiming they had little time left.
My point is this. Why does a media which spends so much time focusing on and criticising illegal tax avoidance and evasion by individuals and companies, completely flip over as soon as the illegal tax avoidance/evasion Rangers were found guilty of is mentioned? What is it that they can’t discuss? There are no unproven allegations being made, and no-one is being slandered. It is a matter of historical fact that Rangers illegally withheld tens of millions in unpaid tax. That fact has been determined by the highest court in the United Kingdom and cannot be challenged. So why do the Scottish media get so agitated when this legally proven fact is raised? It is truly bizarre.
I've been thinking (I know, I know)
If I were a Celtic fan I wouldn't be too upset if people refer to 9 in a row as 8.75 in a row.
If (when) you win the title next year that will be 9.75 in a row.
Still greater than 9.
Still the record.
HS
Higgy's Shoes
It's 9 mate , next year will be 10 ?
Tony.
My tongue was firmly in my cheek as I think most people will realise.
HS
Correct Tony. There is no tarnish attached..It's not even an argument.
However, like the SFA announcing they consider the Res12 allegations are closed, after the SPFL refused to bow to Sevco's groundless demands for an inquiry, the baseless asterisk demands next to this title are sauce from the same bottle…….They SMSM have set up the two cheeks of the arse scenario quite nicely.
Sevvies have something to shout at Timmy, and both organisations will hide behind the firework display.
Truth and reality don't enter into it. A secret 5 way agreement is still in existance which guarantees that one member club is permitted to exist outside of the jurisdiction under which every other club resides. Sevco are quite literally a law unto themselves.
Clyde FC statement
https://www.clydefc.co.uk/news/2020/05/30/6432/#.XtKs7GhKjIV
Below is a very cautious Jason Leitch,can't remember the expert on channel 4 but he raised a good point in what happens if we restart and two teams set to play and one team gets covid 19 infectionballs up in the air I would say ?
https://www.expressandstar.com/sport/uk-sports/2020/05/30/scottish-premiership-not-guaranteed-to-return-on-august-1-says-health-official/
upthehoops 30th May 2020 at 14:26
I then listened to on the Podcast.
………….
I knew as soon as the questions were being asked by the caller, a we are running out of time was coming down as fast as they could.
theredpill 30th May 2020 at 20:56
Below is a very cautious Jason Leitch,can't remember the expert on channel 4 but he raised a good point in what happens if we restart and two teams set to play and one team gets covid 19 infectionballs up in the air I would say ?
https://www.expressandstar.com/sport/uk-sports/2020/05/30/scottish-premiership-not-guaranteed-to-return-on-august-1-says-health-official/
========================================
17 positive tests in the EFL. How many positives will it take to cancel games?
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11688/11997750/efl-confirms-17-positive-coronavirus-tests-after-latest-round-of-testing
Easyjambo, I've been wondering all along about that scenario. Even if they manage to get the football re-started, behind closed doors, how long will it take before it all goes belly up. All it takes is one player to be tested positive within a few days for quarantines to kick in for 50 or 60 people involved in one match! If that were to happen once a week?
easyJambo 30th May 2020 at 21
17 positive tests in the EFL. How many positives will it take to cancel games?
=================
There are so many unknowns, and what 'expert' should we believe? I didn't know so many Professors existed until this all happened!
UTH @ 00:25
"There are so many unknowns, and what 'expert' should we believe?"
It is where so many people in the country are making the mistake. The "experts" at Covid pressers are the ones that back up what the politicians want to happen. Sure, the politicians take on board scientific advice but they then balance it with the political needs. The main need is that the public do not get agitated. Look to the past couple of days in the US where the rioting is happening. The trigger was the killing by the police but it is well recognised that much of the rioting is the venting of the public regarding the destruction of their finances and the loss of millions of jobs. It is what every politician dreads, not because of the violence or the damage but because they will be remembered for this when election time comes round.
It is the answer to the big "why" at the start of this. Why did politicians the world over decide that they preferred to bankrupt their countries by handing out billions to Joe Public than follow the herd immunity policy?
The truth is that the experts we choose to believe should be selected based on the scientific facts if we are concerned with our own safety and less so the society in which we live. The political pronouncements should only ever be the starting point.
For Covid 19 the main facts are the R value(and what it really means) and the real "social distance".
The R value has a lot of emphasis placed on it just now but it really does not tell us anything about the disease. It actually tells only how many people are in social contact with each other because it states the average number of people that one person with the virus will pass it on to. At the height of the pandemic it was sitting at around 3. That makes it more than 3 times more infectious than flu which sits at just under one under our normal circumstances. The covid19 R value has been reduced to just below 1 now but that does not mean that its potency has reduced but just that less people are in contact with the person who is infected. What they do not tell you is what the current value of the flu R value. My guess, and it is only a guess, is that it stands somewhere below 0.3.
Social distancing too is a political decision. Yesterday's sportsound had people calling for it to be reduced from two metres to just one as seen in other countries such as Sweden. Once again the science says something different. It all depends on your desired outcome. For the politicians to adhere to a policy that holds an individual's safety as opposed to the best financial and social outcome would be a huge headache for them.
The scientific research shows that different circumstances give different values. The 2 metres(or 1 in other countries) is probably an average for enclosed space and open space contact. What is more important is that is for normal breathing conditions in still air. The research shows with normal breathing a single virus will not reach as far as two metres under still air conditions. But they also take their research further in that the measure for other conditions . If someone coughs then a virus can travel about three metres and for a sneeze it is about four metres. Of course that is for still air but a head wind or tail wind will reduce and increase that.
So the decisions about to be made by our football authorities will reflect what? Their desire to keep players and spectators safe or to accept a level of risk to satisfy the requirements of the football business to make money?
What's the old saying?
It's only a game.
Sorry, I'm on a roll this morning.
Again on Sportsound yesterday.
Ann Budge's announcement that philanthropists were prepared to inject millions of pounds to help Scottish football resulted in the expected anti-Doncaster reaction. Especially as Ms Budge's suggestion that she was asked to put that in writing and produce a report. Now I am very much of the belief that Doncaster has a lot to answer for over the last decade and that he should be hounded out of our game but it should be done for the right reason.
For anyone to accept that amount of money into any sport then they MUST take many precautions. Not just for the sport but for themselves. To take a verbal communication on this and then run with it leaves no paper trail with which to defend yourself should the source of the donation prove to be illegal. Also, at this time where personal contact is to be kept at a minimum would it not be better that Budge, who already has contact with these "philanthropists", takes the lead on this. This latter point is trivial I know but a complete picture of the personal risks should still include it.
We, in this country, tend to believe that there is no "dirty" money or organised crime involvement in our game, and we may be right, but the odds say otherwise. We have already seen Romanov here and we subsequently have learned, as recently as the last two months, of his criminal background. Add to that the financial condition of our game. In there we see many of the signs that make a business appealing for use by money launderers.
If any administrator, at club or association level, does their work without paying heed to that then we do have a serious weakness in our sport.
This money, if kosher, should be grabbed with both hands and we all should fall at these benefactors' feet in gratitude but not until all the due diligence is performed.
Lastly, I promise.
The benefactors, although unnamed, are reputable businessmen we are assured.
In our Scotland is do the majority consider David Murray as such?
Mickey Edwards 31st May 2020 at 10:25
Lastly, I promise.
The benefactors, although unnamed, are reputable businessmen we are assured.
===========================
Assuming that the benefactors are the same ones who have put money into Hearts, there was a string attached. Apparently they requested that the dress code for the hospitality suites were relaxed, as they didn't like wearing ties.
I don't honestly know if this offer will actually come to anything. It was discussed from early last week on a Hearts message board when it was described as an offer to help pay for Covid testing requirements. Yesterday it was described as a "no strings" offer to help lower league clubs. By definition, that excludes the Premiership, but if the SPFL is not looking to restart the lower leagues then why would they put cash in.
I can see ND looking to take the cash only on a totally "no strings" basis, i.e. he would want it to go into the bigger pot for distribution to all 42 clubs. If that is the case, then the cash may not be forthcoming.
Makes sense EJ.
I have no issue with the benefactors being reputable. I'm just wary about who in this country are regarded as reputable. With or without having wealth off the radar.
My other concern is that, if there are millions available from benefactors, why the hell are they giving it to football when so many other areas are screaming out for help.
As I said earlier, it's only a game.
CFC seldom make a statement just to hear the sound of their own voice. Looks like they are keen to know who is still standing.
http://www.celticfc.net/news/18152
Mickey Edwards 31st May 2020 at 12:30
Mickey, Buy a wee club with its membershippy bits, get a bargain bigger club's stadium from administrators. Change your name if you want…….. Boab's yir auntie.
From todays rags:
"£300k of watches stolen off footie ace.
It seems Riyad Mahrez of Man City has had 3 watches costing
£300k stolen from his house whilst there was no one at home.
One of these watches cost £230,000.
The cheapest, worth more than a nurse's yearly salary.
I know burglary is wrong.
I also appreciate people should be allowed to buy whatever they want
with their own money (as long as it's legal).
But sometimes its hard to sympathise.
HS
Corrupt official 31st May 2020 at 13:16
CFC seldom make a statement just to hear the sound of their own voice. Looks like they are keen to know who is still standing.
http://www.celticfc.net/news/18152
============================
The cynic in me says that Celtic is desperate for an early return to competitive action in order to be able to take up a place in the CL, whenever UEFA announce what they are planning for season 2020/21 competitions.
easyJambo 31st May 2020 at 14:32
The cynic in me says that Celtic is desperate for an early return to competitive action in order to be able to take up a place in the CL, whenever UEFA announce what they are planning for season 2020/21 competitions.
========================================
It seemed a bit of an odd release, and had the cynic in me going too EJ. I'm sure every club is keen to get up and running, but I don't get why the fixture list has any importance. The game will start when it is permitted to, regardless of who plays who. Looking for a hasty fixture list is running before walking, and I think the closest to a fixture list anyone can get is an undated, game 1= X v Y, game 2 =Y v Z etc.
Personally I think we should hold off until it is safely possible to get bums on seats. Some clubs might get a return from live streams, but others not so much. If ST's get you a free-view, (as has been mooted), I doubt even the larger clubs will get much pay per view revenue, although a lot of ST holders will have to get the sausage rolls in.
Albeit there may be reduced stewarding costs for smaller clubs, how can they be expected to absorb full matchday costs, i.e. wages, travel, ground-care, etc, but also the additional £4K per match testing process, and sanitation expenses, with not a pie sold.? How will player isolation be guaranteed in the interim tween test and actual match?
Then there is the possibility of a spike throwing the whole shooting match in the air.
Better to start a couple of weeks late, than a day early methinks. The danger of throwing caution to the wind is too great.
Another thought just crossed my mind (not a long journey I admit)
This point may have been mentioned before so apologies… but I don't remember it coming up.
If the Sky contract stipulates that there must be 4 Celtic v rangers* games per season
what would happen in the future if one of the 2 (Not liable to happen to Celtic, I know)
comes in 7th before the split?
i suspect some sort of jiggery-pokery would come into play.
HS
I gave up listening to BBC Sportsound yesterday. Not everyone will agree, but I think many will, that the Sportsound crew are a gullible bunch!
Once again they have allowed Ann Budge the opportunity to attempt to publicly embarrass/shame Scottish football administrators by her comments about her philanthropic acquaintances.
Just like Scott Gardiner she gives information to the Sportsound team that leads to them having another opportunity to blast Neil Doncaster and the cynic in me asks how come these statements always seem to come when things are not going Hearts way?
If she felt that ND was ignoring her why not directly share with other clubs after all they are the SPFL? Apparently it was on Hearts websites earlier in the week but that’s not the best way to share the information.
The Sportsound conspiracy theorists of course then had the Aberdeen manager saying he had heard about the Budge offer adding to their condemnation of ND.
They must have been so disappointed with the Dundee United interview with a carefully worded response making it clear that they knew nothing about this possible source of funding.
Have the Sportsound crew not learned that Ann Budge interviews more often than not have a hidden agenda and give an inaccurate representation of events? Every time they are taken in hook, line and sinker!
ND did make a statement in light of what was said but if it was read out on Sportsound I was no longer listening so have no idea how they treated it.
My sympathy for Hearts position comes and goes. I have to say Ann Budge approach tends to make it go!
Sorry EJ but I forgot to mention what I was actually cynical about. Given the pure mentalness of Scottish fitba it may be that whispers are reaching Celtic Park, that some clubs might prefer to stay mothballed until bums on seats are possible…..Hence Celtic's rush to get fixtures confirmed. (as you say to get up to speed)
Such was the palaver of shutting the game down, I wouldn't be surprised to see a similar palaver as to re-starting and under what conditions. It just seemed to me that Celtic have retaliated first.
Another possible reason for Celtic’s keenness to see the fixture list for the new season could be to do with ticket pricing: Celtic’s season ticket (ST) renewal prices have been published (with renewal deadline date having already been nudged back a couple of times, to 30 June). However, my guess is that a big number of ST-holders (not just at Celtic) may be delaying their decision to renew until they have a clearer idea of what they’re being asked to pay for.
How can there possibly be a fixture list whilst there is still discussion of restructuring, which would presumably mean the top division changing size.
I was just reading that Celtic have ordered two all singing all dancing test machines from South Korea, offering a result within 20 minutes. Also that the SFA have ordered two and Ross County one. At £35K a pop they're not cheap.
Corrupt official 31st May 2020 at 16:06
Dunderheid 31st May 2020 at 16:28
Homunculus 31st May 2020 at 16:48
=================================
In the normal round of announcements, the League fixtures don’t come out until the middle of June at the earliest. Last year it was 21 June.
https://spfl.co.uk/news/201920-fixtures-released-tomorrow
It is not unreasonable to suggest that Celtic has other motives than simply to get the league underway.
I stick to my view that readiness for European games is their number one priority at the moment. In a normal season, training would probably resume in a week or so’s time, with a series of low key friendlies to get rid of the rustiness, then start their CL qualifying campaign in early July (the original schedule would have seen Celtic’s first qualifying game on 7/8 July).
I can’t see any scope for friendlies before the planned 1 August start date, so it will be straight into competitive action in both the League and the CL qualifying (if there is any).
UEFA had penciled in the month of August to complete last season’s tournaments. I guess that a qualifying tournament could run in parallel with that, but you could only play two rounds, rather than the normal four if you stuck to midweek fixtures.
adam812 31st May 2020 at 15:54
I gave up listening to BBC Sportsound yesterday. Not everyone will agree, but I think many will, that the Sportsound crew are a gullible bunch!
==============
For a publicly funded national broadcaster they simply don't present both sides of a debate, which is just plain wrong. Ironic they went on so much about reform in Scottish football governance. A huge clear out at the BBC would not go amiss either. I find it particularly baffling why they place so much store on what Stephen Thompson thinks. Clearly his status as an ex-Rangers player and the holder of an illegal EBT overrides everything else.
Higgy’s Shoes 31st May 2020 at 15:45
i suspect some sort of jiggery-pokery would come into play.
……………..
A 5 way agreement could play a part
Money from anonymous benefactors cannot be acceptable.Transparency requires that the sources of cash are known and are seen to be reputable. Hearts have had one such donation already and now are at it again. Is there a limit to what may be donated anonymously? £1M?, £10M, £50M? More dodgy unaccountability in Scottish Football.
macfurgly 31st May 2020 at 22:12
'…Money from anonymous benefactors cannot be acceptable.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Would I be altogether off the mark, macfurgly, to understand your statement as indicating that it could not be acceptable that monies should be offered anonymously to an already suspect sports governance body , because there might possibly be the impression that undue influence may be being brought to bear on that suspect governance body in order to bring about an outcome desired by the anonymous benefactors?
I make it clear that I am in no way impugning the motives of Mrs Budge or of those to whom she makes reference.
Rather, based on the experience of 5-Way Agreement and the LNS/Bryson nonsense ( not to mention the questionable RIFC plc Prospectus!) , I believe that the SPFL would not be above a shabby thing, and, in effect, understand 'benefactions ' as imposing some kind of demand for a 'quid pro quo'
If there are folk prepared out of the goodness of their hearts and a genuine desire to save Scottish Football (corrupt as it is) , then let us know who they are, so that we can assess them and their motives, and applaud them -or wonder.
At the behest of my daughter , I read through TRFC's season ticket terms and conditions , ( then compared them with Thistle's ) and can find nothing that exempts them from having to offer refunds for unplayed home games . Same as me wanting nothing back from Thistle , I don't think she's after a refund ( I paid for the fecker so she's on to plums ! ), but doesn't want caught out if there are no games this year, can't accept that they are allowed just to keep the money . Could any TRFC fans looking in point me to the appropriate clause ? Cheers .
paddy malarkey 31st May 2020 at 23:54
'. I paid for the fecker so she's on to plums ! '
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The 'fecker' being the season ticket , not your daughter! ( I hope).
Ah, you're a hard man, pm, if you don't give your daughter the refund of what you paid!!
I enjoyed your post.
macfurgly 31st May 2020 at 22:12
Money from anonymous benefactors cannot be acceptable.Transparency requires that the sources of cash are known and are seen to be reputable. Hearts have had one such donation already and now are at it again. Is there a limit to what may be donated anonymously? £1M?, £10M, £50M? More dodgy unaccountability in Scottish Football.
================================
The mystery benefactor has been connected with Hearts for the last five years and was instrumental in the arrangement that saw Hearts adopt the "Save the Children" shirt sponsorship, as well as helping fund the stadium redevelopment.
In those five years his identity remained largely unknown (at his request) to everyone outside the inner circle of the Hearts board.
Now step forward less than 48 hours. He offers support to struggling SPFL clubs and his name is revealed and plastered over the Daily Record.
Now who has the most integrity, the benefactor, Hearts, the SPFL or the Daily Record?
easyJambo 1st June 2020 at 09:07
'…He offers support to struggling SPFL clubs and his name is revealed and plastered over the Daily Record.
Now who has the most integrity, the benefactor, Hearts, the SPFL or the Daily Record? '
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Prime suspect has to be the SPFL, in my book.
The DR is incapable of doing any original fact-finding and research, reliant as it is on regurgitating what is fed to it.
James Anderson would not have provided the details.
Hearts had kept schtum for years.
I think Anne Budge had to tell the SPFL, in confidence, and someone in that outfit fed the story to the DR.
If the DR had known about the details when Budge first mentioned the fact that people were prepared to help, they sure as hell would have published them then.
And the SPFL has a track record of lack of integrity.
The SPFL resolution to end the season and distribute monies to the lower league clubs was passed on 10 April 2020.
The Premiership was called on 18 May 2020.
At the time many a chairman stepped up and said the resolution was great because 1) It got the last tranche of prize money into the club’s bank accounts and 2) It gave everyone certainty so as to plan for next season.
We are now at 1 June 2020 and still we haven’t got a clue what is happening with regard to Scottish Football.
The SPFL chairman has recently been talking about the Bet Fred Cup starting in July while at the same time lower league clubs are talking about mothballing. Therefore, you can’t have both scenarios.
The Premiership is trying to get started ASAP but there is no obvious pathway for how the Championship and Leagues One and Two are to start up.
In that circumstance if you thought that promotion and relegation were difficult to decide in 2019/20 what about 2020/21.
For example if the talked about 18 game Championship goes ahead from January 2021 and, say , Hearts win, will they be worthy of promotion? Will the bottom team in the Premiership, say Dundee United, feel hard done when they will have toiled over a full season only to be replaced by a team playing a limited number of games. Asterisks anyone?
Presumably there will be no relegation from the Championship to a mothballed League One where no-one will gain promotion. Teams in the lower two divisions could therefore be ‘trapped’ there for a season and maybe even more.
What came across from Ann Budge’s interview broadcast on Saturday was an apparent frustration at a lack of progress for the footballing authorities.
Yes there is a degree of self interest in relation to Hearts position but she now seems to be not only putting forward plans for reconstruction but now also trying to find out exactly what other teams are intending to do.
Perhaps her tardiness in dealing with Mr Levein has made her realise action needs to be taken and quickly to make progress if football in the lower leagues is going to survive let alone be played anytime soon.
Where has her co-chair on this group, Hamilton and SPFL Board member Les Gray, gone – missing in action.
What have the lower league teams contributed to the debate from all these self-proclaimed experienced business men – nothing but criticism. (See Clyde and Cowdenbeath) As far as I can see not one positive uttering or any alternative proposals for finding a way forward.
As discussed above they don’t even seem to have considered the future implications of mothballing on other teams in the SPFL or the pyramid system in general.
Where are these guys in terms of finding innovative solutions.
Budge, through her contacts, appears to be trying to bringing potential new cash into the game in attempt to see Scottish Football through this crisis.
Where is the similar drive to seek out help and use wealthy contacts for the whole of the Scottish game from the big players at Celtic, Aberdeen, Hibs etc.
Where is the similar drive from the lower league chairmen?
As the old saying goes, if you want something done give it to a busy person. At least Budge comes across as being passionate about trying to move matters forward – not only for Hearts but for others.
As always the Scottish Football Authorities have reverted to type and set up a Joint Response group with six sub-groups. Plenty of chatting but no action. Like many initiatives before, anything coming out of these groups will stifled by the self-interest of member clubs, the can will be kicked down the road and/or a weighty document will be produced that will end up siting on a shelf.
The game needs real leadership now but I don’t see anyone in a position of authority really trying to get a grip on things.
Budge, at least, appears to be trying to find a way forward but, for a variety of reasons, seems to be getting little or no support from the wider game and now her contact, who may have been able to help from a financial point of view, has been ‘outed’ and could be more inclined to walk away so as to leave the petty minded to get on with it.
I too think Celtic are desperate to get the footie underway because of the Euro quailifiers , Ive no problem with that. However I am very uneasy about the way Rangers have said before that they dont want to play games behind closed doors . I get that to a certain extent too as playing these games will incur costs , costs that they probably cant meet. With all the fraud , cheating and down right lies that that club has been guilty of over the years I dont think it would be too far fetched for them to "claim" that a right few of their players have tested positive for covid and no games can be played ………..no footie , possibly not any form of meaningful games for Celtic to prepare for a shot at the champs leaugue……… the Rangers fans would erect a statue for DP if that came about. … Ok maybe I am being paranoid but I have been guilty of not being paranoid enough in the past
I’m as confused as anyone about self-isolation & the duration thereof when arriving in the UK from a foreign country.
I understand that a large number of non-Scottish footballers returned to their ‘home’ countries to sit out the pandemic & the consequent footballing hiatus.
If these players come back to Scotland to commence training on the eleventh of this month how is that possible if they are required to isolate themselves at a specific address for fourteen days?
paddy malarkey 31st May 2020 at 23:54
………………..
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1267434790967541767/photo/1
……….
I think this maybe what you are looking for.
The club cannot accept any liability for any expense inccured even in the event that the match is cancelled.
To echo the cynicism echoed by some other posters, we are supposed to believe that a previously unidentified "off the radar" billionaire is now willing to donate money to the teams in the lower leagues without expecting anything in return.
It's obviously got nothing to do with him having a connection with Hearts and Hearts, purely by chance mind you, wanting to gain the support of teams in their attempts to reconstruct all of the professional leagues so that they avoid regulation. Of course, there is no chance these two items could be in any way related.
Scottish football does itself no favours sometimes…or should that be all of the time?!
ElCapitano2013 1st June 2020 at 14:04
As discussed above, all other teams, individually or as a group, are more than welcome to source other streams of income to help resolve elements of the ongoing crisis.
(Michael Stewart has been banging on about trying to raise the issue of additional broadcasting rights and income for weeks now)
As Budge said in her interview, yes it is about Hearts being relegated in unusual circumstances but it is also about peoples jobs, not only at Tynecastle but at other clubs. For some it may actually be about survival.
I’m more than happy for this chap to simply keep on directing his millions towards Tynecastle if his offer is so abhorrent to others.
Reading between the lines, while there will be hardship playing in the Championship, if it ever gets started, the message is that Hearts appear to be in a reasonable financial position with people, including this philanthropist and the FoH all potentially putting money into the club over and above season tickets and merchandising sales. Whatever this next season brings the club will make the required financial decisions and, IMHO, still come out the other side.
I’m guessing that some may not be so lucky the longer this crisis goes on.
While I hope that all teams can survive, if any do fall then I hope they remember who at least tried to offer assistance and who drew up their drawbridges.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52881608
I'm not sure how I feel about this.
easyJambo 1st June 2020 at 09:07
Now who has the most integrity, the benefactor, Hearts, the SPFL or the Daily Record?
oooo
I take it from that his name and the nature of his donations was known to the SPFL, who were satisfied as to his aims and integrity. I trust the same was the case with the previous other anonymous donors to Hearts.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42415484
That being the case, they are not truly anonymous. Anonymity would mean donations from unknown persons, possibly in the £M’s from, possibly and allegedly, Hong Kong or South Africa which may cause UEFA or others to consider the possibility of money laundering or other corruption. The source of funds into football needs complete transparency.
Cluster One 1st June 2020 at 13:40
I see what you are saying, however an alternate take on that could be that it relates to expenses other than the ticket itself. For example if someone had paid for travelling, a hotel or whatever else.
In the even of such ambiguity surely it should be read to favour the party which did not draw up the contract.
Having said that, there is unlikely to be any legal action, so I doubt it will go anywhere.
wottpi 1st June 2020 at 14:32
===============================
When you say "people putting money into the club", is this actual donations, as opposed to loans, buying shares etc.
Cluster One 1st June 2020 at 13:40
Thanks for that , but I'd read that and don't think it covers the current situation . The matches haven't been postponed or cancelled , they have been"called" within the competition rules and the points shared between the competing teams . And it's not incurred expenses that you would be looking to recover , but recompense for undelivered product you are being deprived of .
macfurgly 1st June 2020 at 15:12
I take it from that his name and the nature of his donations was known to the SPFL, who were satisfied as to his aims and integrity. I trust the same was the case with the previous other anonymous donors to Hearts.
==========================
I think that you will find that the Hearts donor(s) on each occasion have been one and the same.
I don’t think that it is within the remit of the SPFL to satisfy themselves that the source(s) of clubs’ income is kosher. However, Hearts do have a legal responsibility in terms of money laundering regulations to ensure that any funds they receive are legitimately sourced and given. That means conducting due diligence on the donor(s).
Where the football authorities may have an interest is in relation to UEFA FFP. As Auldheid has previously pointed out that is very much a self certification exercise with the SFA doing next to no diligence on the returns.
Unlike other clubs, each tranche of cash received by Hearts was a donation. There were no loans involved, no shares issued, nada. Any Hearts trading “losses” that may have been covered by the cash sums received were just a fraction of that allowed by UEFA (€39m over three years).
No rules were broken, bent or anything else untoward. If you disagree with clubs being allowed to accept generous donations, then you better have a word with the Boards of the Foundation of Hearts, the Well Society, AberDNA, etc.
easyJambo 1st June 2020 at 16:50
Thanks, that is what I was asking, so it was donations.
I believe I read that all he wanted for that was not to have to wear a tie. Which I have to say is quite cool.
However if it was allowed it just shows Hearts don't have the same high standards as Rangers, at least sartorially.
I assume that the proposed donation will be to the SPFL who will then 'divvy up' the cash but on what basis?.Football clubs in the top flight are owned and operated by rich men in their own right(with notable exceptions such as Motherwell) and it would be unseemly if said owners sat back to take advantage of this gentlemans largesse.
As no shares or equity is involved does the recipient have to pay tax on the gift ?
The frustration is starting to show on here. To expect any organisation to plan for the future under the present circumstances is expecting too much. The EPL can take the gamble without financial mayhem worrying them too much but in Scotland we don't have that luxury.
So Hearts and Celtic aren't getting the clarity they seem to expect, so what? They, and there fans, are ignoring the threat to the future viability of the other clubs and the health of the players that they expect to bend to their requests just so they can deal with their own predicament.
Is it really acceptable to risk a number of clubs' existence just so that one club can get its defined number of games or so another club can get match practice to better its chances in Europe and extend its financial superiority over the rest?
Calm down and let's just be thankful that we are healthy enough to worry about the future.
The first hit of heroin is always for free.
Mickey Edwards 1st June 2020 at 17:32
I don’t expect any number of games and nor do I expect players and other members of a team’s staff to be put at risk.
What I do expect now is, after the resolution was voted through so convincingly over six weeks ago (as we are often gleefully reminded) and many a chairman waxed lyrical about how it was great news as they could now make plans for 2020/21, that the powers that be and the ‘supportive chairmen’ actually come forward with those plans.
If, having considered the options, they want to mothball then go ahead if that helps their clubs survive.
However just say so and those who want and can play can make the appropriate arrangements.
If you recall it was Hearts asking why the SPFL was in such a hurry and in supporting the T’Rangers motion queried the actions and intentions of the board and the key members of staff.
Now the first resolution has passed and the T’Rangers one defeated those same board members and CEO, supportive chairmen etc seem to be dragging their heels.
Why? Because as usual they had no long term plan beyond dealing with one hurdle when clearly there are at least a dozen ahead.
The current situation is not one of Hearts or indeed Celtic’s making.
wottpi 1st June 2020 at 18:46
I don’t think Hearts “supported” Rangers per se. Well any more than they supported Stranraer.
Am I not right in saying that Hearts, Rangers and Stranraer together called for an EGM to discuss a resolution that all three put forward.
Probably worth also mentioning that both Hearts and Rangers have now accepted that the league could not be played to a conclusion.
https://spfl.co.uk/news/ladbrokes-premiership-and-spfl-season-201920-cur
WOTTPI@18:46
The simple fact is that no-one knows what we are able to do. Our politicians,as always, are making changes that will let them achieve their goals while not upsetting the masses. They want to start the country back to work but that will cost lives. They will use the frustration of people shut up at home to believe that it will be safe to do so and they will pray that it doesn't backfire on them. Should something as trivial as sport take that same attitude?
The simple fact is that, just like everyone else, the football governing body does not know what the future holds. They can't predict what will happen once the league restarts. Smaller teams could go to the wall if a single case of covid19 shuts it all down again. They will have committed to contracts while knowing that there is no kitty in the Scottish game that can help them.
Clubs see a message from the government indicating that we are returning to normal but that is a lie. Do you really think that they should gamble?
I have no time for the SFA and SPFL but they are on a hiding to nothing in the current circumstances. For Celtic to want clarification so that they can prepare for Europe and Hearts so that they can plan for next season is the height of stupidity. Number one aim is to clarify what, under the worst circumstances, each club needs to survive and whether we can afford it.
Having said that, does it really matter what the end result is at a time when we don't even know what awaits us in the new normal. Recession, hyper-inflation, high unemployment, an elderly population that cannot mix with the rest of society for fear of catching a fatal illness and a government has no financial reserves to pay credits to the much higher numbers of poor and unemployed.
I don't think that knowing next year's fixture list is really going to matter, do you?
Mickey Edwards 1st June 2020 at 20:12
In the big scheme of things I don't think next season's fixtures are a priority.
But those matters are for other forums.
This is a football forum/blog to discuss the matters of the day. Therefore I think it is perfectly, reasonable to comment on current developments.
Yes there are going to be many hurdles and issues ahead but football is like any other business and it needs to make plans as best it can.
When things get tough folks like a distraction, be that drink, fags, the movies or sport.
Football and other sports may not be top of the list in terms of restoring the countries financial position but it may help with peoples mental health and therefore shouldn't be so easily dismissed.
I note that there are expressions of hope that the SPFL Board will not use the distribution model used for the distribution of Commercial Revenue in deciding how to allocate to the 42 clubs such millions of pounds as may come as a charitable gift from a donor/donors to 'Scottish Football'.
The Articles appear to give the Board absolute discretion in how other monies or revenue of whatever kind other than 'commercial' are to be dealt with.
But it surely would not be right for any division in the SPFL to be given less than any other? And there would have to be some provision made from the total gift for other areas of the sport, perhaps the women's game and certainly grass -roots football?
Each division might thereafter decide how to distribute its share among the clubs in that division.
No club or division ca be assumed to have an 'entitlement' to a greater share than any other club of an unearned, charitable gift!
WOTTPI@20:12
My original answer to your post @12:34 yesterday where you wrote a long moan asking why people, the administrators and the lower league clubs, were not doing something. My response was to show that it was unfair to demand that. So my posts are football related.
As far as planning for the future I think you will find that companies of equivalent size to Scottish football clubs will be at the same point of forward planning, financial risk assessment and prayers that they will solvent. Our experience from the 2008 financial crash tells that the banks and financial institutions will not be listening closely to those prayers.
I would say though, as someone who has his own mental health issues, getting angry at the running of the game will do nothing to ward that off. In fact quite the opposite.
JC @ 11:59
This is where giving a donation to the organisation is inappropriate. Far better to put the money in a trust (NOT an EBT) and let the clubs apply for financial aid supported by a clear plan for its use.
Mickey Edwards 2nd June 2020 at 12:04
'..Far better to put the money in a trust ..'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I wouldn't disagree with that , of course, although I would wonder why the likes of James Anderson (who probably knows a thing or to about Trusts!) would not himself have suggested that way forward? [ Of course, for all we know he may already have proposed that, and the talks with the SPFL may indeed run along those lines]
The really important thing is to ensure that, whether it's a one-off charitable lump sum payment or a continuing Trust arrangement looking to the future as much as to the present, the 'commercial revenue' distribution model' is ruled out.
I see the SMSM has recently wheeled out SPL referees, in articles whose purpose seems to be to generate sympathy for the whistlers – and for the well paid, side job they have chosen.
Interestingly though, this is one area where most/all SPL clubs’ supporters are united: there is minimal trust or respect for the match officials.
I don’t think a few feeble SMSM articles will help either – and especially going by their attached ‘Comments’.
And another cost of the shutdown – presumably – will be the delayed introduction of VAR. The Scottish Referees Association will no doubt be able to kick that particularly awkward can along the road – for another couple of seasons, at least?
So, whenever the game restarts behind closed doors and further: we are stuck with the unacceptably poor standards of match officiating.
…along with the continuation of unacceptably poor standards of governance at Hampden.
Mibbees the SFA could add a sixth ‘pillar’ to their ‘Strategic Objectives’, just for transparency;
“No change: no improvement.”
John Clark @ 12.31
I had no idea who James Anderson was. However coincidently today’s Herald Business has a big feature on a James Anderson, joint manager of £10bn Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust and Baillie Gifford partner. I assume it is he?? Or maybe not??
Presumably it is within the donor’s gift to say how any donation is spent and if the SPFL feel that they can not commit to any/all of the conditions (an extreme example would be that there has to be a restructuring that meant Hearts were in the top division) then they would have to decline. If it was to pay for every club’s covid testing then that would probably be OK. Alternatively there may be no strings attached and therefor could be the money spent at the discretion of the SPFL. I do not know how much is being donated but unless it were a very large sum then the income from a Trust Fund would likely be insignificant in today’s environment when divided by 42?
Bordersdon@13:55
According to the Scotsman, that's the very man.
As to the trust, a large income is not a priority. The big clubs have no right to stay big and therefore should not be looking to a fund to help them do so. They have the ability to cut their cloth at this difficult time. Unfortunately the amount of cloth clubs below the top leagues have wouldn't be enough to make a thong for an anorexic. The only cuts that they could make would be there own throats. It is for these clubs that a fund would be advantageous at a later date. Just now though I can't see past the mothball option.
bordersdon 2nd June 2020 at 13:55
!Presumably it is within the donor’s gift to say how any donation is spent '.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Both Mrs Budge and Mr Anderson ( the very same Anderson) have indicated that the gift would be made absolutely and without pre-conditions as to how it is to be spent.
And the amounts being mentioned are in the order of £9 million or so, apparently.
42 into £9M=£214 285 and pence. Not a lot of help to the bigger clubs, but a potential life-saver to many clubs which might otherwise die due to lack of lack of revenue because of 'behind-closed-doors matches' .
I think my basic point is that whatever use is made of the charitable donation, the 'commercial revenue' distribution model should NOT be used!!
Homunculus 1st June 2020 at 15:17
paddy malarkey 1st June 2020 at 15:22
…………………
They did Receive a £25 voucher, but i could not find anywhere that it would state a £25 voucher is what you would get as compensation for a situation like this. Seen a few screen grabs of fans not happy for not getting any refund for games not being played.
…………
But Rangers won’t be following the likes of Stirling Albion and Partick Thistle who have offered refunds to fans, and will provide vouchers to be used on club products instead.
The £25 being provided by Rangers will be able to be used on the new MYGERS membership scheme, match tickets – including friendlies, women’s games, cup tickets and legends matches -, hospitality packages, soccer school programmes, RangersTV subscriptions, stadium tours and club events.
I could be wrong but it looks like no refund, you get a £25 voucher a season ticket price freeze and a few other bits and bobs.
Thing is if they are selling next seasons tickets at the same price, and next season kicks off with no fans, Will they be offered another £25 voucher?
It comes as the Ibrox side begin selling their season tickets to fans for next season with managing director Stewart Robertson announcing the new scheme.
wottpi 1st June 2020 at 22:34
21
Mickey Edwards 1st June 2020 at 20:12
In the big scheme of things I don’t think next season’s fixtures are a priority.
But those matters are for other forums.
……………….
Celtic like most clubs may want to get things in order, although that order could change at any time.but best be prepared anyhow.
……………….
Smaller teams could go to the wall if a single case of covid19 shuts it all down again. They will have committed to contracts while knowing that there is no kitty in the Scottish game that can help them.
…Don’t smaller teams get Uefa solidarity payments on the back of Celtic reaching the Champions League group stage?
Could be a life saver for some clubs this season. Celtic doing there homework early could help a lot of clubs.
I know JC was looking into the IPO.
I stumbled across this.
https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/2012/10/19/comment/chronic-investor-blog/rangers-ipo-likely-to-appeal-to-fans-not-investors-4K3OdfNlzZV4zBan7MLmDK/article.html
…………..
Investors chronacle.
It means that the new club – The Rangers Football Club Limited – is debt-free.
….
As punishment for going into administration, Rangers was booted out of the SPL, Scotland’s top division.
It is a bit over the place. A new club, but no mention of liquidation, just administration, and there is an upside for the 54-times Scottish New club champions.
Cluster One 2nd June 2020 at 20:34
'…
I know JC was looking into the IPO.
I stumbled across this.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Ha,ha, Cluster One:
I've put Ken Wieland in among the SMSM's worst purveyors of half-arsed 'journalism' and propagators of misleading pieces.
I'd never heard of him before (my household has not much call for the 'Investor's Chronicle'!) and may I say I would never read anything else he ever wrote or may write again, if he's still around.
Thanks for the link.
John Clark 2nd June 2020 at 21:07
………….
Found while looking for something else, so many things wrong in one article, and they are the ones who are suppose to know what they are talking about.
CO @ 18:42
"Don’t smaller teams get Uefa solidarity payments on the back of Celtic reaching the Champions League group stage?"
No they don't unless they are in the top division in the previous season. So Dundee United will get nothing as will all the clubs in the other three leagues.
I take it that it was a typo when you put "Celtic" in the above quote instead of "any Scottish club" because UEFA don't care whether it is Celtic or not. Only the ever more skewed Scottish set-up means that the odds are stacked against any other Scottish team doing well in Europe.
It is a self-regenerating anomaly that is not good for the Scottish game. It is the very same anomaly that sees Celtic unprepared to call out the Big Lie. That sees desire for income trump the good of the game. Celtic (at this moment it is Celtic although a hat tip should go towards the Ibrox club for outlasting them in last season competition) would veto any move to make our league more competitive if that challenged there place at the top.
Be clear, this is NOT about sport this is about money. Those that still carry the belief in the "Celtic way" and the "Celtic family" need to come to terms with the reality that their club's board has long since jettisoned that fantasy.
To get back to your point. The solidarity payment is not from Celtic but from UEFA. I think if the responsibility of deciding where that money ended up were handed to Celtic we would see it resting in their own bank account. What it currently adds to the coffers of the recipient teams would be less than what they would earn through the gates playing in a league where the disparity in quality and finance was minimised.
Mickey Edwards 3rd June 2020 at 08:34
“Don’t smaller teams get Uefa solidarity payments on the back of Celtic reaching the Champions League group stage?”
No they don’t unless they are in the top division in the previous season. So Dundee United will get nothing as will all the clubs in the other three leagues.
…………………
I was more talking about the smaller teams in the top division as that is were celtic play And the lower leagues have not been given a start date yet.(Celtic to want clarification so that they can prepare for Europe)
So the smaller clubs in the top division will get a UEFA solidarity payments.
….
Dundee utd may miss out on a UEFA solidarity payment but will know that playing in the top division will bring other rewards.
………….
I take it that it was a typo when you put “Celtic” in the above quote instead of “any Scottish club”
…No typo, as the original post was about celtic calling for clarification.
…………………
You say. Only the ever more skewed Scottish set-up means that the odds are stacked against any other Scottish team doing well in Europe.
But then give hat tip towards the Ibrox club for outlasting them in last season Europa competition. Not much of a stack against then.I suppose if other clubs wanted to speculate to accumulate like the ibrox club they could do well in europe and out last them in european competition.
………………….
I agree that the desire for income trump the good of the game.Has done for many years but no one complained about it, they did try and keep that desire for income in the top division in 2012 but the fans believed it would have killed the integrity of the game and was a lesson to be learned to keep club finances in order as you never know what is coming down the pipe.
…………..
Be clear, this is NOT about sport this is about money. Clear as day, always has been about money.
…………………
To get back to your point. The solidarity payment is not from Celtic but from UEFA.
…
Never said it was from celtic.
Don’t smaller teams get Uefa solidarity payments on the back of Celtic reaching the Champions League group stage?
Sky’s deal to show SPFL matches for the coming season and the introduction of virtual season tickets has been concluded.
https://spfl.co.uk/news/scottish-premiership-to-return-as-part-of-new-de
It’s worth noting that it looks as if the liability due to Sky in respect of games not shown at the end of season 2019/20, is being repaid over the five year duration of the new deal.
It was suggested yesterday that Sky was due in excess of £1.5m.
I'm not giving a "hat tip" to a club which lasted longer in Europe by losing £11m in the previous season, then immediately spending £10m on players it couldn't afford.
They are still in the Europa Cup so could win it. However with the amount of money they have spent / lost since they were formed they should have won at least one domestic trophy since they falteringly clambered into the top division.
I recall EUFA solidarity payments being mentioned by ASWGL on SentinelCelts recently
In 2018 nine clubs in the SPFL got more than £370,000 each, in UEFA solidarity payments due to Celtic reaching the Champions League group stages. Celtic themselves received £28.7m.
As CO correctly states it could be a life saver for a lot of clubs
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45978052
What would you rather be when you people are looking to do you for contempt of court- a nobody of a ticket-tout, or a director of the holding company of a professional football club?
In my inbox today, there is an interesting (if rather long) judgment of the (English) civil Appeal Court.
see https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/mckay-v-the-all-england-tennis-club/
Easy Jambo @ 12.40
———————————–
If it is correct that the repayment regarding 2019/20 is £1.5m to be repaid over 5 years and the 5 year deal is for £150m (I think) then this is not a bad outcome. Considering that over 20% of the 2019/20 season was not completed including 50% of the BIG games £1.5m seems very reasonable.
Whether or not the Scottish game is being undersold compared to other comparable countries is of course another question.
my post of 13.44: delete the redundant 'you' between 'when' and 'people' in the first line, please.
bordersdon 3rd June 2020 at 13:51
If it is correct that the repayment regarding 2019/20 is £1.5m to be repaid over 5 years and the 5 year deal is for £150m (I think) then this is not a bad outcome. Considering that over 20% of the 2019/20 season was not completed including 50% of the BIG games £1.5m seems very reasonable.
===================================
In the reconstruction papers a figure of £9m+ was mentioned. The fact that the SPFL has reached a settlement with SKY now opens the door for other broadcasters to do likewise, e.g., re BT live games, BBC highlights, radio and live championship games, international deals (do we still have that?), Ladbrokes as league sponsors etc.
There are still a lot of unanswered questions following the SPFL's statement, particularly about virtual STs. I'm a bit sceptical about the arrangements as I don't think they are quite the radical innovation that they are being portrayed.
"During the 2020/21 season, each Premiership club will be able to sell a package to season ticket holders to watch all home games."
Streaming is limited to existing/new ST holders?
Do you therefore have to purchase a full price ST in order to watch (in theory, only one person in a household would need to buy one for a whole family and friends to watch).
No individual match tickets?
No access for fans to stream away games?
How long is the service available? The whole season or until fans are allowed back (in limited or unlimited numbers)
I assume games can be streamed at 3pm on a Saturday.
Does the streaming service cover games that are already being shown live by Sky?
On what platform will they be streamed, e.g. on a club's website, youtube etc.?
Is there a limit on the number of subscribers for any club?
Who will be providing the cameras/commentators?
Will Sky be taking a cut of the revenue?
Will Championship, L1 and L2 clubs be allowed to stream their games simultaneously?
Sky have a cheek.
They want the money back for non completion of the season whilst still charging Sky customers
for a package which contains no live sport.
I've contacted Sky to cancel or get a price reduction and they tell me I am to be held to the 18 month contract I took out with them last summer.
HS
Higgy's Shoes 3rd June 2020 at 15:36
I've contacted Sky to cancel or get a price reduction and they tell me I am to be held to the 18 month contract I took out with them last summer.
==============================
Is that correct. I was sure that Sky Sports had offered a 3 month pause on subscriptions, i.e. extending them beyond the current contract.
I have a "premier league" Now TV subscription (subsidiary of Sky) which gives me streaming access to all the Sky Sports channels. I also complained about the loss of live sport and finally they agreed to refund 3 months worth of my subscription. A day later, I got an email saying that they had instead decided to extend my contract an no extra cost until the EPL season is complete, which is all I had asked for in the first instance.
EJ: I thought so too.
But trying to get a rebate/cancellation is impossible (obviously not for you).
I noticed you used the words "finally they agreed" which suggests that things weren't straightforward.
Also, one of my friends has Sky through Talk Talk. No rebate for him either.
Although this can't solely be put down to Sky.
But some general questions need to be asked
Have Sky reduced the costs to third parties?
If not, then why not?
If they have, then why aren't these third parties reducing the amount they are charging their customers.
HS
Higgy's Shoes 3rd June 2020 at 16:18
But trying to get a rebate/cancellation is impossible (obviously not for you).
I noticed you used the words "finally they agreed" which suggests that things weren't straightforward.
==============================
It wasn't straightforward. I used their complaints process without success, before eventually emailing Sky's CEO (jeremy.darroch@bskyb.com). That finally got a response from their customer service department and, after a few emails were exchanged, we reached an acceptable settlement.
Now TV's Ts & Cs requires that any material change to the services provided should be communicated to customers. They didn't do that with me. I'd imaging that Sky's Ts & Cs will be similar. Add a threat to take the matter to OFCOM if you don't get a satisfactory outcome.
I'm with Virgin.
They have reduced my payment by c£30 for the last couple of months because of no live sport.
I still have SKY and BT Sport available to me.
The demand on CelticTV servers will be substantial in terms of providing a reliable streaming service. 50K season ticket holders plus existing expat subscriber base all adds up to trouble ahead. I think it will have to be offered via the Sky streaming platform as they have the infrastructure to cope.If the clubs try and limit access to a single stream per registered address on the season ticket list then they fuel the demand for refunds. I can see multi ticket households lending a virtual ticket to a mate as they ahem can't attend the game that week.Pubs will have a field day too.Tricky.
easyJambo 3rd June 2020 at 16:37
‘…., before eventually emailing Sky’s CEO (jeremy.darroch@bskyb.com). That finally got a response.’
“That finally got a response” (my italics)
“””””””””””””””””””””
That’s where I went wrong in these kind of complaint matters!
The CEO of the FCA fecked off to the Bank of England when I complained to him direct about their authorisation of the RIFC plc ‘Prospectus’ without first writing to his minions .
Seriously, though, and may I say, eJ, that your list of questions in relation to the SPFL/Sky ‘deal ‘, when set against the likes of David Currie’s ‘BBC Scotland’ report of about 9 hours ago ,clearly demonstrates the deficiencies of our SMSM sports journalists;
not in the fact that they cannot provide answers but in the fact that they don’t even ask questions, or seem to think it’s important to ask detailed questions that are of great practical significance to football club supporters!
They take their ‘handout ‘ and some encouraging words on the phone from some vested interests, add a few words of bumph of their own, and come out with an unbalanced, totally useless bit of journalistic CRAP.
In my view as one speaking as someone who has no Sky , Virgin, Youtube or football club TV subscription.
Homunculus@13:05
Unfortunately the written word does not allow clarity when an attempt is made to be facetious, there isn't even an emoji for it. CO's responding comments to me intimated that Celtic required to be heeded because, afterall, they would be saving clubs from financial ruin if they did well in Europe. That is just as unacceptable to the supporters of the "smaller" clubs than money generated by the other cheek in Europe. If we are to be grateful to Celtic for the solidarity payments then we should be more grateful to TRFC as their run in Europe was/is longer. I don't think so.
Cluster One @ 10:18 yesterday.
You post was in response to a thread regarding Celtic and Hearts requesting action inspired by self interest when the current situation would mean the requested action would disadvantage other clubs. By introducing solidarity payments you could only be justifying Celtic's right to make the request. To later state that you had meant that "smaller clubs" that would be saved by this was only meant to refer to the top league leaves us to surmise that you believe that only the top league matters and in that league Celtic matter more than other clubs. It is an attitude we smaller club supporters see consistently from the supporters of the "big two" from Glasgow.
Perhaps it would be worthwhile if the "big two" supporters kept in mind that the word "big" refers only to the number of supporters that turn up on match day which in turn leads to bigger bank balances. Within my own time following football I can recall periods where the attendances at Parkhead and Ibrox numbered c.10,000. These were times when other clubs had broken the stranglehold. There are two types of football supporter, those that enjoy the sport and those that want to wear "their"(?) clubs mantle of success. Unfortunately, because they are in the majority at any club, it is the latter that finances continued success. It is why my own club takes three times its average gate to a cup final.
Ibrox is not the sole preserve of hubris it is a characteristic of every glory hunting supporter no matter the replica strip that they wear.
https://twitter.com/jimdelahunt/status/1268492144802701314?s=21
A mouth watering opening game for the EPL. Can’t wait!
Mickey Edwards 4th June 2020 at 09:17
How would celtic’s request for a fixture list for the Spfl disadvantage other clubs?
………………..
leaves us to surmise that you believe that only the top league matters
…
So far it is only the top league that has a start date, and it matters to celtic to see what the fixtures are from that start date.
………….
Perhaps it would be worthwhile if the “big two” supporters kept in mind that the word “big” refers only to the number of supporters that turn up on match day which in turn leads to bigger bank balances. Within my own time following football I can recall periods where the attendances at Parkhead and Ibrox numbered c.10,000.
……………
You don’t have to remind me as i was there.
………………
Perhaps it would be worthwhile if the “big two” supporters kept in mind that the word “big” refers only to the number of supporters that turn up on match day which in turn leads to bigger bank balances.
…
These were times when other clubs had broken the stranglehold
………
We are often reminded thet a big bank balance leads to no sporting advantage.
Having been to Celtic Park and Ibrox Stadium when the home clubs have been in the doldrums , my opinion is that their support is 50/50 at best fans/gloryhunters . What I think we are seeing from the TRFC support is defiance and a refusal to accept things as they stand from the less committed supporters who only wish to be associated with success . Some people on both sides are only buying into the ST lark to try and best their rivals numbers .
As noted by our hero, John Clark,
JC
“In my view as one speaking as someone who has no Sky, Virgin, Youtube or football club TV subscription.”
I don’t often comment but I have considerable sympathy with John’s view of some of those ‘media outlets’. I am amazed that many of the contributors to this Blog, who will rightly condemn SFA/SPFL/Sevco, etc., for the disgraceful management of Scottish Football, will still happily fund the empires of people like Murdoch and Branson. It’s almost as bad as buying ‘stuff’ from Amazon (the tax-free company)!
Wake up and smell the coffee, chaps!
Alas, The Transfer of Undertakings has finally taken it's toll on 'ambitious' plans.
ThenCo:
'The most ambitious plan would feature a 70,000-capacity futuristic stadium, with a retractable roof that would open up a whole new sphere of event possibilities'.
CurrentCo:
'….managing director Stewart Robertson has revealed ambitious plans to turn Edmiston House into a 1,300-capacity conference centre, concert venue and museum – using funds from selling off half the Albion Car Park'.
Haywire 4th June 2020 at 22:30
Liberty Global – Branson only owns 2% of Virgin Media now . But I get your point .
Quick question.
The SFA AGM normally takes place at the beginning of June. Is it going ahead this (or next) week?
The reason I’m asking is that – according to its articles – a ‘season’ for SFA purposes ends the day prior and the new ‘season’ starts on the day of the agm.
Although they are roughly similar, the SFA’s ‘season’ is not the same as the (SPFL’s) league season.
No amendments to the SFA’s articles or its cup rules can be made unless the proposed changes had been submitted by 28th Feb.
So, if the AGM goes ahead on its usual timetable and no amendment has been proposed to define the ‘season’ by another means, I can’t see how the 2019/20 Scottish Cup can be played to a finish.
Has there been any information released about the AGM?
stifflersmom 4th June 2020 at 23:49
'..managing director Stewart Robertson has revealed ambitious plans to turn Edmiston House into a 1,300-capacity conference centre, concert venue and museum – using funds from selling off half the Albion Car Park'.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I have just come into my kitchen to switch off the pc ( been with Mrs C watching re-runs of Downton Abbey, followed by an episode of Midsomer Murders ) and my eye was caught by your post, stifflersmom.
Off to bed now, eager for more information about the 'selling off' of property that Close Bros have a charge on!
I am genuinely curious about how these kinds of things work.
John Clarke 5th June 00:51
It's all a bit Greek to me too; but I can't help but wonder whether the Close Bros have already called in the charge (debt).
eg. Consider the 'positive covenant' scenario (although I'm not sure this applies in Scotland) or the Scottish 'real burden' scenario.
It's possible that the 'car park deal' includes a clause that obliges the landowner (whoever that is) to do something, such as to develop the land. It may follow that the benefits of the developed 'land' may fall to the (or partly) to the persons that have the 'charge upon' it.
In short, TRFC may be using their 'new development' to ooze financial muscle and convince the gullible to part with their seat-less season ticket money, without actually having an interest in it.
stifflersmom 4th June 2020 at 23:49
using funds from selling off half the Albion Car Park’.
………..
How much is half a car park next to a stadium worth these days?
Robertson insisted alternative car parking would be provided for supporters.
There are a couple of bits of land that we are looking at and our making progress on that will be ble to replace the spaces that we lose through the flats that will go onto the Albion car park.
Now let me get this right. They want to sell half a car park, use the money to buy a piece of land to use as a car park, then with the money left over turn Edmiston House into a 1,300-capacity conference centre, concert venue and museum.
Anyone now with a piece of land next to ibrox can just double their price as they know the ibrox club will need car park space in order to open the club deck.
And again, buy land and turn Edmiston House into a 1,300-capacity conference centre, concert venue and museum. Do all that by selling half a car park, somehow i have my doubts, how much is half a car park worth these days when you know the seller is desperate to sell ?
stifflersmom 5th June 2020 at 03:05
It’s possible that the ‘car park deal’ includes a clause that obliges the landowner (whoever that is) to do something
…………….
Part of the close deal was that the ibrox club had to maintain anything close had security over.
Found this also.
Loan Facility,
It will shortly complete a working capital facility with close Brothers. The facility will be secured by fixed security over Edmiston house and the Albion car park amoungst other assets.
The loan will assist with general working capital requirements and upgrading work being carried out at ibrox and in other areas where there is a desire to enhance facilities for staff and supporters.
Philanthropist James Anderson’s offer of around £2m to the SPFL would be split evenly between all 42 members, lower league clubs have been told.
Some good news for small clubs and Mickey Edwards;-)
An interesting 'open letter to 'Scottish Football'' penned jointly by the Federation of Hearts Supporters' Clubs and the Heart of Midlothian Shareholders Association appears in full in the 'letters to the Editor' page in today's print edition of the 'Scotsman'.
It's a lengthy letter and I haven't the tech skills to copy and paste (I'd never get a job in the SMSM!) but the basic point being made is that
"'an independent support group is secured to look at the current set-up of the SPFL, with the power to drive significant change such as: robust, transparent governance; clear, focussed plans which are supported by key metrics to determine success(or otherwise); a board and executive which does not include club representation and operates independently against the above clear, focussed plans-and which is judged robustly by shareholders….We believe the SPFL (as a limited company) should be club owned, but not club run.' [my italics]
Referring to the huge problems of covid-19 the letter ends with
" Heart of Midlothian means the world to us, but this is far bigger than anything down at Tynecastle Park right now".
I make no comment, and there is no comment on the letter by any hack in the newspaper nor in the online edition when I looked at it before I began this post.
Cluster One 5th June 2020 at 10:51
There is an outstanding charge held by Close Brothers, from 1st March 2019
Brief description
(1) all and whole the subjects on the west side of broomloan road, glasgow registered in the land register of scotland under title number GLA68492; and (2) all and whole the subjects known as edmiston house, harrison drive, glasgow, G51 2YX, being the subjects registered in the land register of scotland under title number GLA29534 and GLA62016.
Contains negative pledge.
GLA68492 is a car park, bordered by Broomloan Road and Edmiston Drive.
John Clark 5th June 2020 at 11:28
We believe the SPFL (as a limited company) should be club owned, but not club run.' [my italics]
=================================
I had advance sight of the "open letter"on Wednesday before it was sent out. It fairly accurately represents the views of the majority of Hearts fans. Unsurprisingly, the Daily Record sought only to highlight a view that some Hearts fans might be minded not to attend away games at clubs whose chairmen were vocal in their criticism of Hearts interests during and following the "end of season vote" The DR headlined it as "calls for boycott" and ignored the substance of the letter.
I'm pleased that you picked up on the extract that you did as I also thought that it stood out. Removal of club representation on the SPFL Board does offer a way of introducing fairness to the SPFL's governance.
It is not a new concept at Hearts. Ever since Ann Budge and the Foundation of Hearts entered into an agreement to fund the club and facilitate "fan ownership", their mantra has always been "fan owned but not fan run", i.e. the Club's Board would run the club independently and without interference from FOH, although it would be subject to oversight by what would be its majority shareholder at AGMs or other Board meetings.
Homunculus 5th June 2020 at 13:30
……..
Thanks for reply
So if Close Bros has a charge over the car park and Edmiston House, could this simply mean that they are allowing the sale of half the car park provided all of any funds received are spent solely on improving the value of EH and therefore the overall value of their security?
Alastair Johnston was appointed to the RIFC/TRFC board two years ago today . Compliance officer ?
Just saw this post on the Bears Den . I thought we'd binned this two years ago ? (rather lengthy article ).
Rangers and Celtic would both have 'B' teams in the bottom tier of a 14-14-18 league set-up being proposed by the Ibrox club for next season.
Kelty Hearts and Brora Rangers would also be invited into the SPFL to make up an expanded League One, with the "innovation paper" also suggesting Hearts and Partick Thistle avoid their respective relegations.
Both Old Firm B sides would immediately pay a £125,000 joining fee, with further payments to be made in each of the following three campaigns.
That money would go to third-tier clubs and would reduce by £25,000 each term across a four-year deal, with the entire plan worth a total of £1.2m of "new finance".
What else is in the 'innovation paper'?
Rangers and Celtic B teams can only get promoted as high as the Championship;
Their players will have an age limit of 21;
The Old Firm will purchase at least 200 tickets at a cost of £15 for each away game, with the money paid in advance;
They will also pay £1000 to stream each of those matches, should facilities be in place
Other Premiership clubs can apply to have 'B' teams starting in the Highland and Lowland leagues – replacing Kelty and Brora – with a joining fee of £25,000;
Alternatively, they could forge strategic partnerships with lower-league outfits that would allow up to six players, plus one coach to be loaned by the Premiership club;
Those partnerships would have a minimum three-year commitment and would cease if the lower-league club reaches the top flight.
How would the divisions work?
Hearts and Inverness Caledonian Thistle would be added to top 12;
League would split into a top six and bottom eight after 26 matches;
Top six would play home and away (total 36 games) as would the bottom eight (total 40 games);
One team would be relegated, and another would face a play-off as currently.
Raith Rovers, Falkirk, Airdrie, Montrose, East Fife and Dumbarton would be moved up;
League would split into a top six and bottom eight after 26 games;
Top six would play home and away (total 36 games) as would the bottom eight (total 40 games);
One team would be promoted, plus three more would make play-offs as currently;
Bottom two would be relegated, with the 12th-placed team in play-off.
Teams would meet twice each season;
Top two would be guaranteed promotion, with teams in third, fourth, fifth and sixth in play-offs to decide who would face off with 12th team in Championship;
Bottom side will enter play-off with Highland or Lowland League play-off winner as currently;
There is scope for second bottom team to also become part of play-offs.
Why are Rangers proposing it?
The Ibrox club say their objectives are to ensure no club is worse off as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic and to inject "new finance" into the "vulnerable" lower leagues to improve standards.
Furthermore, Rangers say they want to achieve the "freshness" that reconstruction would bring while making sure "the pyramid is respected" and keeping each club's share of prize-money distribution the same.
Another plank is to tackle the "player transition challenge" with a "menu" of options for different-sized clubs ranging from B teams to the existing loan agreements and reserve league.
What happens next?
It is unclear how much support exists for the proposals, although it is understood Celtic do back them.
All Premiership clubs are aware, and will have had the full document presented to them by Rangers by Tuesday. Furthermore, the Scottish FA and SPFL have both been briefed, and other lower-league outfits have been sounded out.
There is also thought to be broad support for the strategic partnerships – an idea initially suggested by Stenhousemuir chairman Iain McMenemy.
Were the plan to go to a vote, it would need 32 of the 42 clubs to support it. Seventeen of those would have to be in the Premiership and Championship, with 11 of them in the top flight.
While Rangers are aiming for this to be introduced next season, they recognise that will be difficult and are prepared to adapt elements once they have consulted more widely.
Further stumbling blocks are that, while Stranraer would technically avoid the relegation from League One meted out after the early curtailment of last season, they would still end up in the bottom tier.
Clyde, Peterhead and Forfar Athletic would be in a similar situation, while Cove would stay in the bottom tier despite winning League Two last term.
Earlier this week, SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster wrote to clubs asking if they would back a 14-team Premiership for next season and, if not, how might their objections be overcome.
That followed Hearts' owner Ann Budge's failed attempt to gain support for a 14-14-14 structure for the next two seasons.
And from two years ago .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42977922
Cluster One 5th June 2020 at 18:04
You have raised an important point I think.
If Rangers are selling half of the Albion Car Park and there is still a security on it then that security will have to be removed, as I understand it.
To me, as a layman, that means there are only two options. Either the loan is going to be repaid, or they are going to provide security over something else. Something which is acceptable to Close Brothers.
Occum's razor would suggest to me that Rangers are paying off the loan from Close Brothers, in order to remove the security, in order to sell off part of that asset.
Pure conjecture, some of the money received from the sale will go towards paying off that loan.
paddy malarkey 5th June 2020 at 19:01
……………
Was it not three?
Homunculus 5th June 2020 at 22:52
……….
And not much left over to finance another piece of land or turn Edmiston House into a 1,300-capacity conference centre, concert venue and museum.
It looks like just another deflection to stop some questions being asked about half the car park sale.
Also noticed you could buy a season ticket for the car park before but not now, it will be first come first served with a higher parking price no doubt.
Why should Celtic and TRFC be allowed to enter their colts team to the 'official' SPFL while other Premier league clubs can only put colts teams into the tier below i.e. the recently created pyramid. Still trying to perpetuate the 'Big 2' or old firm(!!) or playing the 'we can afford to bribe them with more money' card?
I sincerely hope this TRFC proposal fails, though lord knows the Scottish football authorities will surely buy into the 'old firm' thinking even though TRFC nowadays don't have a pot to piss in.
I read Henry McLeish saying he hopes the Anderson donation leads to more moral funding for Scottish football – what could be more immoral than this suggesgted bribe?!?!?!?!
Nawlite. A good point. OF worship has been the downfall of our game. If there are benefits to be derived from such a move, why not find a less arbitrary way of deciding whose Colts team goes into the third tier?
Disappointing in my view.
https://celtictrust.net/season-ticket-refunds/
Homunculus 5th June 2020 at 22:52
‘..If Rangers are selling half of the Albion Car Park and there is still a security on it then that security will have to be removed, as I understand it.’
“”””””””””””””””
With a nod to Nawlite’s earlier post
Close Bros must have given permission to TRFC to sell half the car park. And permission to develop Edmiston House.
So either TRFC have somehow repaid all monies they borrowed from Close Bros and the charge has been satisfied, and Close Bros are out of the picture (the charge, however, is still showing as ‘outstanding’ on the CH website)
or Close Bros have agreed to hand out a few more bob ( at a price) to let TRFC ‘develop’ , secured on their charge over what would be a potentially much more valuable set of real estate if the ‘ambitious plans’ ever materialise, but nevertheless secured on the original basis.
If there has been another ‘charge’ it should sooner or later show up on the CH website.
But I suspect that there’s a lot of wind and p.ss emanating from Robertson’s various external orifices!
Though, to be scrupulously fair, some of the needlessly aggressive, confrontational language of earlier ‘statements’ has disappeared, I think.
Cluster One 5th June 2020 at 23:09
Says 7 February , 2018 on the BBC web page , but I don't know what day of the week it is this weather !
Re the Rangers proposal for reconstruction. I think it will fail, which will the allow the notion to be perpetuated that it only failed because Rangers are ‘hated’. The real reason for failure in my view will be that it is currently easier to herd cats than it is to get agreement among Scottish clubs.
I also saw Henry McLeish get a mention. Why is it still regarded that this man’s opinion on Scottish football is of value and should be listened to? Personally I care as much what he thinks as I did what Ernie Walker thought years ago via his ‘think tank’. Their opinions are of no more value than those of fans chatting in a pub.
In the early 90’s the former journalist Gerry McNee often referred to those in charge of determining the future of the game in Scotland as having as much value as a bunch of Myopic Pygmies. Maybe these days such a term would not be regarded as politically correct, but the sentiment remains exactly the same almost 30 years on. In my opinion of course.
paddy malarkey 5th June 2020 at 23:51
……………..
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1269182927369355264/photo/1
…………..
but I don’t know what day of the week it is this weather !
Me also, With you on that;-)
……………….
Dec 11, 2017 he became a person with significant control. in TRIFC, and on March 14, 2018 he still had not been passed as fit and proper to be on TRFC board. Maybe he has now been passed and the SFA have kept it quite
Big Pink 6th June 2020 at 10:10
0
0
Rate This
Disappointing in my view.
…………..
However, in order to support those who wish to obtain a refund we are providing the link here [http://www.celticfc.net/refunds].
…
This part is not.
Big Pink 6th June 2020 at 10:10
There are a few messages in that link, which part do you find disappointing.
Big Pink 6th June 2020 at 10:10
Disappointing in my view.
https://celtictrust.net/season-ticket-refunds/
=================
As a season ticket holder I have no issues whatsoever with the club's approach, but the great thing about this forum is people are allowed to respectfully disagree.
I have issues with the club's approach to Res 12 and the 5WA, but I think some fans have issues with absolutely everything the club does, and I think it's unhealthy (not pointing the finger at you BP). For example, the news that emerged today that Celtic have hired the company BT used for their live coverage to do the forthcoming match streaming, along with the host and some of the pundits I think is great news. Then you look around the web and see people demanding to know if Stephen Craigan will be part of it, and if so then he shouldn't be. In the early 90's, when the club was at death's door, I wish that was all I had to worry about. I suspect many of the current complainers were not even born then.
These are exceptional times. I believe Celtic and indeed every club deserve to be cut some slack.
"upthehoops 6th June 2020 at 09:52
Re the Rangers proposal for reconstruction. I think it will fail, which will the allow the notion to be perpetuated that it only failed because Rangers are ‘hated’. The real reason for failure in my view will be that it is currently easier to herd cats than it is to get agreement among Scottish clubs."
The real reason for failure is more likely the fact that lower league clubs have unanimously rejected the colt proposal many times. The collusion between the Glasgow clubs is reprehensible, trying to take advantage of adverse financial times to push through the wholly unpopular change.
Borussiabeefburg @ 12.35
————————————————
Spot on Sir.
Re the proposed development of part of the Albion Car-park:
I wonder if the developers, Merchant Homes, have agreed to pay to partly or fully refurbish Edmiston House & supply additional land for car-parking as part of the proposed purchase of a bit of the world-famous Albion Car-park? There’s certainly large sums involved in the project (all figures speculative):
160 flats selling at (a probably high) £150k = £24m (before costs).
160 flats selling at (still probably quite high-ish) £135k = £21.6m (before costs).
160 flats selling at (a more-reasonable) £125k = £20m (before costs).
160 flats selling at (probably slightly low) £100k = £16m (before costs).
borussiabeefburg 6th June 2020 at 12:35
The real reason for failure is more likely the fact that lower league clubs have unanimously rejected the colt proposal many times. The collusion between the Glasgow clubs is reprehensible, trying to take advantage of adverse financial times to push through the wholly unpopular change.
==============
I would prefer to see evidence that Celtic are working with Rangers on this, so please provide it given you have made the statement. They may support it now it has been made, but that is different from collusion. Some other clubs may support it too. Is that collusion too, and if they do is it also reprehensible?
Cluster One 6th June 2020 at 10:36
Sorry , mate , we seem to have been at cross purposes . AJ was anointed in June 2017 and the "Colts" proposal was 2018 . I blame the lack of drink !
So Rangers are proposing reconstruction including Rangers and Celtic colt teams without discussing it with Celtic ??
Aye right
paddy malarkey
“upthehoops 6th June 2020 at 14:36
I would prefer to see evidence that Celtic are working with Rangers on this, so please provide it given you have made the statement. They may support it now it has been made, but that is different from collusion. Some other clubs may support it too. Is that collusion too, and if they do is it also reprehensible?”
The information regarding a Colts proposal has been put forward, as has been the case often in the past, via the media. I doubt either club have anything on their websites, if that’s the sort of evidence you require.
The proposal involves both clubs spending money to get the idea accepted. £600,000 each is the Tom English figure, although I’ve not bothered reading the detail. It’s unlikely Peter Lawwell would agree to a proposal being put forward where money is being spent without collaborating with the Ibrox club in advance. Various Celtic facing blogs state Celtic are supporting the proposal, according to a quick search, which is as far as I’m going.
I believe Celtic have colluded with the Ibrox club on this, as they have in the past: they want Colt teams in the league system, but to try to shoehorn them in in the difficult climate which exists right now is deplorable, in my view.
….proposals for reconstruction.
On paper, I believe this should be given serious consideration by the lower league clubs; but not without serious negotiation. Negotiations should be mindful of the monies that will be generated by Celtic and NowCo. eg. both teams will undoubtedly commission differently designed kits for the 'B Teams'. Sales of these could be as popular as the 'big' team's. In terms of merchandising, the potential is massive. If these games are televised or streamed, 'the big teams wee teams' will attract handsome returns for matchday sponsorship not too mention an enhanced, or separate sponsorship deal for strips; both manufacturer and sponsor. Additionally, the rest of the 'wee teams' will be better placed to negotiate there own enhanced merchandising; however…….
I've managed the best part of a bottle of cheap chardonnay: I better post my 'however' later…rather than ramble.
I'm sure Colt teams from any senior club can be accommodated , but why not further down the pyramid eg tier 6 or 7 ?
Jings, how it is to be unpopular!
https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/project-brave-update/
“Scottish FA Performance Director Malky Mackay said: “This is a significant milestone for Project Brave.
“Club Academy Scotland is a fundamental part of the process and a lot of work has gone into developing the criteria used to assess the clubs.
“From Day One this has been a collaborative activity.
“The clubs have been engaged at every step, with daily dialogue to help with their applications.”
And from various publications over the past few years:
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/celtic/celtic-and-rangers-u20-teams-set-quit-reserve-league-next-season-1418585
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-6988521/Rangers-Celtic-help-lead-plans-trans-European-league-reserves-shake-up.html
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/4192520/rangers-celtic-reserve-league/
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/chris-mccart-gives-detailed-insight-11925894
https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/17611585.rangers-and-celtic-set-to-quit-spfl-reserve-league-in-a-bid-to-boost-academy-teams/
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/chris-mccart-explains-celtic-ready-14981851
https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/edinburgh-city-invite-comment-fans-over-old-firm-colt-teams-590763
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42793072
https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/sport/football/scottish-football/peterhead-boss-slams-colts-idea-from-old-firm-clubs-he-says-are-out-to-bully-way-in/
https://www.centralfifetimes.com/sport/15964060.cowdenbeath-against-plan-for-celtic-and-rangers-colt-teams-to-play-in-league-two/
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/sport/football/elgin-city/1399075/elgin-to-consult-fans-over-old-firm-colts-move/
https://www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/celtic-rangers-under-20s-set-16213157
https://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/15887194.chris-jack-it-is-nothing-ventured-nothing-gained-when-it-comes-to-old-firm-colt-teams/
Homunculus
Haven’t read any of the messages. My disappointment is in the club’s reluctance to clear a hinderance-free path to refunds.
The insistence on downloading forms, then posting them, then being paid by cheque and now refusing to accept scanned pdfs. Not at all in keeping with procedures when the flow of cash is in the opposite direction.
I could add that refunds to concessions for the unplaced TRFC match is not commensurate with the premium paid to have access to the games.
My disappointment lies in the fact that in my view the club are ‘nickel and diming’ the fans.
Anecdotally, it may well be that the plan will backfire. I include my own family when I count those who had no intention of applying for a refund, but who now most assuredly will.
Wakey Wakey! No news is good news?
Anything happening in the courts this week?
Big Pink 7th June 2020 at 10:34
Thanks, I understand where you are coming from.
Doing this could actually cost the club anything up to about £7.5m if a lot of people now decide to get the refund. I suppose it basically boils down to how many people feel as strongly about this as you. Some might just think “I don’t want a refund anyway, so I’m not really interested in what the process is”.
I think Partick Thistle have probably gone about this the right way. Telling people what they can get back, but also asking them not to apply for the refund if they can afford it.
Homunculus
I think most fans (of any club) will instinctively reach for the solidarity button in these circumstances, but there are also those who may feel that clubs take their supprot for granted.
There are a range of political arguments that folk could use about the morality of asking people to forego what to many of them might be a significant sum of money in order to finance those to whom far greater sums are not significant.
My own feeling is that these should be set aside in these circumstances, simply because that argument is a wider debate about how the game is financed and how the money is spent.
You are correct when you talk about the extent of refund requests being proportional to the strength of feeling over this. Often the loudest voices are not necessarily the majority, but I can't help thinking that this approach is using up much of the goodwill already in the pot. And particularly now, that goodwill is an incalculable commodity.
I am also going through something of the same dilemma with my mother's Life Assurance company, who put up bureaucratic barriers to slow down the settlement of claims. Postage only, original documents only, recorded delivery only, etc, ad nauseam – when they return forms and other documents requiring a response by second class mail.
I expect it from insurance companies. However the bottom line is the only game in town far beyond that.
Be interested to see what fans of other clubs have experienced in this regard.
Borussiabeefburg @ 9.23
Jings, how it is to be unpopular!
————————————————-
You've been a very very bad man! Suggesting that Rangers and Celtic could be in cahoots! Think you might have a record for TD's
. Wash your mouth out with soap immediately!
In amongst all the Old Firm (TM) annual attempt for their colts plan there are some interesting views in other blogs. First one that points out that supporters of Div 2 teams are actually choosing to watch competitive football at the level their team is capable of; not "developing" players. And secondly how anyone can suggest it is somehow good for the international team beggars belief if you count the number of OF(TM) players who have made it through to the Scotland team in the last 20 years after coming through the old firm ranks (as opposed to bought in). Especially current and past Rangers.
Losy idea.
We should all know the drill by now.
If the paying punters voice opposition to Colt teams, then that's just what Hampden is going to give them.
Joking aside…
I've not followed the Colt teams debate – currently or previously – so can't really comment.
But, I am naturally suspicious, (I'm blaming SFM for that!), that during a period of turmoil some may try to be opportunistic?
So, if possible, any significant changes to the game should be put firmly on the back burner – and revisited during a period of calm and stability, IMO, whenever that will be…
StevieBC 7th June 2020 at 15:18
But, I am naturally suspicious, (I’m blaming SFM for that!), that during a period of turmoil some may try to be opportunistic?
So, if possible, any significant changes to the game should be put firmly on the back burner – and revisited during a period of calm and stability, IMO, whenever that will be…
==============================
I disagree. A hiatus such as we have experienced is an ideal opportunity for change. Necessity is the mother of invention and all that.
It should have given the platform to introduce much needed and innovative reform of the league structures, finances and governance.
However, due to the parochial nature of the Scottish game and the in-built conservatism within many boardrooms, change is an alien concept. Better stick with the devil we know, even though we know it’s not ideal, rather than embracing change and being ambitious with a “can do better” mindset.
Looking at the state of the ibrox pitch last season and the fact they had to get it relaid, having a colts team playing on it when it is usually time to give the surface a rest, if the colts thing goes through how long will this new ibrox pitch last?
I'm not sure what the fuss is about.
Rangers have put forward a proposal, if the other clubs don't want it to happen then it won't happen.
That's how it works as has been seen in recent times. Resolutions are put forwarded and supported or not.
I have to say I think EJ makes a good point though. Would now not be a time to think of ways in which we can improve the league. Surely people don't think it's perfect right now.
I totally agree with eJ and Homunculus: this hiatus could/should be regarded as a unique opportunity for implementing change and improvement in the Scottish, senior game.
Just like any organisation or business: change is good.
Unfortunately, we all recently witnessed an embarrassing, prolonged, farcical attempt by the 42 senior clubs to complete a simple vote.
This – and the subsequent fallout – confirmed the levels of mistrust, self-interest and disrespect between clubs and the SPFL management.
I was being optimistic to suggest that better decisions could be made at a later date, during a period of stability.
Being pessimistic: there is no political will amongst the clubs, the SFA or the SPFL to agitate for change.
They want the status quo.
IMO, that is why nothing has significantly changed or improved, in terms of governance, since 2012.
That is why Doncaster has been elevated to CEO of the SPFL.
That is why Petrie has been promoted to [Executive] President of the SFA.
I genuinely don’t believe that meaningful change can be effected from within: some external influence is necessary to impose change and improvements across the Scottish, senior game.
(I include supporters’ actions as an ‘external influence’.)
StevieBC 7th June 2020 at 23:47
7
19
Rate This
I totally agree with eJ and Homunculus: this hiatus could/should be regarded as a unique opportunity for implementing change and improvement in the Scottish, senior game.
Just like any organisation or business: change is good.
…………………
Nothing will change, if there is no change at the top. It might look great if the deck chairs are moved about a bit and a new coat of paint applied to them a new bright coloured stripe may be added to the canvas and give it that all new modern look. But like the style of the deck chairs we know they can only be locked in one position, a position that those at the top are comfortable with, don’t rock their boat, but paint and move the chairs about all you want.
Re the Virtual Season Tickets. Hi Folks, just came to me that most clubs charge different prices for different areas of their ground, but, with this new Virtual Ticket everyone has the same view, so it doesn't seem right that any club can charge more to one fan than another for their Virtual Ticket, and that's what most of them are doing, albeit for probably half a season. Any thoughts, por cierto?
You are completely missing the point Ernie. The point being that once the OF hoover up the decent players with potential into their Colt teams there is a chance that they will develop into good players, thus progress to the senior team, thus gain exposure to "big" games including Euro matches ergo they should be better players thus we have a better national team. Please concentrate on that sole point. Please ignore that that is only as stated, its a chance, nothing more. Please ignore that to do so inhibits every other team as the policy potentially deprives them of players and fans. Please ignore that to do so inhibits every other team as they potentially face hand picked quality colt sides thus distorting 'their' leagues. Please ignore that it reinforces an institutional and currently damaging effective duopoly (Im being generous here) thus inhibits other teams further. Please ignore that this effect will happen regardless of whether our national team improves, whether their players improve or even if they develop benchitis in their arses or just give up the game altogether, or move abroad being thoroughly disillusioned with it here.
Concentrate on the point Ernie. Ignore everything else. Its for the good of the game apparently.
Smugas 9th June 2020 at 11:00
First one that points out that supporters of Div 2 teams are actually choosing to watch competitive football at the level their team is capable of;
…………..
Have any supporters of Div 2 teams even been asked if they would stick around to watch their team play a colts team, and would they want a reduction in their ticket price. Do any fans of Div 2 teams look at this colts thing and think what is the point?
The irony is the best part of the deal is the 200 tickets paid for the away end of each game. The worst part potentially (from the home club's perspective) is if they actually turn up!
And how does one distribute match day income? I assume the colt side underwrites 200 ticket sales? So does the diddy side still operate a cash turnstyle (remember them?) and deduct the number sold from the 200 underwritten and bill the colt side for the rest? Or does it become an all ticket affair (with incumbent expense) and presumably the diddy club missing out if away numbers exceed 200?
Lets say Im a fan of football firstly with a big team and a wee team (look me up in the SFA dictionary under "stereotypical," just "typical" or possibly "ideal"). Do I not then go to the home end of my diddy club. Watch, appreciate and politely applaud if not outright support 'my' colts thus 'my' diddy club gets double reward – my cash revenue plus the guaranteed notional away income especially if I was not particularly in the way of going to the local match in the first place?
My concern is that the Colts’ involvement in League football would make a mockery of said League.
What if one of (or both) well-resourced Colts teams was/were just too good for the other teams in the League?
(Consider TRFC & its resources in 2012/13 & 2013/14. Won Div.3 by 24 points & then won the re-named Div.1 by 39 points.)
Is the expectation that the Colts would be competitive with all teams in the League or just with each other?
Jingso.jimsie @ 11.57
Is the expectation that the Colts would be competitive with all teams in the League or just with each other?
Pretty sure there will be an expectation that they are in the same league (i.e. progress at the same pace) so that there can be 4 Old Firm* Colt derbies each season
.
‘bordersdon 9th June 2020 at 13:32
Pretty sure there will be an expectation that they are in the same league (i.e. progress at the same pace) so that there can be 4 Old Firm* Colt derbies each season
.’
########################################
Isn’t the informal name for that arrangement a ‘Doncaster’, often shortened to ‘Donco’?
My preference , if this goes ahead , would be to keep the colt teams apart , with CFC starting in the East of Scotland First Division and TRFC in the West of Scotland equivalent , or vice-versa , It would take two promotions for both before they could face off .As well as guaranteeing 200 tickets , the big two should also pocket the tab for policing and stewarding costs , given what their more excitable supporters bring to the game . This proposal is for the benefit of two clubs , not Scottish football as a whole , and is disguised as a helping hand to the minnows , who become little more than sparring partners .
The French national court this afternoon moved to confirm that the classification of the 2019/20 Ligue 1 table, called to an end after just 28 of the 38 matches due to occur were played, was lawful, but that the subsequent relegations of Toulouse and Amiens was not.
https://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2020/breaking-toulouse-amiens-relegation-to-ligue-2-suspended-by-the-national-court/
The French court ruling has certainly "laissez le chat parmi les pigeons" en Ecosse.
“Cluster One 9th June 2020 at 11:18
Have any supporters of Div 2 teams even been asked if they would stick around to watch their team play a colts team, and would they want a reduction in their ticket price. Do any fans of Div 2 teams look at this colts thing and think what is the point?”
When the colts appear in the Challenge Cup playing away to Div 2 clubs, the average attendance for that club is invariably a good deal lower. Further, a quick look around specific Div 2 club forums would indicate the hostility towards the idea of colt sides playing in the league system, Cluster One. Or have a look to P&B for the topic “Old Firm Colts in L2” where the overwhelming view is that supporters don’t favour this, with many vowing to leave supporting Scottish football if it happened. I’d link to the long running topic, 167 pages and counting, but don’t know if that is frowned upon here.
“Smugas 9th June 2020 at 11:56
The irony is the best part of the deal is the 200 tickets paid for the away end of each game. The worst part potentially (from the home club's perspective) is if they actually turn up!
And how does one distribute match day income? I assume the colt side underwrites 200 ticket sales?”
There’s no ‘best part of the deal’, Smugas. Some clubs in the lowest of the four leagues regularly take over 200 paying supporters to away games (Stirling Albion, Queens Park) in any case, but the non-appearance, and potential loss of home supporters for the entire season, or for all time would put a dent in that 200.
The offer is for money to be handed over by the Glasgow clubs covering the 200 spectators. Actual people may or may not physically appear to use the tickets, and going by past attendances at Challenge Cup games, it’s likely that those tickets used would be distributed to visiting players’ family and friends. The colt sides brought very few supporters of their own.
“Jingso.Jimsie 9th June 2020 at 11:57
My concern is that the Colts’ involvement in League football would make a mockery of said League.”
Of course it would Jingso.Jimsie: it wouldn’t matter if these sides were better or worse than the teams they were against. It would make a mockery of said league.
“paddy malarkey 9th June 2020 at 14:20
My preference , if this goes ahead , would be to keep the colt teams apart , with CFC starting in the East of Scotland First Division and TRFC in the West of Scotland equivalent , or vice-versa , It would take two promotions for both before they could face off .As well as guaranteeing 200 tickets , the big two should also pocket the tab for policing and stewarding costs , given what their more excitable supporters bring to the game . This proposal is for the benefit of two clubs , not Scottish football as a whole , and is disguised as a helping hand to the minnows , who become little more than sparring partners.”
Could be a good point about paying policing and stewarding cost: when the Ibrox club was on their journey, the MSM narrative was of the riches they brought to the small clubs throughout the land. This was not really the case: as an example, the clubs had to introduce police instead of stewards, and segregation, with attendant costs. Nonetheless, it probably wouldn’t be an issue with poorly attended matches played by colt sides.
I agree with much of your later post, paddy malarkey, apart from them being placed in any part of the pyramid system.
____________________________________________
Now, I await my fate: perhaps more thumbs down than the poor Christians suffered in the Colosseum.
borussiabeefburg 9th June 2020 at 17:36
…………..
Good post.
I will have a look.
https://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php?/topic/235953-old-firm-colts-in-l2/
After the French League ruling today, I may as well 'put my tuppencewoth' in!
Ann Budge will assuredly 'go to court' and the outcome will eventually be:-
14 10 10 10
"Quelle surpris – I thought the road would be a lot harder than this" – quoth Ann
Does anyone know if the Colt team proposal would see them receive prize money?
If they do receive cash then, in season 1, if they finished 1st and 2nd in tier 3 (positions 29 and 20 overall), then they would receive £75k and £72.5k for their efforts.
If both were promoted and finished mid table in the championship (tier 2 – positions 21 & 22 overall), then they would receive £187.5k and £175k for their efforts.
That would go a long way towards paying their entry fees.
easyJambo 9th June 2020 at 19:34
Does anyone know if the Colt team proposal would see them receive prize money?
That would go a long way towards paying their entry fees.
…………….
And go a long way in denying other clubs in the divisions much needed prize money.
easyJambo 9th June 2020 at 19:34
'…If both were promoted..'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
My attention has been elsewhere this last little time, I'm afraid, so I'm way behind with the basics and apologise appropriately.
But I'm sure that I read at some stage that the idea was that a Colts team would not be eligible for promotion if it won whichever League in which it played?
That one of the underlying ideas was that the Colts team would benefit only from match experience, the other clubs would benefit from the guaranteed 200 home 'attendances', and the the non-Colts club that won the league would be promoted..?
Can anyone reassure me that I couldn't have made that idea up?
If it is really part of the 'proposals' then I might not rule it out of hand.
paddy malarkey in his post at 14:20 used the words 'sparring partners', as referring to the other teams in the league.
If we turn it round, though, to refer to the Colts clubs then provided that the 'sparring partners' are not actually in competition for league placings but only in immediately game by game match competition for the sake of their their own development, and also perhaps as stimuli for the other teams in whichever league they are in, it might possibly be beneficial to those other clubs with the guaranteed monies from 200 'gate receipts'.
If there is any suggestion that the Colts teams should 'win ' their league and be promoted, then bugger that for an idea.
Sparring partners, perhaps yes. But nothing else.
If they happen to be particularly good sparring partners, that would be good for their opposing teams.
If not, then the games would nevertheless be useful practice games for the opposition in the rest of the league, fighting each other for promotion.
Or has covid-19 finally reached me and addled my brains?
Oh, that 'The Scotsman' were not so selective in their choice of which wickedness should be reported!
I give you this:
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/henry-dundass-statue-edinburgh-should-be-torn-down-over-slave-trade-links-martyn-mclaughlin-2879038
I have for many years metaphorically spat as I passed Dundas' column in St Andrew Square in Edinburgh.
And I commend Martyn McLaughlin for his observations on the bad ba.tard, whose badness transcends the petty corrupt small-scale badness of the SFA,SPL and SFL , and those associated with the deep corruption of Scottish Football we have seen demonstrated by the Res 12 issue and the Big Lie.
Dundas was undoubtedly a bad basta.d.
And his badness was of an order akin to that of King Leopold of the Belgians and of that of the Third Reich.
But badness is badness.
And our petty little world of Scottish Football governance is as bad in its own way as ever Dundas, or Leopold or Adolph ever was.
But of course the SMSM is very selective about what they view as 'badness' and how they report 'badness' and untruth.
Cluster One linked to the decision of the French courts re relegation, above
https://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2020/breaking-toulouse-amiens-relegation-to-ligue-2-suspended-by-the-national-court/
The key decision is covered in the last paragraph
"On the issue of relegation, the judge “suspends the relegation into Ligue 2 of Amiens and Toulouse… the LFP Board of Directors was not able to argue on sound legal footing their decision to relegate the final two clubs in the Ligue 1 table, attempting to use the grounds that their agreement with the FFF currently provides for a league size limit of 20 clubs, however this agreement ends on June 30th and a new one has yet to be signed.”
Could any of our legal eagles comment on whether Scotland operates a similar end-of-season tabula rasa?
"John Clark 9th June 2020 at 22:50
My attention has been elsewhere this last little time, I'm afraid, so I'm way behind with the basics and apologise appropriately.
But I'm sure that I read at some stage that the idea was that a Colts team would not be eligible for promotion if it won whichever League in which it played? "
The Ibrox club's Plan B would presently allow Colts teams to be promoted as far as the Championship, John.
@ spikeyheid 0736hrs today:
From memory (always a risky action for someone of my age!), the SPFL rules state that the team that is in last place in its respective league at the end of the season is relegated. No ifs, no buts.
If that's incorrect, then, as usual, I'm happy to be put right
borussiabeefburg 10th June 2020 at 09:38
'..The Ibrox club's Plan B would presently allow Colts teams to be promoted as far as the Championship, John.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Thanks for that, bbb. I must have wholly misread and/or misunderstood whatever it was I had been reading or what I heard on radio or whatever.
I'm going to apologise in advance as this post may annoy some people and be at odds with their own thoughts on this matter – this is not my intention and purely to give an alternative viewpoint!
Another week and another two proposals for restructing the leagues. I think this is the completely wrong time to be going down this route and trying to implement wholesale changes at a time of uncertainty, both in terms of the economy and just day to day life, is something that may ultimately end up causing more damage to our game.
Don't get me wrong, I think every part of Scottish football needs reviewed, with the SFA and SPFL being disbanded and started again. For my part, the biggest source of anger against the authorities is the complete shambles that is Junior and Youth football in this country – I live in the Borders where is there only friendly, round-robin 4v4 or 7v7 games between March and May and September to November for u12s and no youth set up at all with all kids having to play in the Edinburgh leagues – this is actually organised and accepted by the SFA Rep in the area!!
However, to try and agree, plus implement, a restructure for the senior leagues at the moment will only ever be a short term fix and being honest, it's only really being proposed by a few teams purely to protect their own interests. Once again we have the same problem which has plagued Scottish football for decades now – self-interest disguised as altruism – and by following this approach yet again, we will end up with the same result, a complete lack of trust and agreement between the member clubs leading to resentment.
By also rushing through a restructure at this time, we basically eliminate the possibility of there being any reform of the SFA and SFPL as they will take this as implied consent of clubs agreeing with their approach and justifying their own existence. They will also congratulate themselves on a job well done and use this as basis for denying there are any issues with our game. To quote a lyric "The needle returns to the start of the song, And we all sing along like before".
To my mind, it would be much better to wait until there is some degree of stability and football returning in some shape or form with clubs getting fans back into their grounds, and then starting a dialogue to come up with the best way forward – not simplying being corralled by a few teams who sense an opportunity to either take advantage of a horrible situation or using said situation for avoiding the outcome of their poor performances on the pitch.
Again, this want to repeat, this not meant to antagonise but just giving a different perspective from the process that is being played out which seems to suggest that restructuring must take place at this very minute!
Confirmation of James Anderson's donation today. £3.1m (42 x £50k) available now with further funds to be made available via the SPFL Trust from JA and others.
Generous in the extreme.
An extremely generous donation as you say ej. A lifeline for some of the smaller clubs I would think!
Yes EJ I agree, a very generous donation. Unfortunately I look on with some unease.
Football is important only to those who follow football and, if you total up the weekly attendance and compare it to the population size of the country, it is clearly a minority group. If the pandemic had not arrived then I would have applauded the donation with more vigour but money is needed to fight the pandemic by finding a vaccine or cure the after effects of the poverty that will definitely increase. I would have been more comfortable had the donation be directed toward such causes.
In his interview with the BBC today he states.
"Football is at the heart of communities across Scotland, and there are not many societal organisations that bring people together nowadays, to catch them in a net when they fall."
I disagree with him on that as I believe that people are more important in the community than an enertainment industry. Education in the community would be more important. Free health care in the community also. And if we could find a way to purge the need for food banks… well? These things properly funded would reduce the need for a net "to catch them when they fall." Add to that the current self interest shown by many clubs and you have to ask are they worthy recipients.
Even before the pandemic we read that he "previously made similar donations to the arts world". A great cause if we have a fully funded society but not in the financial climate that a huge swathe of the country found itself after 2008. I doubt that a visit to the ballet would lift someone's soul if their next stop was going to be the queue for the food bank.
We as football fans really need to face up to the fact that football is only a hobby. Do that and we can perhaps confront the problems that are approaching. To take it more seriously than that then we play right into the hands of those that govern us by just accepting our lot.
From the BBC Scotland sports news site on this link
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52992075
"Edinburgh-based philanthropist James Anderson has donated more than £3m to help support Scottish football clubs and their surrounding communities.
Anderson has also confirmed his intentions, along with others, to provide further funding to clubs in the coming years.
The money will be distributed through the SPFL Trust, with each club able to apply for a fixed grant of £50,000."
I'm happy to see that the money is to be handled by the registered Charity known as the Scottish Professional Football League Trust Charity number Company Number SC369633 , Scottish Charity Number SC041121.
But reading the 'Objects' of the Charity I'm not sure how they can be said to include the making of direct grants to a football club to meet the club's own needs, rather than to help the club fund its own charity and community initiatives?)
https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=41121
"The Company shall operate for the advancement for the public benefit of the following charitable purposes or objects : 3.1 the advancement of public participation in sport and, in particular, the promotion of participation by members of the public in healthy sporting activities , including, but not limited to, football; 3.2 the advancement of citizenship or community development and, in particular the provision of support for community-based facilities and activities undertaken by football clubs; 3.3 the provision of recreational facilities, or the organisation of recreational activities, with the object of improving the conditions of life for the persons for whom the facilities or activities are primarily intended; and 3.4 the advancement of any of the above purposes or objects by the giving of grants or the provision of funding to persons undertaking projects, initiatives and/or activities which further any of the above objects and are wholly charitable within the meaning of the Taxes Acts and also section 7 of the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Act 2005 or any statutory amendment or re-enactment thereof.."
The names of the existing Trustees as shown in the Trust's Companies House page
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC369633/filing-history
are interesting. Roddy Forsyth, Alison Walker (sports journalists), Tony Higgins(PFA), Murdoch Maclennan, Robert Winter (retired social worker), Graham Watt (retired uni professor) Kathleen McLoughlin (no occupation given) Bernadette Malone (retired) Ian Joseph Blair (company secretary) and Charles Barnett (no occupation)
Grateful as we should be for fresh finance in Scottish football , would it not have been easier for James Anderson just to give money to HoM to see them through next season ? It's his money , though , and he can do as he pleases with it , but it might have stopped them and such as them trying to feng shui our leagues .
Mickey Edwards 10th June 2020 at 13:06
Yes EJ I agree, a very generous donation. Unfortunately I look on with some unease.
=================================
While I can understand any unease that you may have about the relative priority of putting money into a "hobby" such as football in these times, I personally don't have a problem with wealthy people investing their "after tax" wealth or income into what ever they wish.
It is governments who have the responsibility to ensure that all citizens have access to their basic food, health, education and housing needs, not private individuals.
Investing cash in supporting food banks is only a sticking plaster on a gaping wound. The Utopian solution is the availability of jobs for everyone and adequate financial support to individuals who are unable to work and their families so that they don't have to rely on food banks. Again that is the responsibility of governments and reflects their approach to taxation on society as a whole.
You can reasonably ask governments to prioritise spending in those areas that support basic human needs. Government spending on "hobby" pursuits could therefore be viewed as discretionary. Similarly excessive spending on defence, cultural activities, media and sport.
EJ@14:41
As I understand it he made his money in the financial sector an industry that preyed on the low earners. They gave them belief that they could have their own houses and then took their properties away when the previously obvious fact that they could not afford it pushed them to bankruptcy. These institutions then were baled out by the bankrupts when it all went belly up, so paying twice over. The same people that orchestrated the scam continued on their merry way and within a year were awarding themselves multi-million pound bonuses while staying in employment courtesy of the tax payer.
Mr Anderson's CV may suggest a more benign involvement in the industry but it all survives through the same gambling on the basics that we all require to live. The law may say he has the right to spend his wealth on what he wants but my political/social viewpoint disagrees with yours on that point.
I would also suggest that perhaps his donation is pre-tax, written off against tax as is the wont of the very rich. The fact that the money has been paid into a charity is perhaps indicative of this.
I am perhaps getting too political on a football site but with our concerns over funding sources over the past decade perhaps we need to visit the non sport related subjects from time to time. How else are we to keep the sport clean?
Mickey Edwards 10th June 2020 at 16:32
==============================
I don't think that your political/social viewpoints will be that far removed from mine.
However if you have a problem with wealthy people funding football clubs, because of how their wealth was accumulated or how tax laws were used to their advantage, then I'd suggest that you need to apply the same standard to all club owners and investors.
I don't think that many clubs in the Scottish Premiership, could state that their major shareholders have never exploited low paid staff or sought to minimise the tax paid by themselves or their companies.
"The hearing in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) arbitration between Manchester City FC and the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) concluded at 4:15pm (CET) today. The hearing, initiated on 8 June 2020 in the morning, was conducted by videoconference, with participants in Lausanne and London, and expert witnesses in various countries, in accordance with the schedule planned. ….
…. The decision is expected to be issued during the first half of July 2020. The exact date will be communicated in advance. The CAS arbitration concerns an appeal filed by Manchester City FC against the decision of the Adjudicatory Chamber of the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) dated 14 February 2020 in which it was deemed to have contravened UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations and sanctioned with exclusion from participation in UEFA club competitions in the next two seasons and ordered to pay a fine of EUR 3"
spikeyheid 10th June 2020 at 07:36
…………………
https://spfl.co.uk/admin/filemanager/files/shares/SPFL%20Articles%20of%20Association%20of%2020-Jan-20%20(MASTER%20COPY)%20CLEAN.pdf
………..
May be in here.
My post of 18.11: the figure for the fine should have been 30 million Euro, of course!
I'd asked the ASA a while ago about TRFC claiming to be the world record holder for trophies won , and suggested that the true champion was El Ahly . It seems that their position has shifted , or that I was mistaken about their claim in the first place . Has anybody an official link to the claim ? ( I thought there was something in RIFC IPO ). Wikipedia now says the following
Rangers is the second most successful club in world football in terms of trophies won, behind only Egyptian club Al Ahly.[4] The club has won more league titles and domestic trebles than any other team in the world, winning the Scottish League title 54 times, the Scottish Cup 33 times and the Scottish League Cup 27 times, and achieving the treble of all three in the same season seven times.
I used this as reference
https://sportytell.com/football/top-10-most-successful-football-clubs-in-the-world/
paddy malarkey 10th June 2020 at 20:03
Celtic now on 109 i believe, and that got me thinking…i know,i know.
If the ibrox club had 115, could celtic over take that trophy haul as the eight year old club reach their 150 year anniversary in two years time?
What a riddy it could be a ten year old club having a 150 year anniversary and claiming to be the most successful club in scotland as your old Glasgow rivals overtake you for that honour.
Could be a marketing dream for celtic if everything falls into place, and a damp squib of a celebration down ibrox way.
paddy malarkey 10th June 2020 at 20:03
…
Back in the day.
https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/the-rangers-football-club-ltd-a13-224406.html
…………..
If i remember correctly not long after they did remove the banners and hoarding that stated that they were, used it as a marketing slogan for a time to get the fans on board.
….
( I thought there was something in RIFC IPO ).
I have that somewhere but i’m too tired to look for it, may try tomorrow.
Edit. I think this is it.
http://www.rangersinternationalfootballclub.com/shareholder-centre/circulars-admission-document
Cluster One 10th June 2020 at 22:21
'..could celtic over take that trophy haul as the eight year old club reach their 150 year anniversary in two years time…'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The absurdity of an eight-year-old club pretending to anticipate celebrating a 150th birthday is laughable as being so absurdly and obviously factually incorrect. TRFC themselves and the rest of us know that they did not exist in Scottish professional football until 2012-the year of their creation and admission to a League!
However, the readiness of our Football Authorities to create and sustain and promote the Big Lie is not at all a laughing matter, signalling as it did a depth of corruption in Scottish Football and its Governance bodies and the ending of any belief that the concept of 'Sporting Integrity' means anything to venal, grasping, cowardly and self-seeking persons serving on the Boards of those 'authorities'.
A plague on them.
The earlier mentions of the 'most successful club in the world' sent me to have another look at the IPO prospectus, and I got diverted from 'the most successful' question by a reference to a very current question:
"The Company understands that the SPL are reviewing whether the SPL should be split into two divisions and that the SFL are considering a proposal for one league body and three leagues of 16, 10 and 16 teams respectively which would result in the end of the SPL and the opportunity for colt teams [ my bold] to participate in the league. The uncertainty in relation to the financial stability of certain Scottish football clubs and the proposals for restructuring Scottish football present a risk for the Company in relation to the manner in which the league and cup competitions will be structured in the future which may have a material adverse effect on the manner in which broadcasting and other revenue streams can be monetised by the Company. However, this risk is mitigated by the fact that any restructuring of Scottish football may enable the Club to return to the top division of Scottish football sooner than currently anticipated and to therefore benefit from access to different sources and levels of income"
I can't be sure, but I think that that was the first reference to 'colt teams' that I ever saw. I don't remember whether I even understood what was meant by 'colt teams' at the time or why they were mentioned as an 'opportunity'.
Further to my post of 22.59 , isn't there a lovely( albeit retrospective) irony in this observation:
"The uncertainty in relation to the financial stability of certain Scottish football clubs .."
coming as it does from RIFC plc, dependent as it now is on directors' loans and/or loans from unknown folk furth of the jurisdiction?
Who these days remembers the old washing board, used by generations of womenfolk ,and by Lonnie Donegan of fond memory and his skiffle group?
The washing board carried to Parkheid steamie ( more or less opposite to the 'three p's' cinema on Tollcross Road in them days) was used to wash nothing but claes, of course.
EJ@17:32
The fact is that I do pay attention to the investors and owners at all clubs and am aware of the dodgy practices that led to the wealth of many. My own club has had people that subsequently fell foul of the law. More recently we were funded by someone whose business used the imitation of faults(with a squirt of oil) to make money from non technically minded car owners. Tom English's recent "rehabilitation" of the Easdales doesn't pay heed to carrier bags of money behind the couch or being found guilty by our courts for dealing in stolen computer parts. We know that a knight of the realm's abuse of the tax system was found out but our society saw no need to prosecute. Neither does it question how, in two years, he went from bankrupt to 16th on Scotland's rich list after "his family" were sold the profitable parts of his failed empire for 20% of its true value. I would also like a closer look to be taken at the man who provided him with interest free loans and his involvement with Dunfermline FC.
While we are at it I would like to understand the recent increase in the transatlantic involvement in our clubs. Clubs that have very little potential for making money and play in leagues that are pretty barren when it comes to income from broadcasting companies.
When we look for someone to blame for what we are seeing then our attention should be on those responsible for policing our system, from the lowly SFA to the the FSA. We should not be surprise at what we see though. When an estimated £15-20 BILLION pounds is laundered every year through London's property market and barely scratch is made on that through prosecution what priority would EBT recipients receive.
Curing these ills is a massive task but should not be regarded as insurmountable. The involvement in football, though much smaller, has different problems – apathy and priorities. It could be tackled with ease by the fans should they choose. Starve the leagues and the club owners by staying away from the grounds. The problem is we have a fan base who, in the majority, see their tribal allegiances as far more important than their social responsibilities.
To my mind the worst of the crimes is the legalised scams operated by the financial industry. A system on which all society currently depends is given free reign to force prices up on the staples of life through the futures market or to create money making scams, sorry, schemes that risk the savings of Joe Public. And yet, the market trader selling pirate DVDs is more likely to face the courts than people who could cause the world economy to crash.
So, rant over. While I feel strongly that these problems need tackled my original posts were more a plea to face up to what will be a serious outcome from the pandemic than an attack on the inaction over organised crime. When the fallout arrives football will have no priority in our lives.
easyJambo 10th June 2020 at 17:32
I don't think that many clubs in the Scottish Premiership, could state that their major shareholders have never exploited low paid staff or sought to minimise the tax paid by themselves or their companies.
=====================================
I don't know who the major shareholders in most of the clubs in the premiership are, or how they made their money, so I don't know if that is the case.
However intuitively I think you are probably correct. So long as they are staying within the law and are not carrying out tax avoidance or tax evasion and are simply managing their tax affairs prudently I have no problem with that. I would sometimes question what the Government allow or even encourage, however that is not the fault of the business taking advantage of what is legitimate tax management.
To use the analogy of an ISA. They are there, they are legitimate, the Government encourage their use to make it worthwhile for people to save. Is there anything wrong with people using an ISA to reduce their tax. Absolutely not.
So I would agree, most businesses will seek to minimise the tax they pay, as will most individuals. No problem with that so long as it is not avoidance or evasion.
John Clark 10th June 2020 at 23:19
I can’t be sure, but I think that that was the first reference to ‘colt teams’ that I ever saw. I don’t remember whether I even understood what was meant by ‘colt teams’ at the time or why they were mentioned as an ‘opportunity’.
……………………
If a club goes bust and has a colt team playing in a lower league, would the colt team also go bust or would the colt team survive as something seperate playing in a lower league?
Cluster One 11th June 2020 at 12:35
=================================
Surely if a club goes bust it goes bust.
It may have teams playing at different levels, may have a ladies team, however they are all part of the same club.
It would be untenable to suggest that the senior (first) team died with the club but the other teams it put out didn't
Cluster One 10th June 2020 at 22:34
Thanks , CO , but can't open second link .
Sky Sports Scotland
@ScotlandSky
·
22m
SPFL LATEST
BREAKING
@spfl
confirm they’ve asked clubs to consider moving to a 14-10-10-10 structure permanently from next season
Clubs have until Monday to indicate their preference – an EGM and formal vote will be held if there is sufficient support.
………………
Wonder if this is another deadline kind of thing?
paddy malarkey 11th June 2020 at 13:14
1
0
Rate This
Cluster One 10th June 2020 at 22:34
Thanks , CO , but can’t open second link .
……………
Having problems also. JC may have the link and post it.
Barry Anderson (presumably not related to James Anderson) writes in today's 'Scotsman' that "the cash (the charitable donation to the SPFL Trust) will help teams pay wages and bills and go to the cost of testing players for the virus… Some of it will also be used to set up the Anderson Fund to support other positive projects within the SPFL community.."
I'm no lawyer, but it seems a rum sort of arrangement , setting up a new separate fund to meet the declared Objects of the SPFL trust, while using the Trustees of the SPFL Trust to decide on applications from clubs for £50 000 in cash grants to help with their normal everyday running costs!
Homunculus 11th June 2020 at 12:57
It may have teams playing at different levels, may have a ladies team, however they are all part of the same club.
It would be untenable to suggest that the senior (first) team died with the club but the other teams it put out didn’t
…………………
Before only one division got effected if a club went bust, but having a colt team playing at another level will affect two parts of the league if the senior (first) team died, double the danger so to speak.
What i am trying to get at (very badly)is there anything in place that would saveguard the colts team in a lower league if the senior (first) team died. Could a Charles Green type guy come in and gather up the colts part of the business and keep it running in the lower leagues?
John Clark 11th June 2020 at 15:04
==========================
From Q&A section of the full media release – it might assuage your concerns to some extent.
There must be some guarantees or stipulations that come with this donation, surely? What are they?
The donation James Anderson is making to the SPFL Trust comes without qualification or preconditions relating to the future structure or governance at the SPFL.
As with any grant charitable grant, the SPFL Trust will have certain standard conditions in place, but for the avoidance of doubt these specifically relate to community benefit, and have no bearing on the future structure or governance at the SPFL.
The only major condition, is that clubs may not use their grant for the provision of staff or player salaries.
Given the likely requirements to enable a return to football, this funding is expected to be able to support work in this area
of focus.
For example:
• Costs associated with ensuring stadia can attain bio-secure status, enabling the resumption of football, and with it, community activity, much of which take place daily at football grounds across Scotland
• Should clubs wish to purchase a Covid-19 testing system, we would expect to see equipment being made available for use to the benefit of the club’s wider community (clubs would not be expected to cover the per head cost of tests conducted by community groups using their equipment)
The one thing I particularly liked about this donation, I hope I have picked this up correctly, is that clubs can ask for the money and for it to go towards their own charity foundation, rather than the club itself. If that's wrong my apologies.
I for one think it is an excellent gesture by James Anderson. I see it as being altruistic, which he apparently has form for, and it is to be welcomed.
Though I can see how people may be sceptical about his motivations. Though that might reflect more on them than it does on him.
Cluster One 11th June 2020 at 15:39
Sorry CO but I'm just not understanding where you are coming from with this.
Take Rangers, when they went bust they would probably have had a reserve team, and under 19 team etc. When the club went bust every part of it went bust.
I take you point that there would be two teams playing in the same league, albeit a different division, however I still don't see how that would change anything.
As to the scenario re someone else taking the colts over. The players registrations would be an asst of the club, so no different from first team players. The same for any other asset the colts may have.
That's just my opinion of course, I have no issue if you or anyone else sees it differently.
Some court business next week. Unless there is a free-phone dial in facility I don’t think anyone will be able to report on it.
LORD TYRE – T Sadler, Clerk
Friday 19th June
Preliminary Hearing
CA86/19 David Grier v Philip Gormley – Kennedys Scotland – Ledingham Chalmers LLP
Homunculus 11th June 2020 at 16:51
………..
Thanks for reply.
….
Take Rangers, when they went bust they would probably have had a reserve team
…
I can’t remember when the reserves team structure was scrapped, but i think that is why the colts team thing came into being.
It is just the now double danger if there is a colts team in the division, if the senior club goes bust. two divisions in the league would be effected. I don’t trust the SPFL or the SFA to allow such damage to happen. Feck they sht themselves when the ibrox club went bust and never had a clue what to do(tried to shoehorn a new club in the top flight as you know to save disruption. What disruption would be caused if two teams were out the divisions at the same time? they would really shi themselves.I just don’t trust them to let such a thing happen.
easyJambo 11th June 2020 at 15:43
'…From Q&A section of the full media release – it might assuage your concerns to some extent..'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Thanks for that, eJ: I suppose Barry Anderson was ,like me, writing before he saw that clear-cut statement about grant monies not to be used for wages etc!
It's not so much that I had reservations about the integrity and generosity of the donor, who can deservedly be thanked for his generosity.
But we know that there are people in Scottish Football governance who have previously shown themselves not to be above a shabby thing and were prepared to throw integrity to the wind.
I am ready to believe they would do the same again , and would be ready to refuse to have 'outsiders' review their actions.
All the baddies are not in South Africa or the Far East.
Cluster One 11th June 2020 at 17:34
I can’t remember when the reserves team structure was scrapped, but i think that is why the colts team thing came into being.
=========================================
The Reserve League system exists, it was brought back in the 2018 – 2019 season. It replaced the Development League which operated between 1998 and 2018.
That's not from memory I looked it up.
In any case, I understand the ramifications for a club having two teams in different divisions if that club fails. That might be a good argument for not allowing it in the first place, the amiistrators wouldn't be able to deal with it.
However bear in mind it's not that unusual in places like Spain where top division clubs have their reserves in lower divisions. The reserves cannot be promoted to the top division and cannot now play in the cup, both of which make absolute sense.
Homunculus 11th June 2020 at 21:39
However bear in mind it’s not that unusual in places like Spain where top division clubs have their reserves in lower divisions. The reserves cannot be promoted to the top division and cannot now play in the cup, both of which make absolute sense.
==============================
There are currently three reserve sides already playing in the pyramid.
Those “reserve” teams are obviously prevented from being promoted to the same league as their parent clubs.
Annan Athletic fielded sides in L2 and the SoSFL up to the end of season 2018/19
Spartans fielded sides in both the Lowland League and EoSFL until 2015/16
Hibs also fielded a “colts” side in the EoSFL in season 2013/14
In discussion with friends I have raged against the ‘hoovering’ up of young potential by the larger clubs .The conversation was weighted toward the EPL and specifically Chelsea and Manchester City but I see parallels in the attempt to include colt teams in Scottish professional football. The game is already skewed enough without allowing young players to be picked up en masse and winnowed so early.Yes I am aware that this happens already but not on the scale that this Colts ruse could accommodate.The loan system is the proper way to develop talent outside of the top league and it has served quite well, Ryan Christie a contemporary example.Perhaps an expansion of the number of players allowed to be loaned out/in could be a way forward.
Latest BDO report now out. Almost 8 years, and they are still at it.
Cluster One 12th June 2020 at 11:21
It contains absolutely nothing new, just a breakdown of their charges.
I imaging they will continue until there is no money left. They are doing a good job of spending the £25m which was brought in.
Out of curiosity: has anyone watched a live game behind closed doors on TV recently?
What did you think about it?
I’ve only watched the highlights of a Bundesliga game, where the stadium was shown as empty, but with a soundtrack of fans noises/chanting. Don’t know if this is just heard on TV or if it’s over the stadium loudspeakers.
It did come across a bit like watching a preseason friendly.
I’ve just read about La Liga using CGI to ‘add’ supporters visually – but it hasn’t been well received?
Maybe, in an unintended consequences way, the clubs and Hampden might truly appreciate that they need to value their paying customers – and in future, proactively seek their feedback, and change/improve accordingly. (I know!)
It’s one thing this virus confirming that the (SPL) clubs and governing bodies desperately need our money.
It’s quite another thing to have it painfully reaffirmed that the (SPL) clubs and governing bodies ALSO desperately need physical bums on seats in the stadiums – to create a sporting event.
Maybe, just maybe, supporters might ‘soon’ receive the recognition – and appreciation – which has been woefully absent in the game, generally.
This terrible crisis also presents a significant learning opportunity for the SFA, SPFL and clubs…
Cluster One 12th June 2020 at 11:21
"….and they are still at it."
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
And then some!!
I wouldn't mind being able to charge £1,415.38 for 2 hours of 'planning and strategy' time.
The average salary of a Chief Medical Officer (in the UK) is about £258,036 per annum., or about £4960 a week, or for a 38 -hour week, about £130.00 per hour.
I needn't pass any comment.
'StevieBC 12th June 2020 at 12:53
Out of curiosity: has anyone watched a live game behind closed doors on TV recently?
What did you think about it?
I’ve only watched the highlights of a Bundesliga game, where the stadium was shown as empty, but with a soundtrack of fans noises/chanting. Don’t know if this is just heard on TV or if it’s over the stadium loudspeakers.
It did come across a bit like watching a preseason friendly…'
################################
I've watched a few closed-door Bundesliga matches.
The secret for me is to put on some music & turn the commentary off. That makes it almost enjoyable.
Tonight's choice on BT: Italian Cup or Turkish Premier League. Decisions, decisions…
Steve, the South Korean baseball league decided to fill their stadia with soft toys and a German company have developed an app to let fans cheer from their sofas
https://gamerant.com/south-korean-baseball-plushies/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-8290407/App-fans-send-cheers-jeers-sofas-stadiums.html
https://hack-care.de/myapplause-app/
<
Cluster One 12th June 2020 at 11:21
John Clark 12th June 2020 at 14:02
=============================
Not a lot to report for 676.7 man hours of effort, at an average of £474.17 an hour, over the previous six months. Although I guess it must take a few hours to calculate how much money you can claim from the creditors pot.
Stevie BC
I've watched a bit of German League. Not too bad once you get used to it – but the players' disgusting spitting habits (prevalent in the modern game but even more abhorrent in the current Covid19 climate) are still all too evident.
Surely someone in (a health) authority could have a word.
Please excuse my 'bee in my bonnet' moment.
easyJambo 12th June 2020 at 18:22
————————–
I can't remember if there is still some ongoing litigation that BDO have to prosecute or defend EJ. Surely it must be close to polishing the brass handles and getting the nails ready?
gunnerb 12th June 2020 at 20:06
I can't remember if there is still some ongoing litigation that BDO have to prosecute or defend EJ. Surely it must be close to polishing the brass handles and getting the nails ready?
=================================
They still have a live case against the Administrators re their (in)competence (case no. P115/17).
I believe that all the claims against the Oldco have been settled (barring one that wasn't brought, i.e. Res 12)
easyJambo 12th June 2020 at 21:59
'..They still have a live case against the Administrators re their (in)competence (case no. P115/17). '
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Yes, that's one case I'd like to see argued out.
D&P survived the inquiry into potential 'conflict of interest' (and I would like to see the guts of that 'inquiry' and how the decision was arrived at).
The question of whether D&P handled the Administration competently is even more open to question, in my opinion.
I suspect that the major creditors were spitting blood at seeing assets sold for a fraction of their previously stated value to a chap whose offer was risible.
I was spitting blood vicariously ,on their behalf!!!
View from a small club .
https://ptfc.co.uk/ptfc-news/board-update-13th-june-2020/
paddy malarkey 13th June 2020 at 13:00.
'.View from a small club '
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
From the Thistle link you posted, pm, I abstract this:
".If this vote collapses because people cannot set aside self-interest and ego, our game potentially faces irreparable damage and ongoing division for many years to come.
“At a time unparalleled in footballing history, countries throughout Europe have re-jigged their league set ups to protect the whole – we have the opportunity to do the same."
And I totally endorse the sentiment.
I have wrestled with the question of whether re-configuration of Leagues in reaction to the immeasurably damaging consequences of an utterly unlooked for pandemic (which has affected every country in the world and every aspect of society) could in any sense be described as interfering with 'sporting integrity.
I'm satisfied in my own mind that it could not be so described, but on the contrary, could be said to be the right thing to do in terms of any understanding of sporting integrity and solidarity in times of great stress.
I think that Partick Thistle have been the most unfairly treated of all Scottish clubs in the attempt to find a solution to the current crisis.
I also feel that they have shown dignity and decency in everything that they have said about it , in marked contrast to some others.
For these reasons alone I would support a solution which would do them no harm.
This from a supporter of one of Glasgow’s alleged ‘ two cheeks’ who recognises that Thistle represents the useful organ that is located between them.
( sorry Paddy I always wanted to get that one in!)
The "negative goodwill" in the accounts is a decent idea of how much the assets were undersold for.
That and the fact that they were sold to an entirely different company than the administrator had an irrevocable deal with is enough to pretty much prove that the administration was not dealt with properly.
Going back to basics, once the CVA was rejected the only consideration for the administrators should have had was the best interests of the creditors. It clearly wasn't.
Aurellio Zen 13th June 2020 at 13:50
You calling us wee ducks , pal ? Yer bus is going in the canal for a wash !
Homunculus 13th June 2020 at 17:56
Going back to basics, once the CVA was rejected the only consideration for the administrators should have had was the best interests of the creditors. It clearly wasn’t.
…………………….
Duff and Phelps are being investigated by the Insolvency Practitioners Association (IPA) over an alleged conflict of interest, which they deny.
Duff and Phelps released a statement claiming they had been a complete success. Paul Clark said Our primary function was to keep the business going and effect a sale of the club in order that it could continue, while maximizing the return for the creditors.
These objectives were achieved. It will now fall to the liquidators to realise any further potential funds that may go to creditors.
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1271929341463715840/photo/1
……
It clearly wasn’t.
Homunculus 13th June 2020 at 17:56
'…once the CVA was rejected the only consideration for the administrators should have had was the best interests of the creditors…'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The burning question in my mind, Homunculus, is this:
At what point in time did the CEOs of the SFA, the SPL and the SFL tell the Administrators that their decision to grant exclusivity to CG in the event that they (D&P) failed (as they signally did!) to achieve a CVA was not important, because even though RFC plc would then enter 'Liquidation', CG's SevcoScotland would be successful when they applied ( whatever name they called themselves) for membership of the SPL?
It seems to me that right from the off there must have been some kind of dirty understanding that that would be the case.
In the event, of course, the smart guys assumed too much. The SPL to their credit booted out the idea that a new club could be admitted to their league, and the membership of the SFL honourably refused to accept the new club into either the Championship or the next lower division.
Who knows what promises may have been made to whomever in order to get CGs new club into the bottom tier?
And all the time the SMSM , squealing now for financial aid as being essential to democracy, refused to ask questions, as they swallowed their bits of succulent lamb and drank the poisoned wine of Circe.
It gars me greet, that Truth should be so trampled upon!
John Clark 13th June 2020 at 23:32
Who knows what promises may have been made to whomever in order to get CGs new club into the bottom tier?
………………
There was an improved offer to get Charles Green’s Sevco Scotland Ltd directly into the SFL at First Division level.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9390002/Rangers-in-crisis-SPL-set-to-improve-offer-to-SFL-in-last-gasp-attempt-to-get-Rangers-newco-into-First-Division.html
……
Joint statement issued on behalf of the Scottish FA, Scottish Premier League and Scottish Football League.
The Scottish FA, the Scottish Premier League and the Scottish Football League have, for the past two years, been involved in a series of discussions at Board level with the objective of securing radical and co-ordinated reconstruction of the game in this country.
Today, we are asking clubs to consider a package of reforms which have the potential to rejuvenate Scottish football at senior level and safeguard its future at a time when uncertainty and fear prevail.
The proposals are based on five principles previously outlined by the Scottish FA as key to streamlining governance, ensuring greater financial distribution and above all, providing better entertainment, enhanced competition and value for money for supporters.
Upon agreement by the respective Boards, the proposals will placed before the SPL and SFL clubs for approval, to be activated immediately and phased in over a two-year period.
A working party will be formed, including three representatives from both the SPL and SFL, to devise a new structure for the senior professional game in Scotland. This group will have an independent Chairman appointed by the Scottish FA. They will be tasked with delivering by 30th November, 2012, a recommendation for structural change effective 2013/14. This will incorporate primarily:-
a) The introduction of an enlarged top tier for Scottish Senior Professional Football.
b) A new detailed model for senior professional football in Scotland including number of divisions; number of clubs per division; number of matches per season per division; number of promotion and relegation places per division and the introduction and operation of play-offs.
c) An all-through distribution model providing certainty for all clubs as to the percentage of distributable income which will be received. As a minimum, clubs in the current third and fourth divisions will receive the settlement agreement proportion guaranteed as per the current arrangement. In addition, the value and number of parachute payments to relegated clubs will be considered.
d) The introduction of a pyramid for Scottish football to provide a route for licensed clubs to enter the new structure effective 2014/2015
In the event that a final decision is not reached by 30th November, 2012, the Scottish FA will seek to implement a new structure in time for the 2013/2014 season. The members of the working party, including Chairman, will be announced in the near future and will ensure consultation with all stakeholders prior to final recommendations being made.
11 Jul 2012
………..
David Longmuir did get a nice Bonus i believe.
John Clark 13th June 2020 at 23:32
Homunculus 13th June 2020 at 17:56 ‘
The burning question in my mind, Homunculus, is this: At what point in time did the CEOs of the SFA, the SPL and the SFL tell the Administrators that their decision to grant exclusivity to CG in the event that they (D&P) failed (as they signally did!) to achieve a CVA was not important, because even though RFC plc would then enter ‘Liquidation’, CG’s SevcoScotland would be successful when they applied ( whatever name they called themselves) for membership of the SPL?
=================================================
I’m not sure there was a tacet agreement John…….At least not with Charlie Chuckles,(representing Sevco 5088). However it was a problem for D&P.
I recall (from one of the tapes I think), that was why there was the demand from D&P for a two pronged offer. i.e. A purchase price for “The Club”, if a CVA was achieved, (which was actually a loan), and also the lower valued purchase price, should “The Club”, not be rescued, and only the basket of assets were available.
D&P were fearful that Charlie, (representing Sevco 5088), would walk away if, “The Club” couldn’t be saved, and they at the time, were under serious time constraints to get at least some kind of result.
As events turned out “The Club”, wasn’t saved, and in an eight minute meeting 140 years of history was washed down the drain, meaning the offer for the assets alone became the accepted deal.
I think that is where the switcheroo happened, as wee Craigy’s shares were not required for the asset purchase alone, so the purchase was concluded with Charlie, representing Sevco Scotland.
(As it's quiet-ish.)
John Clark 13th June 2020 at 23:32
…
And all the time the SMSM , squealing now for financial aid as being essential to democracy, refused to ask questions, as they swallowed their bits of succulent lamb and drank the poisoned wine of Circe…
========
And I bet every game you watch JC, you call the ref a 'homer'?
Coincidentally, I'm reacquainting myself with this genre – whose meanings seem to be ever more relevant today.
Scottish senior football seems destined to forever operate in some level of chaos…
StevieBC 14th June 2020 at 13:05
'..And I bet every game you watch JC, you call the ref a 'homer'?'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Ha,ha! At first reading, that went right over my head, StevieBC!
John Clark 13th June 2020 at 23:32
Cluster One 14th June 2020 at 07:41'.
'There was an improved offer to get Charles Green’s Sevco Scotland Ltd directly into the SFL at First Division level…..'
Corrupt official 14th June 2020 at 10:55
'. I’m not sure there was a tacet agreement John…'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Yes, gentlemen.
Whenever it occurred, there was a specific point when the 'Administration' of Rangers FC plc ceased to be merely a football story and morphed into a much more important issue of potential criminality on a par with the potential criminality of the award of UEFA licence some years before: a story that was simply begging to be investigated by any half-arsed finance or sports journalist.
Instead, there was not only reluctance on the part of the Press to investigate , but insistent denial that RFC plc had ceased to exist in Scottish Football and mass propagandising of the lie that SevcoScotland/TRFC Ltd was not a new football club but the very same RFC plc that had somehow survived Administration.
Not even the Administrators dared to use the words 'football club' when referring to what CG had bought. No, they had to use 'assets and business', and even then could not say 'all' the assets, because they could not sell the contracts that a number of players had with RFC plc because they had not sold the club to CG, and it was the club that was liquidated, and liquidation automatically voided any contract that the football players had.
John Clark 14th June 2020 at 14:35
Whenever it occurred, there was a specific point when the ‘Administration’ of Rangers FC plc ceased to be merely a football story and morphed into a much more important issue of potential criminality on a par with the potential criminality of the award of UEFA licence some years before: a story that was simply begging to be investigated by any half-arsed finance or sports journalist.
…………….
Looking back on this day June 14, 2012 when the CVA was rejected, it was all about the loss of 140 years of history and a New club is born.
The strange thing is looking back you do get a lot of 404 error page failed to open type thing.
I wonder if there is any other major stories out there that have so many dead links
Cluster One 14th June 2020 at 20:56
'..The strange thing is looking back you do get a lot of 404 error page failed to open type thing.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
It has taken a few centuries for the evil bast.rds who made their money on the whip-lashed backs of manacled slaves to be unmasked as the pitiless sodding exploiters that they were.
While they were alive their rottenness was not publicly known, so they could bask in the admiration of others and be rewarded with 'honours' and have statues raised to them by those who benefited from their dirty money at the price of fawning all over them.
Those responsible for the big lie at the heart of Scottish Football, however, know as they live and go about their daily business and family life amongst us, that they are held in utter contempt now, and will not be at all honoured by many thousands of us when they shuffle off their mortal coils.
The slave exploiters at least enriched themselves!
What did our football governance people gain from the abandonment of the Sporting Integrity it was their duty to preserve and foster?
And, of course, what may be said about the SFA, the SPL, and the SFL in 2012 can be said in spades about the SMSM and the BBC in Scotland and the determination of the former to foster and promote the lie, of the latter to forbid any on-air discussion of it.
The print/online Press are, of course, mere tools of rich corporations /individuals which pursue only those 'truths' that might bring in the pennies and the advertising revenue.(That is a generalisation, of course)
But there was, and is, something very, very rotten indeed when the BBC yields to pressure and sells the pass, even in the relatively unimportant matter of honesty in sport and sports administration.
Truth is indivisible.
It is incontrovertibly true that RFC plc was liquidated. and on that account ceased to exist as a shareholder of the SPL and member of the SFA.
The denial of that Truth is clearly of lesser significance than a denial of the Truth about slave-labour being one of the means by which wealth was created sufficient to allow Britain to subdue, subjugate and exploit those countries and nations which eventually constituted the 'Empire'.
It is nonetheless a denial that the BBC ought never to have accepted.
Those in Pacific Quay responsible originally for that acceptance and those there today who sedulously ensure that no BBC sports journalist/pundit/football comedian/ guest is allowed even to mention the liquidation of RFC plc as having ended the existence of that football club are deserving of the deepest Circle of Dante's 'inferno'.
May they go there, chained together with those in office in the SFA, SPL and SFL in 2012 and those currently in office in the SFA and SPFL!
I see that not for the first time the SMSM are providing free advertising for Govan-based merchandise.
Seemingly there is new stauncher training kit which can be worn (after purchase at a reasonable price depending on where the Blue Pound is exchanging with the Euro or Bitcoin) when marching round your favourite statue of someone you had never heard of until 20 minutes, or 2012 minutes, ago.
Strangely, the official Club Twitter account has chosen to leak the new MASH-free gear with photographs of two tops bearing the initials of Steven Gerrard and James Traynor.
At first I thought they meant to show the tops of the Manager and the Captain but soon realised if they did the latter would have been JT (PEN).
We now wait to find out how long it will take before the newest Proud Retail Partner becomes more well known as Castore v T'Rangers; Case No: Nothemagain/2020.
LUGOSI 15th June 2020 at 09:10
I see that not for the first time the SMSM are providing free advertising for Govan-based merchandise.
…………………
Looking back at the new club starting life at ibrox, almost every puff piece had a free AD. I don’t know if Liquidation brought on short sightedness down ibrox way as the free AD’s got bigger and bigger with each puff piece.
Self interest prevails over common sense and shared responsibility, so Hearts is forced to take the only option now available to it. Who knows what the consequences could be and the impact on all other clubs.
https://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/article/club-statement-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8
CLUB STATEMENT
15th June 2020
The SPFL Board has today announced that any reconstruction proposals for season 2020/21 will not proceed to a vote due to a lack of support from other member clubs.
To say we are disappointed, yet sadly not surprised, at this outcome is, of course, an understatement. We have, from the outset, worked tirelessly with fellow clubs and the SPFL Board to try to find a solution that would right the most obvious wrongs that have been caused in Scottish football by decisions taken as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Hearts, along with many others, have stated repeatedly that no club should be disproportionately disadvantaged because of this crisis. This was the final opportunity for kinship to prevail and for Scottish football to stand together in an emergency. It is an unfortunate condemnation of Scottish football that this was not possible.
We thank those who were open minded, pragmatic and willing to come together to try and reach a fair outcome for all. Sadly, there were too few of us.
Now that all other avenues are closed, we are left with no choice but to proceed with a legal challenge. The club has tried throughout these last few months to avoid this course of action but we must now do the right thing by our supporters, our employees, our players and our sponsors, all of whom have been unwavering in their commitment and support. We can hold our heads up high as we have acted at all times with integrity, common sense and with the best interests of Scottish football at heart.
We have stated from the beginning that the unjust and unfair treatment of Hearts, Partick Thistle, Stranraer and indeed other clubs cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. While many weeks have been wasted in trying to find a solution, we must now formally challenge this outcome.
The club can confirm that the necessary steps have been taken to begin this legal challenge. Given that this is now an active legal matter, the club will be offering no further comment at this time.
To our amazing fans we say that we cannot, and will not, sit idly by and watch the decisions made in the past few months further damage Heart of Midlothian Football Club. Thank you for fighting for us, now allow us to do the same for you.
Commiserations , Jambos .
I wonder if anybody is getting an introductory bonus ?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/sfa-agree-deal-rangers-bankers-22192582
paddy malarkey 15th June 2020 at 14:20
I wonder if anybody is getting an introductory bonus ?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/sfa-agree-deal-rangers-bankers-22192582
=======================================
Perhaps Hibs will be their first new customer.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/hibs-make-player-wage-request-22194899
Why would the SFA offer to underwrite a loan from Close Brothers?……..Who even asked them to?.
Surely if a club chooses to get a loan they subsequently can't repay, that is the club's problem?
Am I missing something here, or does it reek?
Corrupt official 15th June 2020 at 15:54
………..
Will fans of any club getting a loan that the SFA offer to underwrite said loan be told their club has asked for a loan that the SFA have offerd to underwrite, or will it all be done in secret?
Corrupt official 15th June 2020 at 15:54
'..Am I missing something here, or does it reek?'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Anything that the SFA board says or does must initially be regarded as suspicious. Their number one priority will be to try to make sure that TRFC Ltd doesn't go belly-up.
TRFC is one of very few Scottish clubs to have a turnover greater than £45 million. That excludes them from access to the Government covid-19 loan scheme. Unlike the other clubs which are also ineligible, TRFC are already near enough skint and will be in desperate straits much sooner than the others-whose credit rating in the commercial loans market is high.
Close Bros already have charges on just about anything TRFC has left to pawn (other than the stadium itself!) and probably aren't all that keen to lend again to TRFC.
The directors of RIFC plc have probably reached the limits of lending from their own personal resources-they will most probably be watching their own business concerns with some degree of anxiety.
Where, then, are TRFC to find the ready wherewithal to keep in business for the first months of the season and beyond?
Perhaps from Close Bros after all, with the SFA underwriting the loan by pawning Hampden Park?
Now, that's possibly a bit fanciful.
But it's the way I now automatically think after the 5-Way Agreement and the arrogant refusal to have the Res 12 issue investigated.
The Governance body lied to us all before, and I believe they will lie again any time it suits.
Anybody seen Alfredo ? And there is usually an eight-page spread of training pictures by now .
Can I ask that anyone including links to pictures on the website refrains from doing so? We have just been served with a fairly threatening notice inviting us to settle a claim for the use of a picture (a daft picture of fans sweating at a match) which was posted by a (unnamed) contributor almost a year ago.
I have explained that the picture was never served by us and that the reference was a link to the resource on another publicly available site. Having had experience with people like this before on another site a few years back, I am not sure that this will make the threat of legal action go away.
This was the major reason we removed the 'upload images' facility, but it is straightforward to get around that by having some html skills.
Not looking to blame anyone, but there is a chance that this could end up costing us a few quid, so could I ask that those of you with html skills please not inject any html into their comments save a link to a web page – especially with regard to src tags.
Cluster One 15th June 2020 at 19:25
Corrupt official 15th June 2020 at 15:54 ………..
Will fans of any club getting a loan that the SFA offer to underwrite said loan be told their club has asked for a loan that the SFA have offerd to underwrite, or will it all be done in secret?
===============================================
Or perhaps already has been done, thus calling off the attack hounds from a club previously in default?.,,,,And I think you are probably correct in your latter suggestion C1 that it would be another sordid secret……..But what box would a club tick on a Euro application form?
Corrupt official
"But what box would a club tick on a Euro application form?"
The same boxes one had ticked all other previous applications, that has worked so far, has it not?
POR CIERTO 16th June 2020 at 08:24
Corrupt official "But what box would a club tick on a Euro application form?" The same boxes one had ticked all other previous applications, that has worked so far, has it not?
================================================
Indeed it has por cierto. And some would say fraudulently. would they not?
The HMFC statement would garner more support from me if some honesty was injected into it. The cries of "injustice" and the blaming other clubs for self interest has so much irony in it that it could prove to be magnetic.
It is only a few short weeks since Ann Budge was handed the chair of a group that was to look into a means of "righting the wrongs" caused by the pandemic. Her first action was to unilaterally state in a BBC interview that there was no way that she would allow the outcome to be a permanent change in the league structure. Other clubs showed surprise as they were believing that no conditions were to be placed on their discussions. There can have been no other reason for Ms Budge's imposition of a condition than self interest. She saw the situation as being that everyone else's vision of the review did not carry the weight that her's did. Not a good starting point for someone looking to keep their club in the top division.
Now she is proceeding with legal action that, because of the time constraints, will probably result in a fine for the SPFL if she wins. A fine that will ostensibly come out of the coffers of all other clubs. She, and the club's fans, may view this as a just outcome but where is the consistency? The fans will occupy a yet unfinished stand that has overrun its building costs by more than double and yet no cries from Budge for recompense from those responsible. Could this be because the project was awarded to someone with no experience of this size of undertaking and who had a further qualification that should have seen them dropped from consideration- they were a member of the Budge family.
So now Budge cries foul and accuses others of self interest but should we listen to someone who appears to be so immersed in the same quality.
Mickey Edwards 16th June 2020 at 09:26
While I agree there is concerns regards the overspend on the new stand at Tynecastle can we just stop the petty nonsense that it is somehow 'unfinished'.
The new stand was opened to fans in November 2017.
I took a coaching badge at Tynecastle in the summer 2018 and was in the European Lounge, all fully functioning at that time, two years ago.
Shop, ticket office, bar and the required nursery facility all fully open and functioning. So long I can't even remember when they were finished.
The changing rooms took a bit more time to complete as did the Skyline Lounge but come any restart of football they will have both been operational and fully functioning for over at least a year.
Tynecastle now has four stands of a uniform design, a full suite of hospitality and catering options, modern changing rooms, additional changing rooms for community use (coaching courses, kids half time heroes events, etc). An enclosed TV studio has been provided. The works on the new stand resulted in new office space and other facilities being provided under the Wheatfield Stand and making use of previous 'dead space'. The concourse goes around all four stand thus providing great access and views for disabled fans. There is a memorial garden and the club museum. Oh and of course a new hybrid pitch.
Given the current situation nobody else will come close to improving their facilities to the level seen at Tynecastle. Aberdeen are the only club I am aware of planning to do anything significant and they are reported to be mothballing their new stadium plans for the foreseeable future.
Yes the product down Gorgie has not been great on the pitch but the 'self interest' is there for all to see in what is a very decent football stadium that the club and fans can be proud off, regardless if there are a few snagging or behind the scenes areas to be completed.
Yes there are some questions to be asked re the finances surrounding the new stand and improvements but, even then, the Foundation of Hearts money continues to roll in. Hearts fans are generally happy with the end product in terms of the club's infrastructure.
If others want to take cheap shots regards what Tynecastle offers Scottish Football by way of a decent ground, then so be it.
Partick now joining Hearts in potential legal action v SPFL.
Both clubs seem to have access to adequate financial resources to move things forward, if they so choose.
Tuesday 16th June, 2020 at 1:59pm
Yesterday, we said that court action was our preferred route to challenging our relegation to League 1. It was only a lack of funding that stopped us. At that time, we reserved the right to change our position should circumstances change.
Last night, in response to our statement, we received a proposal to fully fund legal action should we wish to pursue it, at no cost to Thistle. After careful Board consideration, we have now accepted this extremely generous offer of unexpected help.
Today, following discussions with Hearts, we have agreed that we will launch a joint legal challenge to resolve what others have failed to do since April.
To those who think we should just move on and accept what’s been dished out to us, yesterday 26 clubs put themselves first. Today, we have now been given the opportunity to do the same.
Chairman Jacqui Low on behalf of the Board of Partick Thistle FC.
New podcast – again with David Low. David wearing his Celtic Trust hat in this one so podcast is a bit Celtic-centric.
However the issue discussed – season ticket refund problems – is a wider one.
wottpi@12:51
No cheap shots. The "unfinished" status of the stand was taken from Ann's BBC interview.
Even allowing for that at no point was I being negative about the new stand. I was trying to point out that Ms Budge was being very selective about what could "harm" Hearts.
COVID19 has left many disadvantaged in all walks of life. Like Hearts relegation there are workers who will not be kept in employment in a firm because their performance was not as good as others before the business was hit by effects of the pandemic.
Everyone can find some form of unfairness they will suffer at this time. Hibs will be some £200,000 worse off because of the points per game basis of the decision and they have accepted it. In fact,if they decided to use Heart's "we could have…" argument then who knows what position we could have ended in and how much have we lost because of it.
Had Hearts succeeded in saving themselves through getting a bigger league then the potential of many more "unfair" outcomes was possible. For instance, Celtic are going for 10 in a row next year. If they failed to do that by a couple of points and had lost points to a team that was not suppose to even be in that league what then?
COVID 19 is unfair to us all and we should just accept it. To try to change things would only create other problems that then would be man made and not a an act of nature.
Tom English’s take on recent events.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53062777
And so the battleground changes, from chairmen on Zoom to QCs in court, from indicative votes and extraordinary general meetings to the competition and markets authority and the SPFL articles of association. What joy. Isn’t this the type of crack that made you fall in love with football in the first place?
Skin and hair has flown between club leaders these past months but they can all step aside now and let the legal profession take it from here. The recent history of the game is littered with examples of indignant clubs threatening court over one thing or another only to back away when they got a whiff of the cost, but this time seems different. In their bid to right the wrong of relegation from the Premiership – or expulsion – Hearts would appear ready to go the distance.
One of three things will happen now. Hearts will change their mind and accept their lot after the SPFL’s proposal for an expanded top flight was rejected by clubs. Two, Hearts will lose a legal action and will have no choice but to retreat. Or, Hearts will win a legal action and a new kind of football hell will break loose. Success in court could mean the end of Neil Doncaster as chief executive of the SPFL for surely no leader would survive such a defeat. What it would mean for Hearts – compensation, reinstatement – is really hard to say. The silks are running the show now.
What we had on Monday was 26 of the 42 clubs who couldn’t bring themselves to back a plan that would have spared three of their own members no end of misery, a plan that every last one of them would have supported had they been the one cast into the dismal plight of enforced relegation.
Instead, they danced on the head of a pin for weeks, incapable of finding agreement on the number of clubs they wanted in each division or how many divisions or whether these divisions should be temporary or permanent. To paraphrase a line from Blackadder, in all of those discussions they made about as much progress as an asthmatic ant carrying some heavy shopping.
In Tuesday’s endgame they didn’t even get close to a consensus. All of them said they had sympathy for the three clubs but if they did they had a strange way of showing it. Few, if any, of them thought it was fair that the three should suffer such a blow, but only a small number acted on those beliefs. The rest just declared the problem unsolvable and pulled the ladder up.
Because Hearts are the biggest of the three clubs facing relegation, most of the attention has been on them. That suits the other clubs who have voted against reconstruction. They want the argument focusing on Hearts and not Partick Thistle or Stranraer because it’s easier to kick Hearts than it is Thistle, it’s more convenient to bang on about Ann Budge – a misogynistic tone to some of it – and to mock Hearts’ financial wastefulness and their awful decision-making than it is to confront the steepling injustice that is Thistle’s situation.
That’s a lot harder to face up to if you’re one of the clubs who has done them in. So nobody really wants to spend much time talking about Thistle because it’s uncomfortable. Maybe there’s a bit of guilt there. Better to divert and bombard Hearts instead. Safer ground, that.
But let’s look at Thistle. They are now a club in limbo, possibly starting their season in League One in January, but possibly not. Nobody knows. Nobody is giving them any information because there is no information to give. In terms of the restart, Leagues One and Two remain in no-man’s land.
Some are happy to be there. Others are not. And Thistle are one of the others. Because they’ve been relegated with nine games of a season left to play while sitting two points outside of the safety zone with a game in hand people, will be out of work.
Getting unceremoniously dumped from the Championship, which is scheduled to begin again in October, is bad enough but then to be told that the league they’ve been dumped into might not be starting for another six months at least is a kick too far.
If they haven’t already, they’ll be forced to shed jobs. That’s a direct consequence of not having games and not having income. How can anybody with a fair mind acknowledge that a grave injustice has been done and then vote in a way that does absolutely nothing to address that injustice?
The argument you hear is that nothing could be done, that all clubs couldn’t bend to satisfy the wishes of one or two or three others. The people who are running the game couldn’t find a better solution than this? What does that tell you about the people running the game?
Many of these same people are lying low. Ross County’s Roy MacGregor was one of the few who raised his head above the parapet over the weekend when saying that Hearts should “take their medicine” and desist from legal action. He presumably meant that Thistle should also take their medicine. Let him and others justify those comments to Partick Thistle, a club whose future will be in jeopardy if, and probably when, it’s confirmed that they can’t play league football until next year.
No club deserves this kind of treatment. Having won just two out of 13 league games before football was suspended MacGregor’s own club were in freefall. Even hopeless Hearts had more points than them in that period.
Had Ross County continued that trajectory and dropped to 12th and were then robbed of a chance to rescue themselves because of the pandemic would MacGregor be practising what he’s now preaching about taking his medicine or would he be highlighting a wrong and calling for support? It doesn’t matter who the afflicted clubs are, no properly functioning governing body – one that purports to act in the interests of 42 clubs – would stand over this decision.
What’s also heard in places is the bogus argument to end all bogus arguments, the one that has people saying that if their club was in the same boat as Hearts or Thistle or Stranraer then they wouldn’t be making such a song and dance about it. Donald Findlay, chairman of Cowdenbeath, is one of the people who have put this one forward.
All power to their magnanimity, but it’s somewhat less than convincing. Selfless acceptance of a clear and obvious and hugely damaging injustice is not a trait that you would have associated with football in this county – or any other country – so these views have come as a genuine revelation.
We’re asked to believe that people who scream the house down over a bad refereeing call would sigh and take their medicine when the very stability of their club was put in jeopardy. They wouldn’t be happy, you understand, but they wouldn’t be behaving like Budge with her legal action and her QCs and her vow to fight this to the last. They’d have more class.
They should save that stuff for the tourists. Court now beckons and with it comes the disapproving shaking of heads among clubs who have given Hearts no other option but to fight. “It’s a sad day when lawyers get involved,” said an official at one of those clubs who voted against reconstruction. If only his self-awareness matched his self-interest.
Don't remember Tom English,
ever writing such a lengthy article about ANY one
of the multitude of highly contentious issues and decisions taken in Scottish football back in 2012…
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jun/16/partick-thistle-the-biggest-victims-of-scottish-footballs-vote-farce
Supporters of Partick Thistle are familiar with being patronised. Saturday afternoons in Maryhill are not a soft option. Following a Glasgow team for whom success is rare means regular pats on the head. It would be blissfully easy to swap Firhill for Celtic Park or Ibrox.
Thistle – the club and support – are now deserving of genuine sympathy. The cards dealt to them represent a sporting scandal. As the Scottish Professional Football League hurtled through an infamous vote aimed at abandoning season 2019-20, they were by far the biggest victims. The fact that debate over a now-aborted league reconstruction rumbled on for weeks prolonged the agony. Hearts have the resource to say they will see the SPFL in court; so, too, it has now been announced will Thistle after a benefactor offered to underwrite legal costs. “We have agreed that we will launch a joint legal challenge to resolve what others have failed to do since April,” said the Thistle chair, Jacqui Low.
Football fans who won’t recognise the gross unfairness of Thistle’s situation are not worthy of the label. Ian McCall’s team trailed the Championship’s second-bottom team, Queen of the South, by two points with a fixture in hand – they had nine to play – and have been bounced into League One under this new phenomenon of points per game.
The trouble is, with many clubs doubtful whether it is practical to play behind closed doors, the SPFL has no start date for Leagues One and Two. Hence Thistle, a business with last reported turnover of £3m and 83 employees, have seen their viable full-time operation shunted into cold storage by a league body supposedly built for members. In the midst of a pandemic, 0.04 of a point sealed their fate. No wonder the club admit to being “sickened”.
Thistle’s loyal following have cause to wonder why they should bother to subsidise fellow clubs with their gate money. Not so fans of Brechin City, a team who ‘finished’ bottom of the bottom tier but were miraculously spared a play-off against clubs from lower down the Scottish pyramid. A pyramid that has been fatally undermined. Pieced together, from a Dundee vote entering Scottish football’s version of the Bermuda Triangle to the announcement of an incomplete outcome and the burden shunted on to Hearts and Thistle, the national sport has been hauled into disrepute. And all, it must be emphasised, completely unnecessarily.
The general theme of pulling together in crisis did not register in what again seems such a petty, self-serving world. So much ill feeling has focused on Hearts, the biggest club caught in the middle of the SPFL’s manoeuvres but – and this is lost on many – the one best equipped to bounce back in a stronger position, regardless of legal outcomes. Thistle have no such confidence; instead a blank page sits where the business plan should be.
Hearts’ relegation to an abbreviated Championship when denied scope to avoid that ignominy on the field was wrong. Raging and subsequent debate as to whether a club of smaller standing would have been spared was handy for the SPFL executive. This shifted the narrative. That Ann Budge, the Hearts owner, was the one put forward to lead attempt after attempt at reconstruction was another useful diversion. Meanwhile the SPFL pays a chief executive, Neil Doncaster, £400,000 a year; more than every player at 40 of 42 member clubs.
Incredibly, the SPFL has allowed the theory to permeate that confirming Celtic’s ninth title in succession was uppermost in its thoughts. Consequences? They can wait. Social media is awash with Celtic supporters – who have The Hague on speed dial for refereeing controversies – pontificating about the validity of this SPFL outcome. The fear, one assumes, is that their latest championship – about which the wider resonance is questionable – could somehow be affected by the noise. If that tribalism is easy to comprehend, the general lack of criticism of the SPFL’s coronavirus approach is bewildering.
Had the league drawn breath, ensuring clubs were not meaningfully hurt by unfair relegations would have been at the forefront of its original resolution. But still, it is quite something to set out a plan that needlessly wounds the innocent and another entirely not to row back when alternative options are available. A 14-team top flight would have cost lower Premiership teams around 0.1% of commercial revenues and the bottom two in the Championship 0.005%. Instead, a structure so ineffective it cannot command a title sponsor is maintained, even before associated damage is considered.
Budge may have been naive in accepting the SPFL’s challenge of doing its executive’s work but some of the language fired towards her, including in a newspaper column that branded her as Hyacinth Bucket, has been vicious and misogynistic. Scottish football does not seem to much like a female self-made multimillionaire putting stake in the game, working without salary for six years and trying to highlight failing systems.
Roy MacGregor, the chairman of Ross County, has insisted Hearts must “take their medicine”. The trouble for MacGregor, and clubs throughout Scotland, is supporters of Hearts and Partick Thistle – the ones who have not lost faith entirely – will not forget. Neither should they. There will be no inclination to hand over cash at the turnstiles to clubs who inflicted harm. When Scottish football needs support, wilful punishment has been meted out. It should be possible to acknowledge this shameful situation and simultaneously point out Hearts and Thistle should have been nowhere near the nether regions of their respective leagues.
Some £300,000 a year has been wiped from a new television deal with Sky as the league compensates for missing 2019-20 fixtures. Similar claims from BT, the BBC and overseas-rights holders are in the mix. The Scottish FA’s chief executive, Ian Maxwell, countersigned a letter to Uefa which asserted a line should be drawn under 2019-20. Maxwell still insists the season’s Scottish Cup will finish; somewhere, sometime, somehow.
Hearts, one of the semi-finalists, have in the meantime been jettisoned into another division – which does not start until mid-October – and told they cannot begin training at the same time as Premiership opponents. If this whole affair was not so serious it would be downright hysterical. Nobody at Firhill is laughing either. If there is justice, that will change before too long.
Are Hearts and Thistle arguing a case for null and void? I think I read on here that the SPFL rules state that the league can be ended at any time by the board.If that is the case then Hearts and Thistle must be saying that even while accepting membership of the league and all of the rules that apply,league ending doesn't automatically mean relegation of the bottom clubs at the time the music stops.Logically then it would follow that teams finishing first second..fifth etc are not entitled to claim their places either, ergo null and void.I have a great deal of sympathy for the clubs who find themselves 'relegated' but as league expansion has been refused by the majority membership then I see no way other than voiding the season that they can remain in their respective leagues.This is going to get very messy.
StevieBC 16th June 2020 at 20:42
Don't remember Tom English,
ever writing such a lengthy article about ANY one
of the multitude of highly contentious issues and decisions taken in Scottish football back in 2012…
=====================================
Your post epitomises why I have become increasingly frustrated by the blog. Rather than debate the rights and wrongs of the article, it appears that everything that is discussed on the blog has to be viewed through the prism of RFC.
We have two SPFL clubs taking legal action against one of the sport's governing bodies. It's the latest incarnation of a body that poster after poster has been ripping into for years. You might have thought that those posters would be supportive of those clubs seeking to expose the failures of governance within the game.
But no, I've seen several posters seek to justify everything the the SPFL has done since the Good Friday Disagreement as all being fine and above board. It's as if they feel it necessary to criticise Hearts and other clubs' search for fairness. Is it because their success in having imposed relegations reversed, should it happen, would lead to calls that the award of titles should similarly be reversed?
Or is it just that many Celtic fans just don't like Hearts and, in the words of Ross County chairman Roy MacGregor, that Hearts should just take their medicine. (as dispensed by RC and other clubs with similar vested interests in voting as they did).
It's incredible that so many chairmen have come out over the last few days saying that they have sympathy for Hearts, Partick and Stranraer and think they were treated unfairly. However, some of those same chairmen actually voted for the imposition of that unfairness.
No matter the outcome of the legal case, Scottish football is broken and it will take a long time to recover from the recriminations that will certainly follow.
Time for another break from the blog, at least until the legal proceedings are concluded.
I think , if Hearts win their case , that there will be no league football until next year , and we will be picking up from where we left off this season . This season's Scottish Cup can be finished before Christmas and next season's started , and we can watch bcd EPL football to whet our appetites until then .
StevieBC 16th June 2020 at 20:42
".Don't remember Tom English ever writing such a lengthy article about ANY one of the multitude of highly contentious issues and decisions taken in Scottish football back in 2012…"
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
He never raised a journalistic voice to condemn the 5-Way Agreement , question the LNS 'no advantage' stupidity and Brysonism, or to dig into the RFC plc connections with SFA functions like awarding of UEFA licences when much the RES 12 digging had shown that there were serious questions to be asked, or even raise a question about the point-blank refusal of the SPFL,and Celtic's meek acquiescence in that refusal, to insist on getting the whole matter thoroughly investigated.
There were big stories in all of that for any real journalist.
English writes very prettily, but fails signally as a journalist when it comes to serious journalistic investigation and reporting ,lacking the ballsy gutsiness that real journalists possess.
In my opinion.
paddy malarkey 16th June 2020 at 22:13
I think , if Hearts win their case ….EDIT
———————————————–
What exactly is their case though PM? What will they present before the court other than 'it's no fair'. There will have to be some substance and if, as I mentioned earlier it is true that the rules state the SPFL board can end the season at any time they see fit (in this instance supported by a members vote) then what will Hearts/Thistle be looking for?
gunnerb 16th June 2020 at 22:29
'..What exactly is their case though '
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I think they will petition the Court for a Judicial Review on the grounds that it was unreasonable in all the circumstances of the covid-19 pandemic for the SPFL to decide that the normal Rules regarding relegation on account of poor sporting performance should apply; and that invoking Article 163 of the Articles of Association
"163. The Company may by Qualified Resolution from time to time and upon such terms and conditions as it may think fit, expel or accept the retirement or resignation of any Club from the League" would also be unreasonable and unwarranted in the blameless circumstances of a pandemic, given that the consequences of being relegated /expelled for a member of the company that is the SPFL would be more, and disproportionately far more serious than the financial consequences for any and all the members if , for example, reconstruction of the Leagues was carried out.
It will be interesting to see what other grounds for challenge there might be.
gunnerb 16th June 2020 at 22:29
I think they may be pinning their hopes on this or similar .(Define completion).
C17 At the end of each Season (following completion of all League Matches in the Premiership in that Season) the Club in position 12 in the Premiership shall be relegated to play and be eligible to participate in the Championship for and during the next Season.
paddy malarkey 17th June 2020 at 00:00
I see your C17 and raise that awkward discretion catch all thingy . Rule C53.I think this defines completed.Made all the more concrete by the vote to end the season.
C53.1.2 it shall have been determined by the Board, in its sole discretion, that no further League Matches shall be scheduled for or played in by any Club entitled to participate in the Season 2019/2020 Premiership Division Competition and that both of the Season 2019/2020 Scottish Professional Football League and Premiership Division Competitions, are concluded, COMPLETED, determined and at an end
John Clark 16th June 2020 at 23:30
As for the articles JC , I dont think that will fly either. One of the purposes of the discretionary ruling C53 is to allow the board to manage as they see fit when presented with a crisis such as the pandemic and again they can point to the vote in support of their decision and no club is being expelled from the SPFL.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53065126
Could someone explain this to me please? It looks like one of those texts where the details required to understand it have been omitted.
Am I right in thinking that if turnover is lesss than £45M then the Govt. will 80% back a loan, but if turnover is greater than £45M then it's a straight loan from Close Bros.?
That would be 2 clubs max. applying for the latter, up to £5M. Why is this necessary at all?
Where is the underwriting from the SFA mentioned previously?
"reluctant", "merchant bank (x 2)", "respected lender", "SFA spokesperson"
This reads like a PR sleight of hand to me.
macfurgly 17th June 2020 at 00:49
This link here macfurgly.
"They can also talk to Close Brothers after the SFA agreed to underwrite a percentage of any loan not linked to the CBILS scheme".
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/sfa-agree-deal-rangers-bankers-22192582
easyJambo 16th June 2020 at 21:50
6
61
We have two SPFL clubs taking legal action against one of the sport's governing bodies. It's the latest incarnation of a body that poster after poster on SFM has been ripping into for years.
You might have thought that those posters would be supportive of those clubs seeking to expose the failures of governance within the game.
It's incredible that so many chairmen have come out over the last few days saying that they have sympathy for Hearts, Partick and Stranraer and think they were treated unfairly.
However, some of those same chairmen actually voted for the imposition of that unfairness.
No matter the outcome of the legal case,
Scottish football is broken
Agreed EJ and self interest will never fix it.
EJ@21:50 and Finloch@08:14
I cannot agree with your conflation of SFA/SPFL incompetence and the present situation. In fact EJ's "You might have thought that those posters would be supportive of those clubs seeking to expose the failures of governance within the game." is complete distortion of the situation.
The legal action is not being undertaken to prove failures of governance it is an attempt to overturn a democratic decision to deal with an unprecedented situation. Please do not try to paint a picture of white knights riding to save Scottish football when the reality is a cartoon of a minority figure looking to thwart a vote with the sole raison d'etre of self interest.
Self interest in business is no more than the legal requirement placed on directors to act in the best interests of their company. To see accusations of self interest being slung at other companies because they will not back a single business looking to act on its own self interest is farcical.
The simple fact is that the financial and the sporting facets of football have become so entwined that we are seeing threats to the integrity of the sport arising with ever increasing frequency.
This whole farce has become so serious not because a football team has been relegated but because of the financial implications to a company as a result.
I see this as nothing different to the various contentious issues we have been seeing for the past two decades where dubious decisions are being made on a financial basis that are in stark contrast to what should be expected of a sport.
As I tried to say yesterday, businesses are facing a difficult decision when the furlough schemes ends. Many will need to downsize as the pandemic created new normal will not support their original business model. Should the decisions on who to let go me made on the basis of who were the best workers before the lockdown or should they decide using the Hearts legal challenge reasons that the worst workers may have taken it upon themselves to suddenly improve. After all, the latter case "could happen".
Let's not make our fight to clean up our sport depend on whether we are prepared back a call to abandon our own club's business based self interest and back another club's business based self interest.
Mickey Edwards 17th June 2020 at 09:23
3 2
EJ@21:50 and Finloch@08:14
I cannot agree with your conflation of SFA/SPFL incompetence and the present situation.
………………………………
I don't need to answer for EJ who has consistently been one of the most valuable insighters on this blog.
I'm also not conflating or attempting to conflate anything.
I do believe that self interest has got us into this mess and it won't get us out.
For those quoting the SPFL Rules & Regs, please remember that these now have to be read & applied through the prism of the recently-added Rule C7A, on pages 31 & 32 of the linked PDF.
https://spfl.co.uk/admin/filemanager/files/shares/SPFL%20Rules%20and%20Regulations%201-Jun-20%20(MASTER%20COPY)%20CLEAN.pdf
Finloch@09:59
"I do believe that self interest has got us into this mess and it won't get us out"
I need clarity as to what "mess" you are referring to.
I cannot disagree if you are referring to a couple of decades of manipulation of the integrity of the sport in attempt to make more money. The creation of metaphysical entities, the manipulation of terms of reference in "independent" investigations. The wholesale barrage of lies to uphold a financial model that depends on two clubs playing each other. Contracts with TV companies that guarantee conditions that cannot be guaranteed. The awarding of UEFA licenses that break UEFA's own rules. These are all attempts to make money and not decided unilaterally. All clubs approved this so all clubs have lost sight of the fact that this is a sport. Ms Budge may have joined this cabal later than most but has done nothing to upset that particular apple cart despite being fast tracked into the national organisation. In fact in an interview in the Guardian in 2015 she said this –
“We have got a SPFL [the Scottish Professional Football League] and what keeps coming back is: ‘Of course, we are just taking instructions from the clubs.’ How can they really do the job without any power?” Budge asks. “I think it is very weird. Things like that need a fundamental rethink. We need a more powerful force at the centre.”
Intentions of that kind send shivers up my spine. But what should we expect. Like the others who run our clubs she has lost sight of football, or any sport, having public appeal ONLY if it is seen to be untouchable with respect to the integrity on the playing field.
On the other hand, if the mess that you refer to is the apparent "unfairness" that clubs who were bottom of the league being relegated then we couldn't be further apart. As I said earlier, many clubs are disadvantaged by the decision. To change the decision all that will happen is that those that are disadvantaged just now will be replaced by others. But that is OK when self interest comes into play.
It appears that Hearts want to be the only ones to use self interest in this situation. It was they who brought it to the fore at the earliest point when Ms Budge placed restrictions on all other clubs that joined her to find the best way to preserve her team's place in the top league.
Once again, for some on here, its Hearts, Budge, Hearts.
Partick Thistle clearly feel the same way. Had they had a bigger profile and financial backing they most likely would have been spouting the same mantra.
If fact they were first out the blocks seeking legal opinion regards the manner in which ‘self interest’ would be voted for in the Good Friday resolution.
Now with some financial help they have, without hesitation, jumped on the Hearts legal bus. Stranraer would no doubt do the same if they could.
To reverse the often asked question, if it had been Hamilton, St Mirren etc in the same position saying the same things Hearts/Budge are it would have been interesting to see what sympathies and support they would have had from this forum.
So lets take Heart of Midlothian FC out of the equation and ask, hand on heart (excuse the pun) :-
Do the readers and contributors to SFM believe Partick Thistle should just shut up and “take their medicine”?
Thumbs up = Yes (they are just a bunch of moaners and deserve what they get from their league position having only won 6 games all season and the consequence of the points per game formula. A total shambles of a club, with an unfinished stadium, who have dropped down the divisions because of dubious managerial appointments/footballing decisions and pissing generous financial donations up against the wall).
Thumbs Down = No (they are being treated unfairly by their fellow SPFL members as they had a chance to make up a small points differential in the remaining games of season 2019/20 and also were given no immediate apology or offer of compensation for ‘taking one for the team’ in these most difficult circumstances.)
I note reports are surfacing today that following Sky agreeing a compensation deal, BT (and possibly BBC) are now in line for a payout possibly totaling £3m for 2019/20 games not televised.
Not the £10m T'Rangers were claiming (clearly they were using their Morelos Calculator) but still hefty sums.
If the figures are correct then it essentially wipes out the James Anderson trust fund cash.
Everyone and their uncle is making sure they are OK financially yet three teams who have had relegation voted upon them don't even seem to get a sniff at any compensation.
As discussed previously I think a lot of the hoo-ha currently being played out could have been avoided if the SPFL board and member clubs had made some compensation/parachute offer to the three clubs being relegated in the event of no other alternative 'do no harm' solutions being available or agreeable.
Folks perhaps could have taken that medicine with the compensation being the spoonful of sugar. However the bitter pill on offer is much harder to swallow.
I’ve a lot of sympathy for Stranraer, Partick Thistle and Hearts, and feel they have been badly let down, not by each fellow club, but the structure and leadership at the SPFL. However, I also think certain individuals at these clubs have done themselves few favours
To have got to the stage of yet another football court case is disconcerting and was avoidable. Is it too late to reconcile the positions, maybe consider this to have been an opportunity mislaid? Probably.
But rather than the parties setting themselves against each other, I’d like to have seen the SPFL board take a proactive view at the outset and look for options to protect all member clubs. No club, in my view, should suffer relegation in the difficult situation we are in, where the leagues couldn’t be fully completed. Reward successes, but to put a huge financial strain on certain clubs, and a potential cost to all clubs depending on a court sought outcome is down to poor leadership.
No need for TU/TD for me. It is what it is. I don't care which team it is. The concerns for the affected clubs is business related and ALL of the football businesses signed up to the business organisation the SPFL. The rules that they signed up for included the right of the SPFL to terminate the league and that the league positions are fixed.
What we need is less of the paranoia, "It's just because it's Hearts". If you feel that way then you cannot take a balanced position on the situation. My points regarding Budge were because she was insistent that restructuring would only happen if it met HER criteria, ie. temporary. The other affected clubs were not outspoken. We had ICT who also were vocal but they appear to have wanted to benefit from situation.
I don't care which team it is but if any club looks to benefit in such a position then they immediately undermine any sympathy they may deserve.
As soon as Budge stated that she wanted reconstruction to save her club but with the proviso that her conditions must be met then she condoned the self interest from all others.
The words gift, horse and mouth spring to mind.
No paranoia here but just wondering why the majority of your posts relate to Hearts, Budge, questioning the club's anonymous and mysterious financial backers etc etc.
Anyway if I am paranoid I am in good company as, if you have been a long time lurker on SFM, you will note I have often discussed similar with the those suffering from the green/white hooped tinged variety of the condition 🙂
Maybe it has rubbed off over the years!!
Mickey Edwards 17th June 2020 at 12:16
“The concerns for the affected clubs is business related and ALL of the football businesses signed up to the business organisation the SPFL”
So precisely the same business related setup that ALL of the football businesses signed up to the business organisations SPL and SFL when Rangers went into liquidation in 2012, yet pretty much everybody who reads this website is up in arms about the financially-driven decision to pretend Rangers hadn’t met their maker as a result of that liquidation and all the other inexplicable decisions that have marked the saga ever since.
Unless I’m misunderstanding you, you need never post on the Rangers saga again because you’ve worked out that every action carried out by the football authorities was done in the interest of the business. So that’s all right then, case closed! Nothing to see here. Move along!
Also, people seem to be ignoring the recent French and particularly Belgian court judgments which, as I understand it, based their decision on restriction of business, or words to that effect, regardless of what league rules may have been signed up to.
I am seriously suspicious about this SFA underwriting loans from Close Brothers.
Other people have probably mentioned these things so apologies in advance but the things that jump immediately to mind are.
1, Why would Scottish Football Clubs want this before a Government loan. The only answer I can think of is that they have a turnover in excess of £45m, thus precluding them.
2, What exactly are the SFA using as security, which presumably Close Brothers would be looking for. They don't have much in the way of assets to put forward.
It strikes me that there will be a very limited number of clubs who want this and the SFA have no right to take such a risk.
Jingso.Jimsie 17th June 2020 at 10:46
'..please remember that these now have to be read & applied through the prism of the recently-added Rule C7A, on pages 31 & 32 of the linked PDF. .'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Grateful for that info, jingo.jimsie.
Do you know when the resolution to add that amendment was voted upon?
Homunculus 17th June 2020 at 13:00
—————
That's what I was thinking, but wondering if I had missed something.
WOW!
"No paranoia here but just wondering why the majority of your posts relate to Hearts, Budge, questioning the club's anonymous and mysterious financial backers etc etc."
Really???
My recent posts are regarding legal action being taken and the commentary and accusations stemming from that. That commentary is emanating from Tynecastle in the main and the main accusations are that the other clubs are acting in self interest. And yet every step of the way the actions from Tynecastle are soaked in self interest. It doesn't matter whether you think self interest is good or bad surely there must agreement that, whichever, it must be the same for all. Are you saying HMFC has right to the quality and others don't. I don't care where it comes from it is that I object to and it is why I mention ICT as I could with Falkirk. I also abhor the attitude from Ibrox where it is everybody elses fault. In the past I have also fought against the attitude from Easter Road when they were party to the 2012 fix. At that time I did so directly speaking to both Leanne Dempster and Sir Tom Farmer.
It is easy to soothe your disappointment by believing that it is others ganging up on you but it is not healthy place to be. Could it be that the decision was made because the other clubs came to the conclusion that this was the least unfair outcome?
As to your comments regarding Anderson. I have known for a long time that HMFC was receiving large donations and my attitude was fair play as long as it's legal. That changed when the pandemic hit and I saw millions being paid to a sport, an entertainment, when we had care home workers going without PPE and testing being refused for their clients.
There are far more important challenges about to hit us than whether our club is relegated or not.
It is only a game!!
Highlander@12:46
I am unable to give a response to your post as I am unable to make sense of most of it but as to referencing the French and Belgian cases I think we need to be careful in what we are comparing. I don't know and the courts will agree or disagree as they see fit but I fail to see that relegation is a restriction of business. Are we to see a court case at the end of every season?
The overlying issue for me is that the financial side has now introduced a very unhealthy and quasi-corrupt side to the sport in Scotland. If we cannot find a way to separate the two then I fear there will be no future for it and what we are seeing now are the death throes.
‘John Clark 17th June 2020 at 13:03
…Do you know when the resolution to add that amendment was voted upon?’
########################################
I don’t, but I suspect it may well have been when the the SPFL board abrogated their responsibilities to (some of) the Articles of Association & Rules & Regulations of their organisation to offer the clubs a virtual GM to decide (in stead of the Board) the end of the season. Was that the first week of April? I think it was.
Mickey Edwards 17th June 2020 at 13:16
Mickey Edwards 17th June 2020 at 13:27
Highlander@12:46
For someone who keeps saying its 'only a game' and we should have bigger things to worry about you seem to spend a lot of time on here discussing footballing matters.
In relation to Belgian football's decision to relegate clubs their court dealing with competition law said the following:-
The Auditorate further specifies that it "has elements supporting the assertion that the decision to relegate Waasland-Beveren to division 1B instead of organizing one or more seasons with a division 1A to 17 or 18 clubs would not be aimed to achieve a legitimate objective, but on the contrary would aim to protect the financial and economic interests of certain clubs.
The matter will need to go to a higher court in Belgium and clearly a Scottish Court may not take the same stance of that in another country but the above just agrees with your argument that you can't accuse or criticise some people of self interest when others are doing the same.
Like the Fawlty Tower's sketch Hearts/Budge's self interest (along with Partick, Stranraer, Brora, Kelty etc) only kicked off when others started the whole thing by 'invading Poland'.
Homunculus @ 13.00
I am seriously suspicious about this SFA underwriting loans from Close Brothers.
Other people have probably mentioned these things so apologies in advance but the things that jump immediately to mind are.
1, Why would Scottish Football Clubs want this before a Government loan. The only answer I can think of is that they have a turnover in excess of £45m, thus precluding them.
2, What exactly are the SFA using as security, which presumably Close Brothers would be looking for. They don’t have much in the way of assets to put forward.
It strikes me that there will be a very limited number of clubs who want this and the SFA have no right to take such a risk.
On point 1: There are no Government loans available. Under the CBILS loan scheme the government guarantees 80% of the finance to the lender and pays interest and any fees for the first 12 months. However the reluctance of banks to lend to football businesses is well known. Loans can be for up to £5m and the borrower’s turnover must be less than £45m. In addition the business must be viable were it not for Covid.
On point 2: No idea if CB would need security over the amount underwritten? Presumably they will require security over the amount not guaranteed? Don’t know what %age is being guaranteed by the SFA. Take your point on what the SFA would/could use as security.
Are there any grounds for suspicion about what is behind this offer from the SFA and approved by their Board? I take it at face value but others, clearly, may not. I assume that my club will be looking at this and assessing whether it would help in the current situation taking in to account the the CBILS scheme’s probable limited application to football clubs.
There is, of course, no real comparison between
a) the hugely damaging untruth that TRFC is RFC of 1872 or with the ready acceptance of the SFA's point-blank refusal to have the Res 12 issue(with its possible criminal dimensions) independently investigated and
b )the decision not to reconfigure the league set-up
In a) lies and tergiversation were employed to get round the effect of applying the normal rules about the consequences of the insolvency event of Liquidation – the end of life for a professional football team in Scottish football.
RFC plc were indeed liquidated as per the Articles and Rules. Yet somehow, a new club was and is allowed to claim entitlement to the sporting honours and sporting history, and market itself as if it were RFC of 1872 and had been in existence since 1872.Untruths were told, and actual truth ignored.
The readiness of even ordinarily honest and decent men in public life to swallow such a perversion of facts and truth is, perhaps, exemplified by no less a person than the current shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, Ian Murray ,MP for Edinburgh South.
Even though his involvement with Hearts caused him to realise – more than most, perhaps- the absolute necessity for Hearts to get itself out of Administration in order to stay in Scottish football with its proud history intact, he was happy enough to raise no objection-whether as a private citizen or as a public person- to the dirty shenanigans of our Governance bodies-when our governance people allowed and allow the absolute lie of the 5-Way Agreement to be created and to remain at the heart of our Football, or to ask why the serious allegations made in the Res 12 were so arbitrarily dismissed.
In b) it seems clear that no actual lies have been told, no fantasies of the 'undead' created, no potential criminal actions being exposed that require independent investigation.
Yet in the 'Scotsman' today (print edition,p.61, Allan Pattullo's report), Ian Murray is reported as being 'furious' and 'aghast' over the self-interest of those who have turned their backs on the Tynecastle club.
Now, says Pattullo, Murray wonders how the SPFL can 'be fit for purpose, if it practically gives the green light to the potential for mass redundancies'.
I have already previously indicated that I think the SPFL/SFA ought to have found a way of accepting that Covid-19 was such an unlooked for international disaster that they had some duty to try to find a way to avoid relegating clubs and that I hope the Courts would take that view also.
But the SPFL/SFA seem not to have broken or by-passed the rules. Even if the rules were hastily and frantically amended, they nevertheless (presumably) were duly approved and passed. And the offences that the governance bodies can be convicted of are at worst incompetent short-sightedness and unsound judgment and perhaps a degree of unreasonableness in arriving at that judgment that the Courts would find unacceptable.
easyJambo 16th June 2020 at 21:50
Your post epitomises why I have become increasingly frustrated by the blog. Rather than debate the rights and wrongs of the article, it appears that everything that is discussed on the blog has to be viewed through the prism of RFC.
…………….
Just were are TRFC in all this? It feels like only a few short weeks ago that Hearts had their back in going down legal routes. Now it looks like Hearts have been left holding the baby. I don’t see the same backing that Hearts were giving TRFC coming from down ibrox way.
All the sabre rattling from ibrox was just that, at least hearts, right or wrong are doing what they said they would do.
JC@16:57
The opportunity was given to those concerned to come up with an answer, a committee set up to try to find a means to restructure in a way that everyone found acceptable. This was to be chaired by Hearts. They were given a free rein but immediately reined in every other club by stating that they would veto any attempt at creating a permanent change. Other chairmen let their dissatisfaction be known.
Such gerrymandering of the goal of the committee obviously created the impression of self interest being pursued at Hearts. After that a free for all could be the only outcome.
To now be accusing their counterparts in the league of taking the stance that they themselves started with I find astonishing.
Mickey Edwards
Need to calm down a bit. Not Highlander’s job to answer for Ann Budge, and comparing St one one’s input to a red top rant helpful.
We all have club sympathies on here and a little bit of understanding of where we all come from is one of the better traits of SFM.
I have had cause to wonder, in the light of recent events, how it is that some folk have been stricken with amnesia over just how corrupt the guys who ruin our game are.
We appear to be making the assumption that the SPFL (despite the complicity in the RFC saga of many of those at its head), must be innocent of all charges simply because TRFC were part of a group criticising them.
And If Ann Budge is guilty of self interest, she is no less infected with that malady than any of the rest of folk who run ALL of our clubs. Also, she has given none any reason to be believe that she is less trustworthy than Peter Lawwell, or any other club head. Of course as a Celtic fan who has watched how Res12 has been handled at the last Celtic AGM, she’s a rung or two above PL on the trustworthiness ladder.
There are different views over this, but through years of experience, I’d trust EJ’s judgement. I can’t see who benefited from the bizarre decision to penalise the teams who have been disadvantaged over this. B
I hope the Hearts/Thistle litigation is sufficient to get the SPFL board to do something for the greater good. That is, to be seen to be fair.
Hearts’ self interest is no less worthy than the self-interest of Celtic or Aberdeen or anyone else either. I think, whatever our position on these matters, that SFM members would recognise that.
Btw, I may be behind the curve on this one. Is it actually correct that Hearts threatened clubs with a veto (although I am not sure they have one) over reconstruction proposals?
My guess is no.
The SPFL respond to Hearts and Partick Thistle launching a legal challenge.
………..
SPFL.
a spokesman said, Our solicitors have this evening recieved a petition from Hearts of Midlothian plc and The Partick Thistle football club ltd. We are studying this carefully, along with our legal advisors, and it is not therefore appropriate to comment further at this time.
bordersdon 17th June 2020 at 14:10
1: There are no Government loans available. Under the CBILS loan scheme the government guarantees 80% of the finance to the lender and pays interest and any fees for the first 12 months. However the reluctance of banks to lend to football businesses is well known. Loans can be for up to £5m and the borrower’s turnover must be less than £45m. In addition the business must be viable were it not for Covid.
========================================
Which clubs with a turnover under £45m were not viable prior to covid. I don't remember an awful lot actually going out of business. Rangers and before them Gretna, not including a few surviving through administration, not a huge number of clubs though.
Equally importantly, why were the footballing authorities letting them start a season if they were not a viable business. Surely there are rules about that.
Yes some clubs have gone into administration recently, it's mostly been top division clubs, who have spent more than they were earning. It's not that the businesses weren't viable, it's that the people running them weren't very good and didn't do their business properly. They were greedy and tried to buy success.
Most clubs in Scotland will be as viable as other small businesses, prior to covid. They live within their manes and are viable businesses. They deserve the Government backing (which I would suggest is a better guarantee then the SFA) as much as any other small business.
Cluster One 17th June 2020 at 19:55
Do you know what "… received a petition …" means in this context.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53080219
Hearts & Partick Thistle claiming £10m from SPFL if relegation not overturned
…………………
Are they trying to bankrupt the SPFL?
Homunculus 17th June 2020 at 19:58
0
0
Rate This
Cluster One 17th June 2020 at 19:55
Do you know what “… received a petition …” means in this context.
……………..
They got an email?
Cluster One 17th June 2020 at 20:03
Presumably they will apply for an interdict, to prevent the league from starting again until this matter is settled. Even if it is compensation they are looking for they will presumably want the option for relegation to be scrapped.
Then if they are awarded that compensation it will have to come out of the prize money fund from next year. Whatever happens, the money will be coming from the other clubs in the league.
If it's only about compensation for being relegated , that could have been arranged and agreed at the start of the process as a fall back position if reconstruction failed to fly . I can only presume that they're/we're trying to impose on other clubs that which they've already rejected . I can see no positives in this .
Any sightings of Alfredo ? Some folk are getting anxious .
Homunculus 17th June 2020 at 20:41
'..Presumably they will apply for an interdict, '
"""""""""""""""""""""
The BBC report by Brian McLaughlin
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53080219
contains this quote:
"As matters stand, we have not asked the Court to grant an interim interdict which would prevent next [Premiership] season commencing on 1 August," the statement said. "However, we have to reserve our right to do so in the event that becomes necessary."
This suggests that Hearts'/PT/ Counsel have suggested that charging straight into legal battle about what relegation would cost them financially without exploring the possibility of being compensated for loss by the SPFL in view of the wholly one-off exceptional circumstances would not impress any Judges!
The alleged 'offending party ' must ordinarily be given a chance to re-think, or the petitioner can be seen to be bloody-minded and unreasonable, particularly if they themselves had appeared unreasonable in discussing options for change to minimise their anticipated loss!
( The way the FCA conducted their action against DK can be seen in light of that approach!)
If the SPFL digs in its heels, Hearts/PT can forge ahead with their legal action, in the knowledge that the Court will accept that they have done their best to be as reasonable as reasonable!
And if the SPFL are now able to underwrite 'loans' to clubs , then it's likely that they can find the funds to set up a structured ,agreed rate of payments of compensation that would not bankrupt the SPFL 'business' .
BP
I think it might be appropriate if you refer to the whole of my thread before you decide who it is that should calm down. I am only looking to remind those who claim that Hearts relegation is down to the other clubs acting out of self interest that Hearts were handed the opportunity to come up with a solution. Ms Budge was given the chair of that committee and her first action was to publicly state that she would not allow the outcome be a permanent change to the configuration of the leagues. Your guess is that I am wrong on that so may I suggest that you listen to the interview she gave with Tom English on BBC Sportsound on the Saturday immediately following her appointment to the committee. You do not have to wait long to hear her overrule the leagues assurance of no preconditions.
Further I find it strange that my post responding to suggestions questioning my intentions to making this very point is belatedly put into moderation while the accusatory post is allowed to stand. That post also carries a rather extreme comparison of the clubs' democratic decision to the invasion of Poland.
I have tried to view this whole shambles regarding the legal action in as detached a way as I can. However, Ann Budge and Jacqui Low are, in my humble opinion, taking a ‘wrecking ball’ to our game. They say they have no desire to harm Scottish football but reserve the right to delay the start of next season. How do you square that?
How many more toys have they got to throw out of their prams?
Many clubs have felt hard done to down the years – so Geezabrek!
bect67 17th June 2020 at 23:04
'. Ann Budge and Jacqui Low are in my humble opinion, taking a 'wrecking ball' to Scottish Football.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""
You will permit me, bect67, to say that in my humble opinion the wrecking ball was first set in swing by the football governance 'authorities' in their dealings over many years with SDM's rotten, lying club, and their subsequent abandonment of all notion of integrity in sport by their very ready creation and propagation of a monstrous and ludicrous sporting lie!
Just wondering if it is worth reminding everyone of how we got where we are today.
After weeks of thought and deliberation regards the Covid 19 crisis theSPFL board reached a decision that only one resolution should be put forward to members.
That being that the Championship, L1 and L2 be ended with positions determined by a points per game system and that, on awaiting the outcome of a later Uefa meeting the Premiership would also potentially be ended on the same basis.
My interpretation is that the main thrust was to enable much needed end of season prize money to be released to clubs in the lower divisions.
Those prize monies were to be distributed based on final positions. No mention or offer was ever made regards compensation to any teams who could be seen as " losing out' be that through relegation or missing out on play off slots for promotion.
One of the first calls for potential league reconstruction came from Dundee FC via John Nelms as part of the "hokey pokey' voting debacle. It was reported on 11 April he had been planning alternative proposals to effectively halt relegation and promotion.
In her club statement of 12 April Ann Budge made clear she was considering (alone or with others) putting forward a resolution for a Temporary Adjustment to the Leagues. I am not aware of any such resolution ever having being lodged.
However the SPFL then board APPOINTED Les Gray and Ann Budge to jointly lead a reconstruction task force as per the press release on 15 April, 5 days after the Good Friday vote.
At or around the same time Patrick Thistle sought legal opinion regards the SPFL resolution and published this on their website on 14 April feeling they were being treated unfairly. At this time the SPFL didn't even acknowledge that PT and Stranraer were being asked to make a sacrifice for the greater good.
In the same way the SPFL board reached their decision regards the original resolution, the SPFL Reconstruction Task Force attempted to evaluate support for potential reconstruction plans. Ultimately these all failed both at the first hurdle and when subsequently raised again later out of the blue by the main SPFL board.
Given the above it can be seen that the reconstruction issue was raised by Dundee FC a as part of their hokey pokey and wholly supported and sanctioned by the SPFL board. (All as an after thought) Therefore the process was not driven solely by Hearts/Budge specifically for their benefit or their self interest.
Budge was consistent regards Temporary arrangements if reconstruction was to be considered.
If Ann Budge had said anything out of order why was she not reigned in by her co-chair and full SPFL board member Les Gray.? His silence (and apparent disappearing act) must surely be proof the SPFL were happy with how Budge and the sub group was proceeding with matters.
With hindsight Hearts and Ann Budge should have had nothing to do with the SPFL"s sub group and just followed PT"s lead and gone down the legal route right from the start.
However by "playing ball' Hearts will be able to show the court they acted in good faith by trying to explore all potential solutions before feeling the need to follow through with legal action.
Wottpi
Agree with pretty much all of that, though I’m not so sure about hokey pokey at Dens.
I’d be willing to give Dundee the benefit of the doubt. The SPFL board not so much.
I too have every sympathy for Hearts and Thistle, but no more than the sympathy I would have had, should the divisions not have been curtailed due to Covid 19, and they found themselves in the same positions.
I am by no means any sort of legal eagle, but imo they are both wasting their money with a legal challenge. It seems to me that to prove they were disadvantaged, they would need to prove they could have bettered their final standing should it have been possible to play out the division in full.
I get that the "opportunity" to improve was denied by the curtailment, but that is not the same thing. A bit like an unexpected, but enforced, shop closure denying one the "opportunity" of getting the lottery numbers on in time.
I just don't see how either club can prove they would not have been relegated anyway, should the divisions have played out in full.
Both clubs have been treated exactly the same as they would have been, had the division been played in full……It was nobody's fault it wasn't. If there is any "fault" to be found, it is a sporting fault, and that is a position the clubs put themselves in.
I doubt they have a leg to stand on, and the only outcome will be the creation of ill-will and bad-feeling where previously there was none.
Neither club is a victim of anything, other than a nasty virus that has affected some more than others.
Wottpi@01:01
"If Ann Budge had said anything out of order why was she not reigned in by her co-chair and full SPFL board member Les Gray.? His silence (and apparent disappearing act) must surely be proof the SPFL were happy with how Budge and the sub group was proceeding with matters."
This sort of silence?
"Gray understands it is a hefty task that won’t get off the ground unless positions of neutrality are immediately found.
But a perfect example of conflicting outlooks comes from the chair positions.
Budge has stated publicly she would prefer a temporary restructure, while Gray’s own board at Hamilton want permanent change."
……
"We can take everyone with us as long as there is compromise in the air because everyone can’t get their own way. It’s impossible.
What we have to do is not pre-empt. That’s why when I speak with Ann, hopefully her and I as co-chairs of this group should refrain from talking about temporary or fixed at this stage. This is a debate for the clubs.
My board want a permanent fix. If they decide that is it then my (task force) position will be untenable.
But I know my board will also accept a temporary fix if it’s the right thing."
Les Gray, 20 APR 2020
So what next after teams taking legal action to be awarded £10M as compensation for what they could have done. How much should TRFC ask for for being denied the opportunity of taking the Champions League spot? Not just the earnings from that competition but millions due because of their earlier claim that entry to the CL could open the way for the balance of financial power in Scotland to be overturned.
Maybe that's too fanciful.
How about Aberdeen making a claim for being denied European football next year?
Or my own club Hibs who could have shot up the league and won the corresponding prize money instead of by moved down one place at the cost of c.£200K?
The stance that the clubs taking the legal route would be creating should they win is for clubs that have accepted that losing money, because of the premature ending of the league is a result of the pandemic, would be paying the money awarded to those that believe the pandemic should not impact on them.
John Clark @ 23.43
Excellent point well put John!
True, as ever, to the spirit of RTC/SFM.
Incidentally, I do notice that Thelma and Louise (AB and JL) are not getting as much (social) media support today…
I think I should clarify my own position on football after the pandemic. It is that it should be exactly then- after the pandemic.
The plans in Scotland like yesterday's restart in England are premature. England has the advantage of obscene amounts of money to compensate for not having customers at the game.
We are now at the stage in the pandemic where governments move their concentration from preventing unrest in the country due to the wholesale loss of lives to preventing unrest because of financial concerns and frustration at the lack of normality. Football is a prime tool in the current conditions as it appeals to so many of the population.
For Scottish clubs to play along with this needs different conditions than England. 60% of the clubs' income is through the gate. No big sums being thrown our way by the broadcasting conglomerates. So how can the majority of clubs go along with this? They can't.
So fans being allowed back is an essential. We have seen the fanciful ideas of 25% full stadiums but how do you get them into their seats? Airdrops? Many of us have stood outside supermarkets waiting to be allowed in. When B&Q reopened a member of my family spent 3 hours waiting for their turn to be allowed in. Can some one do the calculation for me on how long it would take for everyone to be seated at a 25% full Ibrox or Parkhead?
For me the answer would be to have suspended football totally until it is safe to resume. Suspension would see clubs go to the wall but so will playing in empty stadiums. To give a workable alternative would guarantee the loss of lives.
If you doubt any of this then consider yesterdays news that restaurants and bars in Florida were allowed to open a week ago. Yesterday they had to be shut down again because of COVID19. Likewise in Beijing, South Korea and New Zealand.
Corrupt official 18th June 2020 at 07:55
As discussed earlier I don't think the argument will be around whether or not both teams would have stayed up. It will revolve around the fact they weren't given the opportunity to play their way out of trouble and that in passing the resolution as it was worded, others who could have been 'in trouble' had the season been able to continue protected their own position (by voting for the resolution) to the disadvantage of a minority of fellow members.
If it goes to court you have to remember all the emails, Whatapp chats will be brought up and you could see individual club's chairmen and CEO's take the stand. Roy McGregor may well regret his 'take your medicine' quote if he has to explain that in front of a Judge.
Even accepting that last season could not be completed, no offer or compensation was offered to the three clubs effected by the resolution.
So lets say you are a member of a golf club. You buy tickets for the annual awards bash. The club's venue holds 200 people. |A week before the event the venue burns down. The committee organise an alternative venue but can only get one with capacity for 150.
The committee ask the members to vote that those with tickets 1 to 150 get to go. First come first served. 3/4 with those tickets vote yes because they want a good night out.
However it is simply hard cheese to those holding tickets 151 – 200. No refund, no compensation, no mitigation offered. Not even an apology or a 'thanks for being so understanding'. Just take your medicine.
You would be a bit miffed, wouldn't you?
Mickey Edwards 18th June 2020 at 09:16
Fair point.
So you agree with me that that it probably have been better for Hearts not to be involved?
Therefore with Budge having stated that she was in favour of Temporary arrangement on 12th April and Les Grays views probably being known given he was a full SPFL board member, did the SPFL choose the joint chairs:-
a) Because they sought to bring two people with opposing views to the table to seek a solution
b) Because they sought to bring two people with opposing views to the table knowing there was no chance of success
c) Because they are incompetent and if taking the matters or reconstruction seriously they should have brought in a wholly independent chair or chairs.
If the voting goes against your interest in a golf club/SPFL you have 3 choices. Propose an amendment to go to another vote using the vehicle in the constitution/rules to do so. Accept it. Resign. I don't see the option to delay the function/season for everyone else or to be compensated for damages (rather than cost of ticket for example). The SPFL is, of course, different from a golf club and the offended parties are a wee bit more than miffed but it does raise the key issue for me. The clubs voted.
It wasn't Doncaster. It wasn't even Lawell or Nicola Sturgeon. It was the clubs. We have discussed on here many times that, as much as one might abhor Doncaster (I certainly do), the SPFL are the clubs. A board may well go rogue now and then but eventually the clubs make the decisions either directly, by voting as in this case, or by approving representative authority.
So if Hearts/PT win the case what do they get? Money presumably. At best all they can hope for in regards to the division they play in nest year is another vote and the result would be an even bigger majority against. Surely the courts can't actually enforce the SPFL to put in place a minimum 13 team top tier so that Hearts don't get relegated? Same with PT.
I hope they lose otherwise we are in big trouble. The Dons could have gone on an almighty run of wins with Sevco collapsing (going bust even) and we get second spot. Compo please.
Would my club have done the same? I don't know much about the new guy but I can't see it. However, that's may well be me hoping they wouldn't so maybe they would, maybe every other club would. There would have been the same vote and the bottom team relegated.
Big Pink 18th June 2020 at 01:30
Sad day for SFM when the administrator and posters are getting thumbs down for trying to review facts, timelines and reported happenings. (Happy for Mickey, in true SFM fashion, to bring his own evidence to the table).
Re John Nelms at Dundee his stance re keeping Hearts up by a bizarre 'reconstruction' were reported as early as the morning of 10 April before the vote. As we know there was all the Whatsapp chats, so lord knows who was saying what.
https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/celtic/scottish-football-live-spfl-respond-rangers-resolution-statement-hibs-vote-favour-euro-giants-want-morelos-2535359
wottpi 10.08
An alternative end of season awards golf club dinner dance!
200 members with tickets but venue gets burnt down and alternative room found for only 150.
A suggestion is made that the top 150 performing members would get tickets and the 200 members vote and agree by a substantial majority it's the fairest way. Some are disappointed but most accept they hadn't played well.
There is a complaint from one wealthy member who has a really expensive set of golf clubs and didn't do all that well but the other members agree the way they have decided is best!
Maybe too simple?
ernie 18th June 2020 at 10:39
No Ernie, in a democracy you always have the 4th option i.e right to take matters to court, even if a vote or a decision goes against you. You may be end up being justified or looking a right arse but it is a legitimate course of action.
For what its worth here is a small calculation.
Compensation for 'taking one for the team' (round figures just plucked out of the air )
Hearts £1m
Partick £500k
Stranraer £250k
£1.75 million divided by the remaining 39 clubs – Circa £45k per club
Spread that over the new five year Sky deal = £9k per club per season to help keep the peace.
Just a thought.
adam812 18th June 2020 at 10:47
Yup still too simple, as no recognition given to those losing out through no fault of their own.
It is the 'fire' that is the defining issue, not the previous performances of members, and whether the decisions taken regarding what to do about the effects of the 'fire' were fair and equitable.
As discussed earlier the Belgian case sums it up quite nicely (members effectively being given a loaded vote) but I wholly accept Hearts may not find the Scottish Courts to be of a similar mind and could end up with egg on their face.
I'd be surprised if any other aggrieved club and in particular a Plc, with the means to take such a matter to court would not do so to protect their own interests.
My own view is that stopping the coming season starting via an interdict would be a step too far in terms of the effects on Scottish Football but I do believe Hearts and Partick deserve their day in court.
Wottpi@multiple
I understand the disappointment for Hearts supporters but to pick out irregularities, like Nelms, can create more confusion than clarity. It looks suspicious but then so does ICT's involvement in the "whistleblower"/"dossier" farce. Nelms looking to gain an advantage for his club but then again so was ICT's representative. I could of course refer to the ICT persons "allegiances" as others have done but would be stupid.
In addition, to describe Budge's objection to a permanent structure change as a "preference" is a bit of an understatement. At a time when she was looking to others to support her attempts to stop her club's relegation her declaration to block any move toward permanence was ill advised and, quite frankly, aggressive. I gave you the quotes from her co-chair Les Gray but I can assure that reading it does not reflect his tone. He did as his position dictates and stayed diplomatic. Others too came out and expressed their support for his position. To my mind Ann Budge did more to ensure a rejection to her proposals than to get others on board.
As to the example of the golf club do, well what can I say. Those who lost their place at the party would get their ticket money back. You seem to think that were due more because they might have played the slot machine on the night and won.
BP
Can I request that a decision is made on my post at 19:08 yesterday which has been under moderation since about 30 minutes after it was posted. I was afterall only responding to a post that clearly was questioning my reasons for posting on valid football subjects. For the original post to remain and mine be blocked does go against fairness. No ad hom attacks were made, no bad language and nothing broken with respects to the blog's rules happened.
Thank you.
wottpi@10:56
"For what its worth here is a small calculation."
Can I request that you do the same for the other clubs in the league. For instance, as Ernie pointed out earlier, Aberdeen being denied the opportunity to go on an "almighty run of wins" has lost them a lot of money. Or my own team Hibs repositioning in the league costing c.£200K. Of course these clubs could follow the current example and pursue it through the courts. I wonder why they aren't? Could it be that they recognise that the current circumstances are unique and it is not in the interest of Scottish football to do so.
I am becoming repetitive now on this but you don't seem to believe that these points deserve a response.
I wonder how people’s opinions might have differed on Hearts and Partick Thistle taking legal action against the league body if the action was instead in relation to Res 12 issues, the LNS sham, the invention of a metaphysical immortal club, or something similar related to the long-running Rangers saga. I suspect such legal action would be praised to the high heavens and probably even crowd-funded.
For those who live outside the Celtic bubble, there is a perception, realistic or otherwise, that, following Rangers’ demise, Celtic are the new establishment club and that despite their past condemnation of Rangers officials holding sway for a century or more, Peter Lawwell now rules the roost over Scottish football and absolutely nothing must get in the way of ten-in-a-row. Proof of this is scarce, suggesting it is based on nothing more than paranoia, but actual proof of Rangers past influence was thin on the ground too.
Our new prolific poster (whose productivity, if not subject matter, brings to mind a certain Govan resident with a thousand and one usernames) makes several very good points about football as a sport very much taking a distant second place to football as a business. Money is king, hence many of those baffling decisions made by the football authorities, and crucially Celtic and the rest of the clubs, to pretend that Rangers survived liquidation in order to maintain the one and only only show in town – the money-spinning duopoly.
Notwithstanding that our new poster is of course at liberty to post whatever and whenever he wants, I can’t help but wonder why he has only felt compelled to comment now, when the latest events happen to involve Hearts, when the injustices he rightly points out relating to the Rangers saga have gone on for a decade and more.
I suppose what I’m trying to say in my usual clumsy way is that it’s not just our clubs who display self-interest in abundance – fans are equally as guilty, including me.
Well of course everyone has the right to go to court. The Dons could on the basis of they could have been second. Sheffield Wed could on the basis that it was a goal last night. I’m talking about what your options are in the constitution/rules of the club you joined or, in the case of Hearts, the trade body you are in and in which you are a founder member.
What would be enough compensation to satisfy Hearts and PT? Could it be substantially more than what will be spent on lawyers? As has been outlined above, surely this needs to be tested by negotiation rather than spafing yet nor money into lawyers pockets.
There is no level of venality below which the SPFL board will not stoop. Unfortunately for them, the voting system and the self interest of their members creates paralysis as we have clearly seen.
Although disappointed that the discussion has resorted to this I will reassure Highlander that his thoughts that I am Lawman/Steerpike are well off the mark. As this follows on from wottpi questioning my being on this blog I can't help feeling that we are witnessing an attempt to discredit others rather than support their own views. I think we have all seen this before when it is shown that certain types of poster's own stance is shown to be weak. So let me state the following which I not only believe but have acted on.
The Ibrox team is a new club.
Res12 should have been supported by Celtic and this backed by all other clubs.
Celtic have played fast and loose with the Res12 guys and are party to deceit as are every other club.
LNS is seriously compromised and should be set aside.
There are potentially many cases of fraud involved in the whole big lie.
The SPFL and SFA are not fit for purpose.
Does that help?
Aurellio Zen 18th June 2020 at 12:44
‘.There is no level of venality below which the SPFL board will not stoop.’
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
In connection with your observation, Aurellio Zen,were my ears deceiving me when they heard a little earlier this morning that Doncaster has been appointed to the ‘ Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body’ of UEFA????
Mickey Edwards 18th June 2020 at 13:02
My apologies for giving the impression that I thought you were Lawman/Steerpike – I assumed, wrongly it seems, that my mention of the different subject matter made it clear that I'd eliminated you from such suspicion – the reference was intended entirely to reflect the volume of your posts.
Again, apologies for my clumsiness and I'll retire to lurking for a while in penance.
Mickey Edwards 18th June 2020 at 11:43
Aurellio Zen 18th June 2020 at 12:44
From this information
https://www.sportekz.com/football/scottish-premiership-prize-money/
As it stands at present in relation to the prize money pot then the bottom team in the Premiership receives 4.5% of the total pot. Currently £1.12m
The winner of the Championship receives 2.25 % of the pot.
Therefore based on this years prize money that means relegation means an immediate loss of 2.25% or £560k and for that you have to come straight back up the following season.
I am assuming, given the new deal with Sky and the the prize monies for the new deal may increase next season.
You then have to add in lower ticket prices, potentially lower crowds, merch, food sales etc (that is going to happen to everyone anyway with behind doors games).
However with it being unclear when the Championship will start and if the lower divisions will even play this season then Hearts & Partick will also miss out on whatever potential income streams could/would be available.
I fully acknowledge that others have taken a hit but the hit is going to be felt greatest by those being relegated.
As Ann Budge has said, if relegation was the result of abeing bottom after a full season then you have to take that on the chin and get on with it. But this situation is different.
I must say I think the £10m being reported is on the high side which is why I have argued that some recompense and recognition of 'taking one for the team' early on would have smoothed the waters.
My position remains that the SPFL board were blinkered regards the ending of the season and, like many other times in the recent past, the authorities only have the capacity to deal with short term solutions and fail to see the bigger picture and potential outcomes of their (normally) incompetent actions.
Mickey Edwards 18th June 2020 at 13:02
I have no problem with you commenting at all.
However, like others, all I am wondering is why now, given all that has gone before.
Your end position in posts appears to be that football is only a game and dealing with the Covid 19 crisis should be more to the fore than bickering about who is getting relegated. However, then you post pages and pages bickering and giving us the impression Ann Budge and Hearts are the devil incarnate for daring to protect the club/business/people's jobs etc in these self same difficult times for all of us.
Like Easyjambo and Highlander I think its time to step back once again.
Unfortunately for the site and the guys doing the hard work to keep things going , to my eyes, it looks like over the past wee while (even before Covid 19) other previous and regular posters, especially those not of a Celtic persuasion, have taken a similar view and have been less inclined to contribute.
The wide ranging appeal of the site and the tolerance of opposing views has, in my opinion, been on the slide and, these days, as soon as you see a posters name or reading the first few lines to get a sniff at the content you can predict how its going to go with the thumbs up / thumbs down.
Maybe a lot of us aren't getting enough fresh air these days!!
Stay safe and healthy everyone and I'll maybe catch up sometime soon.
Wottpi
I hope you won’t take a break from the blog.
I think the consensus is very different from what the TU/TDS tell us, and indeed no matter how prolific, one poster is just that.
Of course we don’t always agree, but there is nothing wrong with that. What I do know is that the vast majority of our number consider you one of our own. And will be sad for your absence.
And not all Celtic fans on here are unsympathetic to Hearts/Thistle/Stranraer either. ?
" A camel is a horse designed by a committee ". That is how I'm viewing the current SPFL imbroglio . The whole governance of Scottish football is not fit for purpose .
wottpi 18th June 2020 at 14:15
I don't have an issue with Ann Budge, or anyone else involved with Hearts trying to protect the club or the business. Absolutely no problem at all.
Just don't chastise everyone else for acting out of self interest at the same time. That' s exactly what you are doing.
It's also a bit hypocritical trying to get re-structuring, but it has to be temporary. Is that not acting out of self interest again.
I'm afraid her position just comes across as a bit childish sometimes. Everyone needs to behave a certain way, except me.
Someone who you could not find a Scottish football fan who does not think is the epitome of ineptitude and who has shown evidence of this in every enterprise in which he has engaged since his appointment has been elevated to an influential position in EUFA!
Flabbergasting.
Nice seeing Alfredo going through his paces , and obviously he was back in time to beat the 14-day isolation . What were folk worried about ?
The reason that organisations have rules is so that every member knows what can and cannot be done within the organisation.
This is to prevent individual persons (or clubs) pushing their own agenda.
https://www.bunkered.co.uk/golf-news/ex-rangers-chairman-dave-king-blamed-for-player-family-legal-fight
…….
Dave King, and his malicious and continuous tortious interference in what should have been a private family matter.”
……………
Hope it is ok to post the link. Not football related, but i don’t believe this is the last time we will hear of Mr king getting the blame for something.
Cluster One 18th June 2020 at 22:24
‘..Hope it is ok to post the link. Not football related..’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Any reference to a person who ” ..refused or declined to fully disclose his earnings in South Africa ..” is connection enough to football if King’s name is at all mentioned, no matter how peripherally.
Gary Player may or may not have had problems with SARS. We don’t know.
But we do know that King did have such problems. [and let us honour the memory of the tax inspector who had the wit to compare King’s spending with his declared income and insisted on asking questions! And also honour the gritty determination of SARS to nail the tax cheat)
And that convicted tax cheat King is still operating in Scottish Football.
So, no problem, Cluster One, about being OT, as far as I am concerned.
And a brilliant spot!
(See me and golf? I share the view of whoever it was who said something about a good walk spoiled.
)
I am not able to include a link at present as the online news is being refreshed but I believe Keith Jackson in the Daily Record is reporting that the SFA Compliance Officer is looking into the possibility that rules have been broken by Hearts and Partick as a result of their legal action. If correct he suggests the possibility of significant sanctions.
He is also reporting many clubs are very unhappy with the action of the two clubs and calling on the SPFL to take action.
If there was any doubt before now it looks certain that this is not going to end well
Aurellio Zen
Someone who you could not find a Scottish football fan who does not think is the epitome of ineptitude and who has shown evidence of this in every enterprise in which he has engaged since his appointment has been elevated to an influential position in EUFA!
Flabbergasting.
%%%%%%%%%%
My money would be on Peter (member of ECA board) having put in a word for him.
Almost certainly, the same Peter who featured in the Good Friday whatsup messages that came to light.
#quidproquo
The word I used a few weeks ago was omnishambles and it now looks as if that may come up short of fully describing the mess that the SPFL have led us towards.
The conflation of issues and the railroading rush to push everything through at such a precarious juncture was just so wrong. It opened a can of polarised worms that they can't close.
Back in the day there was more accountability. Today, the likes of Cummings and Doncaster vicariously stick their middle fingers up at ordinary folk because they are close to the real power.
Homunculus 18th June 2020 at 17:07
|As you know you are a pedant please note part of my post from 1 June (which was the first for a while) acknowledging Hearts and Budge's self interest.
My recent contributions are merely a counter point to a new poster who seems to have come on with an Anti – Hearts/Budge bee in their bonnet. Given no such criticism has been directed at the likes of Partick, Stranraer and others, such as Dundee, ICT, who were sympathetic to reconstruction as a means of achieving a position of 'Do No Harm' you have to wonder why one specific club has been singled out.
Extract from 1 June
Big Pink 19th June 2020 at 02:15
Don't worry I'll be back (see above
) at some point, probably when there are significant developments but will be taking a break to avoid circular arguments becoming boring and tiresome and also to get on with some work!!
wottpi 19th June 2020 at 09:53
I was not having a go at you, it was specifically at Ann Budge.
Not even the position she is taking, I have said on several occasions that I thought reconstruction was the best option for everyone. However the clubs would appear to disagree.
It is specifically her telling everyone they are in the wrong, acting out of "self-interest", when that is exactly what she is doing herself. Like I said, everyone should behave a certain way, except her.
I don't think it does her or Hearts any favours. Particularly if it's also true that her opening gambit on reconstruction discussions was that it had to be temporary. So, change the structure when it suits me, but change it back when it suits me as well.
Re compensation, I really don't see it. I don't even understand what the case for it is, other than the clubs involved not getting their own way.
According to Superscoreboard the Hearts and Partick Thistle action is not just about getting "compensation". It looks like they are still trying to avoid relegation.
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273646929071702016
Hearts & Partick Thistle's court action includes trying to stop Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers being promoted. Scrapping promotion is the only way to save them from relegation.
John Clark 18th June 2020 at 23:45
(See me and golf? I share the view of whoever it was who said something about a good walk spoiled.
…………….
From memory i always thought it was a quote by Winston churchill for some reason. Golf was a waste of a good walk.So i looked it up.
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/28/golf-good-walk/
adam812 19th June 2020 at 01:31
27
0
Rate This
I am not able to include a link at present as the online news is being refreshed but I believe Keith Jackson in the Daily Record is reporting that the SFA Compliance Officer is looking into the possibility that rules have been broken by Hearts and Partick as a result of their legal action. If correct he suggests the possibility of significant sanctions.
…………….
I remember when the ibrox club were shown the sanctions for taking their complaint outside football.
Expulsion from the league.
A £1mill fine.
Cup bans
Sanctions.
In the end they agreed to a signing ban (that kicked in months down the line) but they could play trialists, in the end they got a membership and a 5 way agreement, did ok out of it in the end.
It appears that the frequency of my posts is causing some concern so perhaps I should point out a couple of things.
One strand of what I have written is regarding the unrealistic expectations on the restart of the sport in Scotland.
The other was on the point that Ms Budge was given the opportunity to come up with the plan to deal with the consequences of a prematurely ended season. The first thing the Budge did was, as Homunculus points out, was to dictate to the others what she would not allow to happen in the outcome of what, we were assured, was a working group that was to have a remit without preconditions.
The frequency of my posts following that parallel those of wottpi and Highlander neither of whom gave an explanation for Budge placing restrictions on everyone else. My posts only repeated my point but still no acknowledgement of the damage Budge was doing to Hearts, Partick and Stranraer's cause. Sure, no satisfactory outcome may have come from a more open attitude from her but it at least would have not have immediately alienated many of the clubs from whom she was seeking cooperation. Instead a stance is taken by posters that my Hibs background meant that I was attacking Hearts and Budge. In the past I have, in posts elsewhere and in direct discussions with TRFC supporters, faced the standard response to my objections to post-2012 events – I was a Rangers hater. My answer to them was always, as it is now, that I am a hater, I hate cheating and corruption. The fact that in those years and earlier one team stood out in this respect and that wasn't attacking the team but what they did.
Despite wottpi's assertions at 9:53 there is no recognition that the failure to restructure the leagues was in a big part due to intransigent stance in Budge's interview with Tom English. Instead, he points to a post that he believes will show Budge's attitude was not wrong and also suggests that Les Gray became anonymous and should have dealt with Budge's position if he found it to be wrong. This despite my providing the documentation to Gray's response and disappointment on that very point.
I am accused also of only raising objections to Hearts and ignoring Partick and Stranraer. That would only be true if these other posters' stance that I was attacking a team was correct. If you accept the truth that my points were referring to Budge's wanting her cake and eat it stance then why should Partick and Stranraer ever be mentioned. In fact I would guess that at least one of these teams' opinions would be more aligned to my own on Heart's stance. They after all were looking for a reprieve from relegation.
Truth be told I am in the camp that, even before pandemic, would prefer the league sizes be increased. The demands of TV to have small leagues so they can show more "big" games is detrimental to our sport as is their control over kick-off times and days.
I find it sad that I have to write such a post as this where I am having to explain the reasons for my posts. To my view this stems from being viewed as a supporter of a team who the other posters see as the "enemy" and therefore should not have a view on the actions of "their" team. If that were classed as a valid stance by the blog then the comments section would be empty as Celtic supporters would be barred from commenting on events at Ibrox.
This is not a time for posters to abandon the site especially if they believe that the site is allowing attacks on their club. Better to step back and ask themselves if their perceptions are wrong. My stance is aligned with the sites stated aim of assessing the actions of the Adminstrators of the sport and, where necessary, holding them to account. That can only be done effectively if supporters of as many teams as possible are represented in these posts.
'adam812 19th June 2020 at 01:31
I am not able to include a link at present as the online news is being refreshed but I believe Keith Jackson in the Daily Record is reporting that the SFA Compliance Officer is looking into the possibility that rules have been broken by Hearts and Partick as a result of their legal action. If correct he suggests the possibility of significant sanctions…'
#################################
From the above, would it be reasonable to assume that the Compliance Officer has completed examining the actions of members of the boards of RIFC, TRFC & indeed the SPFL following the recent 'dodgy dossier' rammy? Charges to follow or (the much more likely) 'Nothing to see here, move along!'?
I think Ms Budge is another who was and is interested in holding administrators of the sport to account.
This omnishambolic clusterf**k wasn't concocted by HMFC but I'm sure the 6th floor at Hampden will welcome the metaphorical guns being turned towards Tynecastle.
Jingo
Jackson (DR) has been the go to press hack for the SPFL throughout this affair.
When it comes to his articles, Jackson isn't of fixed colour favourable slants (blue/green/whatever). He generally trades them for an ongoing supply of insider info.
adam812 19th June 2020 at 01:31
'..I believe Keith Jackson in the Daily Record is reporting that the SFA Compliance Officer is looking into the possibility that rules have been broken by Hearts and Partick ..'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The link is
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/hearts-partick-thistle-could-face-22216733
From which I quote this little snippet:
"Now Whyte [Clare, the CO] could be set to wade into the civil war which has been ripping through the Scottish game since it was forced into lockdown in March"
The CO can wade as much as she likes, but she must know in her own heart that she is working for an organisation that will disregard any findings that they don't like and abandon any pretence of having regard for truth and justice- as witness the arbitrary dismissal of any need to investigate the Res 12 issue.
Why she doesn't walk away from any connection with that sullied, dirty, lying organisation which boasts of its 'Judicial Panel Protocol' in the way that tyrants boast of their respect for law is something of a mystery.
Must be nearly as bad as being lawyer for a lying football club!
Just passing on for information purposes.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-sfa-alert-seething-dutch-22218986
The Daily Record is out-Daily Record-ing itself with TRFC articles today.
There’s a ‘Morelos to Qatar for £15m’ story –
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-transfer-news/alfredo-morelos-rangers-goal-pattern
There’s also a story that shows the professionalism & intellect of some of their players –
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/epic-allan-mcgregor-baws-oot
I'm clearly missing a point regarding the £10m 'compensation sum' quoted for Hearts and Partick Thistle. How did they arrive at that figure?
Each day we are reading about savage cuts mad by what will be assuredly be all 42 clubs – which makes this whole claim figure (if true) just – well mental!
Would whatever those two clubs were going to lose anyway be deducted from any compensation? (experts please!)
…and would they, in their magnanimity towards the rest of Scottish football (remember they don't want to damage it!) forego some of it to help others? Oops I forgot – self interest must rule!
Does the SPFL have the money to pay out?
Finally, I think Hearts and Partick should be aware that the sword they are dangling over the Scottish game might just be the sword of Damocles hanging over them.
https://www.raithrovers.net/44313/club-statement-5.htm
JOINT STATEMENT FROM DUNDEE UNITED FC, RAITH ROVERS FC AND COVE RANGERS FC
On Wednesday 17th June 2020 Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers were served with a petition lodged in the Court of Session by fellow SPFL member clubs, Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle which, if successful, could prevent our clubs’ promotions, and potentially have catastrophic financial implications for every SPFL member club as well.
Whilst we are extremely unhappy that we have been drawn into this legal action, we can confirm that we immediately instructed external lawyers to act on our behalf and to protect our clubs’ interests. Since the SPFL resolution was passed by 81% of member clubs on 15th April 2020, which confirmed us all as title winners who were to be promoted, we have undertaken extensive and costly preparations for a new season in new leagues, including obtaining major financial commitments from our supporters, business partners and stakeholders. Our removal from those leagues would be ruinous on and off the field.
We have each had a highly successful season, brought to a premature end by something bigger than our clubs and bigger than our sport. Our status as champions of our respective leagues is not being contested, and nor should the promotion which has always, and should always, come with it.
The legal action that has been raised by Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle not only threatens the financial stability of the SPFL, but also its individual member clubs.
For all of these reasons, we must and will robustly defend our position.
As legal proceedings are now underway, we intend to make no further comment on the matter at this time.
Thanks for that Homunculus …
Hearts and Partick have now completely 'lost the dressing' room and the ba' is well and truly 'in the slates'.
Did they think others would accept their actions meekly!?
Bect67
Finally, I think Hearts and Partick should be aware that the sword they are dangling over the Scottish game might just be the sword of Damocles hanging over them.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
The Sword of Damocles was hung over the Scottish game when the SPFL decided to railroad their way down Omnishambolic Avenue come hell or high water.
At a time when we needed foresight and leadership… We got creative lobbying, limited time constraints, misleading by omission, voting scandals, silence, media spin campaign, etc.
Now it’s indirect threats to Hearts and Partick Thistle. Who are both predictably and quite correctly seeking redress to the unnecessary circumstances they have been placed in from an office, rather than the field of play.
In it’s current form, the SPFL, from it’s corporate governance standards to it’s executive officers, is not fit for purpose.
When many recently said that now was not the time to have an Independent Investigation, they were IMO badly mistaken. More of the same lack of leadership and dubious standards is only going to ensure a rockier road than was necessary.
Bect67
Hearts and Partick have now completely ‘lost the dressing’ room and the ba’ is well and truly ‘in the slates’.
Did they think others would accept their actions meekly!?
%%%%%%%%%%%
Did the SPFL think that affected clubs would meekly accept or be threatened out of seeking to redress injustice ?
The SPFL set this trainwreck in motion.
The clubs are only doing what you’d expect them to do given the cards they have been dealt.
bect67 19th June 2020 at 17:31
The next thing will be whether the SFA join in and threaten action against them, I believe it is against the rules for member clubs to take matters to Court.
Of course that doesn't stop them doing it, however it also doesn't stop the SFA taking action against them for doing it.
Reconstruction was the best thing for everyone in my opinion. Leaving Hearts in the top division and adding Dundee Utd and presumably ICT would have worked, and maybe even have made it a better division.
The SPFL executive clearly believed that, and tried to make it happen. The majority of the clubs didn't want it though, so we are where we are and I don't see how it doesn't get messier and messier.
reasonablechap 19th June 2020 at 18:01
They are seeking to redress what they perceive as injustice.
By inflicting injustice on others.
The vote was taken, the decision was made. Hearts and Partick Thistle may not like the outcome but that does not mean it was unjust. For the three teams to lose their promotion would, in my opinion be unjust.
Homunculus
When I said clubs are doing what you’d expect them to do, I include the promoted clubs and their joint statement.
It’s a slowmoving but predictable trainwreck that shouldn’t have been set in motion in the way it was and the SPFL are reaping what they have sown.
ps. the vote was questionable and that is being kind.
reasonablechap 19th June 2020 at 18:28
ps. the vote was questionable and that is being kind.
=========================================
The top division clubs unanimously agreed that the league could not be finished on the park, prior to the SPFL executive making the decision to finish it and that the final placing would be based on average points per game.
So even if the original vote was "questionable" and I don't know what you mean by that, they all effectively agreed with it's outcome anyway.
reasonablechap 19th June 2020 at 18:28
As a Thistle fan and ST holder , I'm !00% with Homunculus in his thinking . We (and Hearts) played our way into that position and would have liked the opportunity to play ourselves out of it . Once the league was called , that was it . We finished bottom using the formula applied to all clubs and got relegated . It would have been a nicer had the clubs voted for 14-10-10-10 but unfortunately that didn't appeal to them . Or if Mr Anderson had given his money directly to Hearts to see them through a season in the Championship . Our problem is that the league we are now in may not operate for months , or even ever , due to uncertainty over clubs ability to survive and play bcd with no alternative source of income to entrance fees . What would have been your suggestions to do things differently and achieve consensus ?
Just a thought.
If the legal action is successful and the outcome cannot be afforded by the SPFL will they make use of the Close brothers loan underwritten by the SFA.
Mickey Edwards 19th June 2020 at 19:04
It would be "affordable" the money will be coming from the other teams.
That's assuming that there will still be income from broadcasters, sponsors and the like.
Personally I don't see that compensation will be due though. The clubs might not like what is happening, however I don't think it is "unjust" in the sense that it was democratically agreed by the members.
reasonablechap (or RC for short – hope you’re ok with that!)
My apologies in advance if you suffer from argumentative personality disorder, but I believe you are, in essence, a ‘stirrer’ with an agenda.
Although it’s seemingly pointless trying to elicit openmindedness from you, I will refrain from commenting on the content of your posts, and instead offer you the following:-
I’m only speaking for myself, but it seems to me your contributions are deliberately adversarial (with most reasonablechaps on here) and clearly in keeping with having an agenda.
I try and learn from my TDs on this blog, and acknowledge when I get things wrong (a wee bit of humility never goes amiss).
You might want to glean some learning points from how others regard your posts instead of apparently/ automatically disagreeing with them – as seems to be the case with you..
What do you mean I’m wrong?
Homunculus 19th June 2020 at 18:03
14
2
Rate This
bect67 19th June 2020 at 17:31
The next thing will be whether the SFA join in and threaten action against them, I believe it is against the rules for member clubs to take matters to Court.
……………….
I had a look back at the ibrox saga.
Rangers have overturned a 12-month transfer embargo in the Scottish law courts – but they could now face more severe sanctions as a result.
The club succeeded in their application for a judicial review at the Court of Session in Edinburgh as Lord Glennie backed their assertion that a Scottish Football Association judicial panel had exceeded its powers in administering the ban on registering players.
The judge accepted the club’s case that only the specific punishments laid down under the related rule should be imposed on the club for bringing the game into disrepute.
However, he proposed that the decision be referred back to an SFA appeal tribunal, which had upheld the decision that a transfer ban was appropriate punishment for a failure to pay more than £13million in tax last season.
The explicit punishments stated in the SFA’s rule 66 are a maximum £100,000 fine, suspension or expulsion from participation in the game, ejection from the Scottish Cup or termination of membership.
The independent three-man SFA disciplinary panel had considered ending Rangers’ membership, saying they viewed the offence second only to match-fixing in terms of seriousness, but decided a transfer ban was more appropriate.
Having already administered the maximum fine, an SFA appeal would therefore only be entitled to throw them out of the Scottish Cup for a spell or else stop the club playing football altogether in Scotland.
FIFA have also stepped in to the dispute, stating that they expect member associations to take “direct action” against clubs who take them to court.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9298583/Rangers-risk-fresh-sanctions-after-wnning-transfer-embargo-ruling.html
……….
Don’t know what punishment both clubs would get but if any they could appeal and state they were not as bad as the ibrox case in bringing the game into disrepute.
That reminds me wonder how the compliance officer is getting on with the ibrox club bringing the game into disrepute with their allegations and their gross breaches of confidentiality?
bect67 19th June 2020 at 19:44
'.reasonablechap ……I believe you are, in essence, a ‘stirrer’ with an agenda. '
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Unquestionably so, bect67.
RC , to use your shorthand ,in my opinion, seems to be an instrument of those bad guys who foisted the Big Lie on Scottish Football.
What he has to say is in line with the whole rotten mentality of those who so perverted Scottish Football governance. A mentality that in effect said 'bugger sporting integrity' , TRFC is 'Rangers of 1872'
The tragedy is that they know they are illegitimate and baddies but like the 'Wild Bunch' exult in their badness!
May they (metaphorically!) come to the same bad, inglorious end.
And now this stuff
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/sfa-contact-hearts-and-partick-thistle-over-investigation-as-scottish-football-s-civil-war-escalates/ar-BB15Jn8d?ocid=msedgntp
Honest to God.
All kinds of dishonesty by all kinds of Scottish football people!
What a wreck of Sport.
Bad bast.rds all, basically, with absolutely no principles. Tearing at each other savagely , each as guilty as the the other.
Bad, and very bad, cess to them all!
I have never considered myself a prophet and when I asked earlier if we were watching the death throes of Scottish football I did so as a means of overstating to emphasise a point.
I now look at this escalation and find my self wondering if I was nearer the truth than I thought. Scottish football is not in a financially healthy position, and I am not talking a just about the clubs here but the SFA and SPFL. Homunculus is correct in pointing out that , if the SPFL face a fine, it is the clubs that will pay it. But how many can afford to and can those with money withstand the outcome? It's all very well saying that Celtic's healthy bank balance will see them ride out the storm but what to they do afterwards. To make money they need to play games but who against if a number of the top clubs go to the wall? Be assured it is the top two leagues that are most exposed in this. Smaller teams with small wage bills can literally hibernate until the carnage is over. Those with larger wage bills have nowhere to hide other than administration and liquidation unless their players agree to play for nothing. Who believes that that would be likely? There will be no Lazarus like resurrection of the type we are meant to believe happened in 2012 or even of the type we KNOW happened then because there will still be no means to pay the wages.
I believe that this truly is a critical time for Scottish football.
Reading back at the link i posted yesterday.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9298583/Rangers-risk-fresh-sanctions-after-wnning-transfer-embargo-ruling.html
………
Despite attempts by Rangers to suspend the additional sanction or at least revert the case back to the judicial panel, the judge proposed it return to the SFA appeal stage.
That leaves the club open to more severe sanctions, which they would struggle to overturn given that CAS has effectively been ruled invalid for Scottish disputes and that Lord Glennie admitted his only jurisdiction was whether the SFA applied their own rules properly and not their guilt.
………….
Not had my coffee yet so a little help here is required. What does it mean where it say’s (given that CAS has effectively been ruled invalid for Scottish disputes)?
Cluster One @ 1110hrs:
All is made clear when you read the findings of Lord Glennie's Judicial Review.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=168f86a6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
Para. 8 applies:
'This matter is, in any event, to my mind, made clear by Rule 15.8.3.6 of the Judicial Panel Protocol to which I have referred, which provides that the Appellate Tribunal's determination "shall be final and binding on the parties and there shall be no further right of appeal." That excludes any appeal, including an appeal to the CAS. I note, as was submitted by the Dean of Faculty, that the present application to the court, by contrast, is not an appeal but an application to the court in its supervisory jurisdiction to correct what is alleged to be an excess of jurisdiction by the Tribunals.'
Hope that helps!
Must admit I've not followed the latest SPFL legal threat closely.
But, neither the clubs nor the supporters should be surprised at all at the current chaos in the SPFL.
The SPFL, (and SFA), are seemingly doing their best to mismanage a crisis in the Scottish, senior game.
Just like they did during the crisis in 2012.
With both Doncaster and Petrie STILL calling the shots at Hampden…why should anyone expect anything different?
ALL the clubs have kept both these characters at Hampden.
ALL the clubs have looked the other way, and avoided pushing for radical changes and improvements at Hampden.
ALL the clubs have – explicitly or implicitly – supported the status quo since before 2012.
So, Hell mend them.
Maybe, this crisis will prove to be the necessary 'external influence' which ultimately forces change on the game – after a lot of pain?
Thank you Stevie BC. Saved me typing it. Authorities are struggling due to a simple lack of experience or competence. But in addition they have now lost any sense of authority they may once have held. All they now have is a type of mob rule, hiding behind a veneer of democracy. Hell very much mend them.
Jingso.Jimsie 20th June 2020 at 11:49
……………
Thanks
Smugas 20th June 2020 at 20:16
'..But in addition they have now lost any sense of authority they may once have held. '
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The world and his wife know that the Football Authorities allowed themselves to be panicked by what they 'believed' would be a disaster if RFC of 1872 had been expelled on account of the monumental cheating by SDM into betraying their office as guardians of Sporting Integrity in Scottish Football.
By accommodating the most bizarre nonsense attached to the LNS inquiry ( such as the idea that being able to buy the services of better players did not confer a sporting advantage, and the idea that an ineligible player is not ineligible if his ineligibility is not discovered until long after he has played several games ), and by then accommodating CG's new club by allowing it to claim to be, and to market itself as, RFC of 1872, they forfeited any right to be regarded as 'legitimate authority'.
Having behaved like any corrupt person in 'office', they can be told to stuff their 'rules' and 'rulings' up their jaxies by any member of the SPFL which may have just reason to feel aggrieved.
The cry quite reasonably must be :
' A club that cheated both football and HMRC on an industrial scale was not expelled.
A new club was/is allowed to maintain that in fact it isn't itself but another club entirely, that is in liquidation.
Why in heaven's name, therefore, should clubs innocent of any sporting 'crime' be expected to have their very existences threatened by a bunch of deeply compromised charlatans masquerading in 'office' as 'The Football Authorities'
particularly in circumstances which make the 'disaster' that it was thought would have been the expulsion of RFC of 1872 seem like a mere temporary inconvenience when compared to what covid-19 might still do, even to the club which Brian McLaughlin referred to ( apparently on good authority) this afternoon on 'Sportsound' as 'leaking millions of pounds a month'.
Not that I am implying that covid-19 is in way the fault of football, or of the boards of the SFA and SFL.
No, the point is that neither of these Boards has any moral authority and a state of quasi-anarchy subsists, which renders abortive any attempt at leadership or any believable drive to get clubs to pull together to ensure the survival of all 42 ( but only in so far as the survival of any is threatened by covid-19!)
The time to worry about the future is in the future.
It is the present that has to be dealt with, so that all 42 clubs will have a future!
Do we have trustworthy leadership capable of uniting clubs in the battle against covid-19?
Sadly, no.
John Clark
RC , to use your shorthand ,in my opinion, seems to be an instrument of those bad guys who foisted the Big Lie on Scottish Football.
What he has to say is in line with the whole rotten mentality of those who so perverted Scottish Football governance. A mentality that in effect said ‘bugger sporting integrity’ , TRFC is ‘Rangers of 1872’
The tragedy is that they know they are illegitimate and baddies but like the ‘Wild Bunch’ exult in their badness!
May they (metaphorically!) come to the same bad, inglorious end.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Easyjambo has been IMO, the best all round poster on here by some distance and when he said “I have become increasingly frustrated by the blog. Rather than debate the rights and wrongs of the article, it appears that everything that is discussed on the blog has to be viewed through the prism of RFC.”….he again, hit the nail on the head.
So when I come on here on Friday to give the SPFL both barrels and remind posters of where this current omnishambles started. That is, holding the governing authority of the game to account, as per the stated aim of this blog, I am called all sorts.
I standby what I posted on Friday and yesterday, on Sportsound, heard many of my thoughts echoed by Tom English, who is a lot closer to the ongoing clusterf**k. A journalist, who is actually doing what journalists are supposed to do and what this blog has been desperate to see, attempting to hold power (governing body) to account.
Going back to what Easjambo pointed toward. I think if you continually view everything through the same particular prism then tunnel vision is inevitable. If you can’t or don’t want to get out of the tunnel, you won’t see much light or be capable of making rational judgements on the here and now.
I wouldn’t expect you to listen to me but I would hope you all take note of what Easyjambo had to say.
RC@07:02
Unfortunately, taking our adminstrators to task as you appear to want while not wanting it to include two decades of cheating and their involvement in that is what makes me immediately reject whatever you have to say.
My own feeling is that these administrators have a lot to answer for and should be held to account. Not just for 2012 but all malfeasance they have been responsible for. Their incompetence too should be confronted. What I don't want, unlike you, is for them to be pilloried for wrongs that are NOT of their making. For us that would be a foolish mistake that would detract from the gravity of their mismanagement. For you it would be perfect and it would undermine the calls for action we wish to see to punish the crimes against sport undertaken by the club you back. Like your club you wish us all to forget crimes against our clubs and fall into line and support a club who, through false dossiers and lies, want the administration overhauled, not to right wrongs, but to ensure "compliant" personnel. Pardon me if I for one oppose you to the maximum.
Easyjambo, like wottpi, highlander and apparently allyjambo, will be missed on here and I am disappointed by their decision as their contributions were vital. Easyjambo is much respected on here, as he is by me, particularly with regards to what appears to be his expertise – finance but like us all they can allow emotion concerning our teams to blinker us. I hope they change their minds.
I cannot agree with his "RFC prism" allegation as having taken over the site although it no longer appears to have same degree of balanced views. No matter who is correct it is no reason to walk away from the fight. It may be that the reaction to his club joining forces with a club who epitomise not only all that is wrong with the sport but also society has increased the opposition to his clubs actions. Personally I feel that they were wrong to enter into the alliance especially when it very quickly became obvious that the "dossier" of proof was no such thing.
So there you have a one off reply to you RC do not expect any further responses.
As I have indicated before my wish is for the SFA and SPFL to be dismantled and rebuilt but unlike others I would have two bodies replace them not one.
My reasoning is much like the ideals of the US government systems to hold each one to account. I see the ideal being a separation of the business and the sport with sport having the senior position. At present the SPFL is the business related body but it also controls all that is involved in the running of the leagues. As a result league structures and kick off times are controlled, not by football, but by whoever a deal has been made with to broadcast matches. We end up with the ridiculous situation where league rules may have to be distorted to provide four "OF" matches to meet with guarantees to the broadcasters
To my mind control of all matches and leagues should be the responsibility of whatever replaces the SFA. They plan the leagues, days and times of matches and everything that is game related. This is then passed to business body who can then go to the broadcasters and say this is what is on offer who will pay what for it? Our games are 60% funded by through the gate income and the organisations should reflect this. The fans should not be disadvantage because broadcasters want rearrangements so they can fill "dead" spots in their schedules. Be assured, that is how broadcasters view Scottish football.
The argument will be that we need their money but is that totally true? Our 60% fan funding of the sport could surely be increased by pre-fixed kick-off times and the ability for a clubs to plan better for their match day experience. The broadcasters will still pay to broadcast matches and I am not convinced that it will be less than at present. If one thing we are learning from behind closed doors games is that the atmosphere created in the ground is as much a necessity for a TV game as the value of the players on the pitch. This is an area that matches in Scotland can outperform the EPL. Put in place conditions that will increase the attendances at the "smaller" games and we will have a product with a very strong selling point. The sterile matches of the EPL do nothing to stir the crowds and the atmosphere becomes sterile also. This comes across in the televised product.
These are just fag packet ideas based on my strong feelings that we need to reverse the corrupting of our game by the increasingly damaging control of the business side of the game. Surely the professionals can come up with something that is satisfactory for the business and the sport but one thing should be non-negotiable, the sport MUST be the senior partner.
reasonablechap 21st June 2020 at 07:02
'..So when I come on here on Friday to give the SPFL both barrels and remind posters of where this current omnishambles started. That is, holding the governing authority of the game to account, as per the stated aim of this blog, I am called all sorts.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Ever since RFC plc (IL)was exposed as a club guilty of an incredible degree of sports and tax cheating , there have been people (among whom I include your good self, rc) who have sedulously and assiduously tried to get us all to 'move on', to ignore and forget the fundamental untruth at the heart of our football and let a new club claim sporting honours that it did not win and could not have won.
Our football authorities foisted that untruth on us. That act of deception cannot be forgotten or forgiven until truth is restored.
The acts of blinkered incompetence by the Board of the SPFL and the SFA in their dealing with the effects of Covid-19 on clubs innocent of any football crime are rightly being powerfully challenged by eJ and some other posters. I support that challenge.
There is nothing to say that the Football Authorities cannot be both deceitful and incompetent, being not fit for purpose on either account!
As for English and the SMSM, there was not a cheep of complaint from them about the ridiculous nonsense of the 5-Way agreement or the decision not to investigate the Res 12 matter, or any serious questioning of the integrity of the whole rotten Admin/Liquidation scandal.
As sharers in an infamous squalid act of betrayal everlasting unforgetful disgrace will be theirs.
reasonablechap 21st June 2020 at 07:02
everything that is discussed on the blog has to be viewed through the prism of RFC.”….he again, hit the nail on the head.
……..
Every club and every fan should start any point of grievance through the prism of RFC.
Why should they adhere to the rules when the rules can be bent and a blind eye turned to the goings on down ibrox way.
………………
So when I come on here on Friday to give the SPFL both barrels and remind posters of where this current omnishambles started. That is, holding the governing authority of the game to account, as per the stated aim of this blog, I am called all sorts.
…
Was a crosshair aimed at the SPL and SFL and SFA when the bent the rules for an ibrox club? or is it just now both barrels have been pointed at the Spfl as an ibrox club hold no sway?
……………….
I standby what I posted on Friday and yesterday, on Sportsound, heard many of my thoughts echoed by Tom English, who is a lot closer to the ongoing clusterf**k. A journalist, who is actually doing what journalists are supposed to do and what this blog has been desperate to see, attempting to hold power (governing body) to account.
…
Is this the same Tom English who had his arse handed to him on a plate during the dossier shambles? The minute you start to use Tom English as a referance point you have lost the argument.
……………….
I think if you continually view everything through the same particular prism then tunnel vision is inevitable.
….
Prism.
a transparent solid body, often having triangular bases, used for dispersing light into a spectrum or for reflecting rays of light.
Tunnel vision.
tunnel vision is a term meaning that the edges of your vision are lost and only central focus remains, as if you were looking through a tunnel.
…………..
Would rather a light was shone in all directions rather than one.Like Tom as a journalist he should not get to pick and choose his battles to suite.
……………………
In terms of significant developments I believe copies of the Hearts/Thistle petition have been doing the rounds but I have not seen one.
I have seen a paper (possibly an extract) that is purportedly the SPFL’s QC's opinion given prior to the Good Friday resolution.
The main thrust of the opinion is that the resolution could fall foul of the Companies Act 2006 on the basis that a minority shareholder has been disadvantaged by the actions of the majority.
Counsel concluded that due to the financial implications on the minorities, the SPFL could see litigation being pursued by one club or another.
The use of a members vote was then put forward as a means of showing a democratic decision was made by the organisation and then hope the courts would be minded not to interfere in an internal footballing matter if a legal challenge was made.
So, if this is genuine, in effect the SPFL board knew full well there was a good potential for a legal challenge by a member club or clubs, if the resolution was passed.
It is unclear if the member clubs were informed of this legal opinion before voting.
If not, then should they have been told?
If yes, then why is anyone within the game surprised the matter is going to court, given what is at stake?
In my view the SPFL board has been left with taking a gamble.
While a legal challenge was possible they have perhaps anticipated that, while raging, the likes of Stranraer and Partick Thistle (as appeared to be the case on Monday) would not have the means and resources to mount a legal Challenge.
Hearts of course are a different matter, being a larger club, but if they are flying solo far easier to portray them as the troublemakers via leaks to the SMSM.
Thistle joining the party changes things somewhat given, as my wee vote the other day shows, the wider fan base tend to have have a greater degree of sympathy for them.
Would the gamble been safer if St Mirren or Ross County had been in position 12 and less likely to take action?
Would the gamble have been considered if board member Les Gray's Hamilton had been in position 12?
As far as I can see the Hearts/Thistle petition attacks the SPFL for a) rushing through the resolution with inadequate information being provided, b) the issue of the Dundee ‘No' vote, c) the lack of alternative solutions, especially in relation to conflating paying out monies with final places and the ‘take it or leave it approach".
How it will play out in court is anyone’s guess but as this site should well know, the emotion, rivalries, personalities, turbulent past etc of a membership organisation will hold no sway in the court. Either side will win on the basis of points of law in a real court and not the mickey mouse ones set up by the footballing authorities.
If the petition gets past the first hurdle of the Court of Session believing it is a matter for them to consider, things could become very interesting in terms of seeing how our footballing authorities operate.
Just a pity that, if it gets to that stage, this site's intrepid court reporters may not be able to attend proceedings.
Wottpi@12:16
If the legal advice that you have seen is genuine I would guess that you are not getting to see it all. I would guess, I am no legal expert, that they will have been made aware that other clubs would also have a legal case if changes were made. It is probably why they were so hands off at the decision made after the reconstruction working party conclusion.
I think also they will point to the fact that the clubs concerned were given the chance to prevent their relegation by having the lead point on the working party. Ms Budge's insistence on the party not being allowed to consider a permanent change could be used to show that the end result was in part self inflicted. She annoyed more than her co-chair with that move and I guess, again, that could lead Hearts open to law suits for placing restrictions that killed any chance of reconstruction. The thing is that in modern society anybody can sue for just about anything. Fortunately the majority see it as inappropriate. As I have stated before other teams in the league could sue on the same grounds as is being used against the SPFL – that the final decision has left them worse off because of what they might have been able to achieve. Fortunately they haven't.
My own preference of a larger league would have seen no-one disadvantaged so please don't take the attitude that this is another attempt by a Hibs supporter to attack the enemy. The place football has in my life means that I do not hate things like teams or supporters of certain teams. I hate any attempt to undermine the sporting nature of football as a means of securing success and I hate fans of all teams that are party to violence and any other antisocial practices.
CO, remind me never to fall out with you online!
100% on point, IMHO.
The unfolding mess we are was predictable and inevitable.
Our very blog predicted the civil war ahead of the first botched vote but the tram lines had been set.
Since then it has been chaos and deep down no fair minded fan can criticise Hearts and Thistle for their final flings when facing what most fans out there feel is premature and unfair relegation.
Nor can any of us criticise the others like Raith and Cove for fighting back when fingered by the Hearts/Thistle Petition.
Its a right old circular b uggers muddle that never had to happen.
It still has a distance to run and is testament to how badly run our game is.
The SFA and the SPFL are over-puppeted and hamstrung by our clubs and our clubs interests as well as the petty politics and constant need to get more money that both unites and divides them all.
Imagine in a parallel world if Rory McIlroy, Tiger Woods, Colin Montgomery, Gordon Sherry, Tony Jacklin and Raymond Floyd dominated and called the shots at the R&A and the USGA.
That's what we have.
It doesn't work in football any more than it wouldn't work in golf.
Change of the model won't come from within but an increasing inevitability is that the current confusion will lead to thoughts on a more perfect version of what we currently have with some kind of breakaway to protect what the bigger clubs see as rightfully theirs.
That might take a while and in the short term some kind of messy compromise will ensue.
That is what happens.
Plus ca change.
Mickey Edwards 21st June 2020 at 13:21
Think you may be getting ahead of yourself by conflating decisions and actions being taken before and after the resolution.
Even if you are correct and they had a crystal ball, the SPFL has created a situation where there was a potential legal challenge from at least five/six member clubs and two sets of three going after each other!!!
Be aware guys our site is under attack by thumsdowners with an agenda.
I’d guess it is to destabilise
A wee post earlier as as test was in reality a wiggly worm under a float to see how long it took.
It was Riding 13 to 0 after almost 3 hours of normal people And blog readers and is now 13 to 26 as I update.
Statistically almost impossible.
WTF is going on?
Why?
How do some posters get scores off the radar and others like Easy J get thumbs down pelters?
Who is trying to sway our arguments and destroy what we are doing
——————
Stop press
Within a minute it’s now 14 to 40 and under attack
————-
Who is so scared of the fans having a voice?
Everything on line is traceable guys
Still climbing. Wtf!
Rangers unveil new shirt sponsor: https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-unveil-energy-check-partnership-22229692
Looked them up at companies house: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/search?q=The+Energy+Check
They seem to be different companies that link to one man. Something isn't passing the sniff test?
Finloch 21st June 2020 at 19:01
Can go with that.
Noted TDs seem to increase overnight.
Will be first to offer apologies if I have read the site mood wrong, outwith those directly involved in healthy one to one debates.
Finloch 21st June 2020 at 19:01
xxxxx
Firefox doesn't show thumbs up or down, and the blog is no less readable for that. It's easy to get used to not seeing them.
Express your view without regard for the opinion of others.
I have noticed that the TUs and TDs have disappeared from the site when using chrome now but for a while the TDs really went a bit mad.
MercDoc 21st June 2020 at 19:42
…………
Good work.
Neilson replace Stendel at HMFC because relegation triggered a cancellation clause in Stendel's contract.
What happens if Hearts manage to stop promotion/relegation as appears to be their aim if United, Raith and Cove's statement is to be believed?
TU/TD
I can never see the value of these as the point of posting is to put an opinion across not to seek approval from anonymous readers.
TDs were removed because logs showed that there was considerable activity from one or two IP addresses. Visits which did not last long enough to read a comment, never mind the blog itself.
We’ve said for a long time that TU/TDs are irrelevant, and have never been a reflection of the debate taking place.
In the past, when new posters have appeared, particularly the incredibly prolific ones, there’s been similar activity on the ratings, which tended to suggest the newbie‘s popularity.
There is no doubt that it frustrates and emboldens respectively.
Of course when folk are being honest the TU/TD system can be a good indicator of what’s happening on the blog, but for the time being, no false indications of popularity/infamy are appropriate.
Following up on ‘prolific’ posters, I normally, invite those folk to condense their contributions into a headline blog. Never been taken up on it, but that invitation still stands.
Anyone with strong feelings either way on the Hearts/Thistle shambles, why not commit your thoughts to a blog, as opposed to being limited to reacting to what others say?
BP@various
I must admit to some concern over your recent posts. As the only new poster on here they read as an accusation against me.
If as you say you know the IP addresses of those causing the disruption then obviously you know my IP and know that I am not involved. So can I ask that you clarify that there is NO connection between the two.
Secondly, your last post, again suggesting me, reads that there are now limits on what you wish to be discussed on here. I find this strange as, with the infrequency of new blogs, it is the comments section that attracts visits to the site. I would have thought increased activity would have been your aim. If on the other hand you would prefer this to be a private club for a select few of the "right type" of poster I would think that is something that would be a headline part of the site.
You could of course just request that I go away.
For my post of 19th June @ 19.44, I received around 110 TUs
I must say, with tongue firmly in cheek, this pleased me no end (for fair points which I thought were well made!), but now I’m reading about the gremlins (?) re TDs, and wondering if the same thing is happening with TUs!!!??? Could be my paranoia playing up again.
Seriously, having received my fair share of constructive criticism on the blog, I am generally in favour of being ‘rated’ by fellow posters. Part of the learning process for me anyway.
In conclusion, TDs are good for the soul and thickening the skin – also reminding us that we’re not the only ‘show in town’!
So… reinstate them if you can?
Mickey Edwards 22nd June 2020 at 09:46
I think if Hearts / Thistle were trying to get the relegation rescinded they would already have applied for an interim interdict to prevent the league from starting. It would also be a good bargaining position.
The reason they haven't, in my view is that they would be unlikely to get one.
The executive of the limited company put forward a resolution, which was passed by the members. That is now being acted upon. I really don't see an issue with the executive lobbying for their own resolution to be passed, it would make no sense for them to do anything else, they think it's in the best interests of the members.
Likewise others lobbied for it to fail, again no problem with that.
So, and avoiding personalities here, what was done wrong. What would be the basis on which a Court would agree to prevent things simply proceeding in the way the members agreed.
Compensation is a different matter, and I think that's what the clubs really want. For me that is more open to interpretation. However I really don't see a good argument for it. I can understand why the clubs want it, whether they deserve it or not is a different issue.
A little help from our members who are versed in civil engineering/surveying/DIY:
In today’s DR, as part of Alex Rae’s (heartfelt, no doubt) TRFC advertorial, there’s mention of lowering the pitch at Ibrox to increase spectator capacity.
Could someone explain to me, a man who would struggle to knock a nail into the middle of a doughnut, how would lowering an area of fixed dimension which is surrounded by extensive infrastructure increase the usable area for spectators? Wouldn’t that require extensive work on (possibly) all four stands to alter the gradient of the seating areas to expand capacity (& maintain sight lines)?
Economically practicable, or moonbeams?
We’ve seen this several times before when the blog is being distracted / deflected in the expectation of some news to be announced in the game.
With this latest influence on the TU/TD’s it could be something similar? But it could also be viewed as a compliment: that we’re not all just talking nonsense to each other!
Personally, I’m not bothered either way about ratings – but it does add some level of interaction / participation for those who may not particularly want to add a comment?
But, ultimately the admin. of the site shouldn’t be burdened with any extra work on managing TU/TD’s – IMO.
(Naturally, I’d have to give myself a TU for this comment.
)
Jingso.Jimsie 22nd June 2020 at 11:58
Around a year ago today
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-talks-over-ibrox-capacity-18783817
By
Gary Ralston
Rangers in talks over Ibrox capacity increase as Stewart Robertson details ambitious plan
The club have taken consultation on extending the stadium to house 55,000 supporters.
Amongst other things … "The most ambitious project would be lowering the pitch again, which last happened in the mid-nineties, although the level of the water table so close to the Clyde could be an issue."
Jingso.jimsie11.58
From memory there is still a “track” around the pitch at Ibrox so there would be some room for manoeuvre and potentially increase the seating capacity. Making such alterations would certainly be expensive and require a potential closure of the ground. I’m calling moonbeams.
Homunculus@11:55
I think I tend to agree with you but the petition submitted by Hearts and Thistle appears to want promotion/relegation stopped. At least if we are to believe the BBC in this quote –
"Their petition asked for a judge to scrap promotions and relegations for last season – meaning United, Raith and Cove would stay down despite being crowned champions of their divisions. "
Like you I don't rate their chances of success especially as the lead club was given the opportunity to head the working group set up to right the wrongs. Arguments could be made that they thwarted an outcome from that working group by taking the stance that they did.
Mickey Edwards 22nd June 2020 at 12:56
I think the problem that concerns us (Jags) is the prospect of having no league to play in , if clubs mothball due to covid-19 and aren't viable to play bcd . The future of/for all Scottish clubs is uncertain and we're basically asking to be given the chance to survive . What happens if League 1 doesn't proceed ? Would the clubs able to compete be absorbed into the Championship ? An invitational league for those below Championship level who need/wish to play ? It shouldn't have been beyond the wit of our game's administrators to concoct a plan that works . Maybe they are only any good at doing these things away from scrutiny .
Mickey Edwards 22nd June 2020 at 12:56
Homunculus@11:55
And is that not the key point and presumably the thrust of the Hearts/Thistle petition. They view that the resolution was wrong, ill informed and cack handed from the outset. Added to that is the shambles of the Dundee vote. Anything thereafter has been back peddling by an SPFL board who knew and were advised there was a potential for a legal challenge given the consequences of the resolution they favoured and championed.
Oh and BTW where does this 'lead club' come from. Thistle and Hearts are joint petitioners as far as I can see. I don't see anyone calling Dundee United the 'lead club' in any potential counter legal action as if Raith and Cove are some lesser entity.
Tom English said on Saturday that he discussed with Doncaster, before the vote, on what he would do if the resolution failed and his answer was to do a 'Teresa May/Brexit job' and just keep resubmitting it until it passed.
I fully appreciate the complexities involved trying to work their way through this unique situation. It would have been a difficult decision to make but the SPFL hitched themselves to one particular wagon and may now have to deal with the consequences depending what the Court of Session decides.
The Companies Act 2006 was influenced by EU directives which is why in the Netherlands, Belgium and France the same/similar challenges made by Hearts/Thistle have been possible. Are those clubs on foreign shores somehow guilty of the same apparent offense caused to some by Hearts/Budge? Or is this all just a natural legal progression of what can be seen by many as an unfair situation both in Scotland and elsewhere. As discussed if Stranraer could afford it they would be in on this as well.
The constant moaning about what Budge said at the start of the reconstruction task force process is a mere bagatelle. In court any accusation of her pursuing self interest and being hypocritical will be set aside and simply be viewed from the point of view of (as the SPFL's legal opinion said) have a minority group of shareholders been disadvantaged by the actions of the majority to the point that the court takes a dim view of the matter.
If we are getting bogged down to who has said what I am led to believe the petition makes several references to SPFL board member Les Gray's public utterances that (possibly including his role in assisting with the reconstruction task force) he was trying to prevent Hearts, Partick Thistle and Stranraer from being treated 'unfairly'.
Therefore, there appears to be evidence and acknowledgement from Gray that the resolution made by the board he was a member has resulted in an unfair result. To my mind this is far more devastating than anything Budge has said or done in terms of protecting her club/business.
If the petition gets past the first hurdle, it will be down to the court decide if that 'unfairness' was of such a disadvantage that the petitioners have a case to reverse the resolution or seek compensation.
paddy malarkey 22nd June 2020 at 14:23
Yes, the outcome of the League 1 & 2 meetings this week will be interesting.
My guess is that pressure will be being applied to get as early a start as possible. The longer the restart or potential mothballing just helps the petitioners highlight the degree of disadvantage that can be suffered.
O noted on Saturday the Peterhead chairman was keen to get going with fans in attendance ASAP as he clearly viewed playing behind closed doors was not an option for his club. However he could not say when that would be but seemed disappointed little had been discussed by the way of using the lager stadiums as hubs.
He then said he knew/guessed Falkirk and Partick could probably be ready to play next week if need be, and at worse would be able to stream games to paying customers etc.
The replies I received to my post on Saturday morning all backed up what Easyjambo said about the "RFC prism".
A noteworthy observation was that apparently the SPFL are blameless for the current fiasco, this almost made me laugh as much as when later the same day, Tom English sarcastically congratulated Neil Doncaster on his appointment to the UEFA Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body.
That brings me to the priorities and influence of Peter Lawwell (ECA board). Rather than forever let events of 8 years ago always get in the way of the here and now, I'd direct your complaints regarding res12&similar to the heid honcho at Celtic PLC, rather than getting on my back.
Let me get on with holding Scottish football administration to account. It shouldn´t be for Scottish football fan X to tell Scottish football fan Y, how exactly he has to go about it or what he has to say….and John, I'm not trying to get you to move on because I know I'd be wasting my time given my suspicions that you actually own the IP rights on what Easyjambo called the "RFC prism"
Regards more recent events, someone mentioned that Rangers don't want better administration of the game, they only want "compliant personnel". Of course, politically, the two big Glasgow clubs will actively seek good working relationships with administrators but why not with better goverence. The present model is holding Scottish football back, including, in pounds and pence and that negatively affects all clubs…. By the way, can we ask Peter in what direction the compliance is currently aimed ?
ps. looks like an unscripted live Q&A with Peter Lawwell would be interesting.
psII. I missed the TU/TD drama but don't miss the TU/TD.
More importantly I think the site is better for it.
I’m just surprised that it has taken this long for another club to seek legal redress against the game’s governance.
I’m even more surprised that a player, (with the cash), hasn’t tested the legal route before now on an individual basis / restriction of trade (?) – as a result of a disputed, disciplinary decision.
A scenario where a member club feels the need to refer to the Court of Session – for any reason – is a clear indication that the governing body concerned is a failed organisation, regardless of the outcome, IMO.
Paddy@ 12:56
I appreciate that concern and how far Thistle have slipped now sees them mixing with clubs whose financial structure means that mothballing would be better for them financially but to answer you means I have to repeat what I have said a couple of times previously. This seems to concern some people but here goes. I do not believe that there will not be business casualties from this need to play without fans therefor there will be a trend to move up into the empty spaces created by such events. How the leagues look at the end of this no-one can predict but, should no club go under, I would imagine that there will be rearranging of the lower division with those that want to mothball able to do so with proviso that when they return they will start at the bottom. That way those who continued playing will not find themselves disadvantaged.
I have to say though that I can see Thistle facing severe problems should they have to play behind closed doors, but you are in a better position than I to judge that.
No matter what happens I can't help feeling that making plans just now that will have to change later, maybe even a couple of times, would create more problems for the clubs.
Mickey Edwards 22nd June 2020 at 15:53
Have to disagree with your last sentence there . We need a roadmap now , with a defined strategy . Firstly , though , we need to audit what we have , get the views of all the clubs as to when/if they can compete and under what circumstances , and cobble something together to get us to the next branch in the road . Too many variables to set things in stone .I think , though , that pissing off sponsors will be a deciding factor in proceedings .
Wottppi@14:43
Short part out of the way first. I use the term "lead" because it was HMFC that was first to head for the courts and Thistle joined them when someone agreed to fund their part.
As to the rest of what you say, I take it when you refer to the "resolution" you are referring to the proposal to end the leagues. If so then, cack-handed or not, those from all but the smallest clubs who dealt with it are professionals who should, and in my opinion did know, about the time scales to deal with such things. There was a preferred shorter time scale placed on getting a desired result and that, as far as I'm concerned, was the right thing to do. The belief was that money was needed by some clubs rather quickly but any of the clubs' administrators who disagreed with that knew that they could request that the SPFL rules were adhered to. Instead we had clubs maneuvering and plotting. I find it strange that Nelms of Dundee has taken it in the neck when all he did was change his mind to the advantage, he thought, of his club. Whether he promised anyone else that he would do it differently is of no matter. This is a group of businesses and in this case we should not forget that. What were some of these business doing conspiring to all put their vote in at the same time and with the same result. For one in particular to then conspire to be some sort of pseudo whistle blower to help concoct a "dossier" that gave facts on nothing of concern should be more worrying than what Nelms did. Ms Budge denied that she had ever witnessed any bulling but still the accusations went on and Hearts joined the dossier authors in calling an EGM. To this day I have seen no proof of bullying or coercion nor have I seen signs of inducements. What I have seen is what we should expect from Scottish football a bungled process that was as much the fault of the clubs as it was the administrators.
I have made it more than clear that I believe that the SFA and SPFL are not fit for purpose but on this occasion I can see nothing that I would add to the evidence needed to have them disbanded.
I can see why until the vote was concluded restructuring was kept off the table. It would have been inappropriate to do otherwise but the speed with which it was introduced after leads me to believe that it was always part of the plan. How it was handled after that was where my criticism lies. You should be asking your own club's chief executive why she placed obstacles in the way of success. The probably would have arisen anyway but as someone who wanted her club to stay in the top league she should have placed all her efforts towards that end without concerning herself with personal preferences.
Let me repeat that my preferred outcome would have seen Hearts remain in the top division. Likewise the two other disadvantaged clubs would not have been.
Paddy@16:23
We should agree to disagree on that.
Too many variables around that we cannot define. If clubs go under it won't happen in an orderly fashion. The level of disruption when any player or official tests positive will be unmanageable. Outside the playing bubble a threat of a new peak will see the bubble burst. Clubs will have spent money for planned matches that never happen and will not be able to recoup it.
Too chaotic for plans to make sense.
Mickey Edwards 22nd June 2020 at 16.57
I know it's not a matter of life and death , but I'll leave it with WS (not Walter Smith !)
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And, by opposing, end them.
That's where we are – fight or acquiesce .
I posted this on a Celtic Blog (Sentinel Celts) because the stimulus to do so came as a result of Celtic's approach to ST Renewal and use of Virtual TV as a replacement for attending in person.
However it does branch into community ownership via a Membership Scheme, a path other clubs are treading so if you remove the green tinted angle I offer it here as a way forward for Scottish Football.
https://sentinelcelts.com/2020/06/17/losing-the-sense-of-community/
Losing The Sense Of Community
Football clubs are merely the totems around which different communities gather to sing their songs and dance their dances, but in trying to become big business this essential point has been lost. Football as a business has grown too big for its boots.
At the end of the chapter “The Worst Business in the World” in their book Soccernomics (2009) Simon Kuperand Stefan Szymanski say
“Soccer clubs need to know what they are. They shouldn’t kid themselves they are Titanium Metals (a small company in Big Business Terms but a behemoth compared to any soccer club – https://www.timet.com/about/ ) . Rather they are like museums, public spirited organisations that aim to serve the community, whilst remaining reasonably solvent.”
Few would argue that Celtic have managed the latter in laudable terms that has led to long term football success and long may it continue, but in becoming a PLC has that aim of serving the community not so much been lost as reversed?
Celtic started as a community club and, I would argue still are, but that community has spilled out from its origins in the east end of Glasgow to become global. Wherever you go in the world you are likely to bump into a fellow Tim and a friendly connection is often made. We make friends easily, we commune. However is the current PLC model the right fit for the global Celtic community of today? Has the PLC model caused Celtic custodians to have grown apart from its community rather than being a part of it?
The most recent issue caused by the CoVid Virus has been the sale of season tickets for games that at the outset fly in the face of the very reason for buying a season ticket which is To Be There when the team runs on to the park. Celtic’s approach to the problem caused by CoVid19 is constrained by the very model that has sustained Celtic as a solvent, indeed very profitable business, which is the degree of reliance on actual match day physical attendance that brings the sense of community back to the place where it first began.
However that community whilst metaphorically and emotionally lives in the shadow of Celtic Park physically it does not. In having to offer regular match day attendees the opportunity to watch from afar ,will that be a cause for many to rethink the current model in a world where we are being reminded nothing is certain , so be ready to change?
In that respect I looked into my crystal ball (a spreadsheet actually) that can be viewed here for an alternative model that recognised not only how widespread the Celtic community has become but also offered a path to a place where the lost sense of community at one with itself could be reborn.
It is one of life’s cosmic ironies that as I was developing the new model last night the same idea of giving the community a greater say via a Membership Scheme had emerged on CQN on Tuesday
https://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/season-tickets-renewed-of-course/comment-page-2/#comment-3480841 by CELTIC1MEMBER1VOT
that BMCUW pasted on Sentinel Celts and if you have not read it everyone should. It makes the very valid point, particularly in light of the lessons Resolution 12 has taught us , that the PLC model not only does not reflect the values that the Celtic community hold dear but prevents any changes to that model happening and is prepared to go to unacceptable lengths to do so.
The great thing about a spreadsheet is the ability to ask“What if?” and each answer offers a potential new realitythat might be attractive enough to try to create call it Back to the Future.
The model at this link contains various assumptions thatare challengeable and the purpose in presenting it is solely to get us thinking about what about Celtic is important to us?
That will obviously vary according to each individual’s experience, but hopefully in sharing those thoughts a consensus might emerge as to the direction the community rather than the PLC wish Celtic to head.
The spreadsheet model has notes to reveal the thinking behind the figures but this bit of text from the model is worth setting out here to provide a bit more context.
Key assumptions
Ditch Sky and form SPFL TV as streaming channel
Celtic matches played either Sat or Sunday fixed KO and not in competition with other SPFL games. The Rangers FC Ltd do same
Other clubs keep income from their supporters viewingbut are guaranteed a bottom figure.
Objective
To make Celtic a recognised well run NOT For Profit GLOBAL COMMUNITY CLUB that truly reflects the ethos of that community
To pave the way to giving all Membership Scheme participants a single vote on Celtic business policy based on Celtic’s greatest resource – its supporters and their values as a community.
The spreadsheet for a Membership Scheme model can be viewed at
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-X3f5S7iLvhXGCLBFwLvpbX42FWPIS25/view
Mickey Edwards 22nd June 2020 at 16:34
Sorry but I just can't get my head around this idea what Budge did scuppered the process.
Various reports indicated many were never going to go for it even if Nelson Mandela had come back from the grave to lead the process.
Even when it came to the SPFL's own final option of 14,10,10,10 Peterhead's General Manager Martin Johnston on the radio on Saturday said he believed 41 out of the 42 clubs responded to the SPFL's request for an indication on how clubs may view, what was first a proposal and then a working paper.
He then said a they received a memo from the SPFL that there was 'clear enough support for a permanent 14,10,10,10 structure to merit a vote'.
On that basis you would expect a closer vote than the 16 who said yes to such a plan.
So either some clubs were lying in their initial response or the SPFL were being somewhat loose in their interpretation of what constitutes 'enough support'. Especially given the way votes need to be counted per division.
As Tom English then questioned, was this all just a back covering exercise?
Johnston then pointed out he felt the Reconstruction Task Force got shot down before they even managed to present any papers or proposals and he saw the whole thing as a waste of time and effort.
As Johnston then questioned, why did the SPFL not just get the mood of everyone regards reconstruction right from the off, it was indeed their next step in the plan.
16 clubs or around a third were in favour of reconstruction to deal with the current situation.
13 clubs supported a review of the SPFL's handling of resolution (also 2 abstentions)
Yes the minority but significant enough to say all is not well with the game in this country.
As I said the Hearts/Thistle petition may not get past the first hurdle but if it does fans should be cheering to the rafters that the court process may help give us some real insight into the workings of a failing organisation.
On the matter of the impact of Covid19 on Scottish football and Hearts/Thistle reaction at fighting their corner, the fact is there isn't a corner, its a circle and Scottish football is in it.
I've posted this link before.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grXBBzNtm2Y
Hearts/Thistle are the guy whose spoon is broken. It is time for club allegiances to be set aside and look for a collective solution.
This isn't like a normal relegation, it has been akin to a game of musical chairs where not having a chair when the music stops, is having much more serious consequences than was the case before the music started.
My previous community club post requires the dependence on Sky money to end. Had that not been a consideration would the current dilemma exist ?
We can either feed each other or starve.
Jingso.Jimsie 22nd June 2020 at 11:58
Jingso.Jimsie 22nd June 2020 at 11:58
Around a year ago today
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-talks-over-ibrox-capacity-18783817
………….
Was just about to say just before i read Homunculus 22nd June 2020 at 12:16
from what i remember reading it can’t be done as it is something to do with drainage, that is why Charles Green wanted to build a bigger ibrox.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/archives/news/72230/ill-build-a-bigger-ibrox/
The reason why the ibrox pitch is always so bad was the dranage. happy to be corrected.
Build a bigger ibrox has always been the pipe dream down ibrox way ever since Celtic built a bigger stadium, the only way they will get more bums on seats is if God left me a chair many times over;-)
Ps. I never really looked at the TU/TD. now that they are not there,i am looking for them.
And Mickey Edwards 22nd June 2020 at 10:53 as a new poster and a Hibs fan, i have found some of your posts interesting. Just my thoughts.
StevieBC 22nd June 2020 at 12:08
We’ve seen this several times before when the blog is being distracted / deflected in the expectation of some news to be announced in the game.
………………….
I thought it was just me who noticed that.
Sorry to report that the company which is trying to leverage several hundreds of pounds from us for the use of an image (which was only a crowd-shot on a hot day illustrating a comment about record temperatures last August) are not going away and are now threatening legal action.
I think our status as a limited company, which is simply there to avoid mods being held personally responsible for any libellous remarks that could be made by a malicious poster. has drawn some ££££ signs up on this company, (PicRights).
I have explained that we never served or hosted the image, and that it was merely an embedded link in a comment that went unnoticed. When we received their follow-up to our explanation they have demanded £600 that we do not have. I am not so sure that getting the £600 is their overarching aim here reading between the lines of the communication so far.
The dilemma is that although I am not at all sure we have breached any IP rights, the cost of seeking legal advice is almost exactly the same as the cost of settling with these shysters – and of course there would a double hit if legal advice showed that we were in fact liable.
So the bottom line is that on top of the recent trojan attacks, DoS episodes, and other stuff, if we don't get a favourable reply from PicRights (something I am not sure a debt collection agency will provide), we may have to close up shop.
There is an irony in us being forced to liquidate to avoid debts, but we have always been on the margins cash-wise.
Please let me state that this not a plea for financial assistance. If a spurious image-use is being used as a stick to beat us with, I am not sure it will end there.
I will of course keep you all posted, hopefully with some good news.
wottpi
I don't know how many way I can say this but one more.
She was given the opportunity to chair a group to restructure the leagues which in turn would ensure Hearts would stay in the top league. Her first action was to state that she would only accept that if it was temporary.
If you cannot see anything self defeating than that then I have no more to offer.
It doesn't matter what was set in other clubs' minds, given the opportunity no-one should expect success if they immediately create opposition.
Remember now, the lowering of the pitch was all about the 8 year old clubs 150 year aniversary.
Will post the link and the mods can remove if they want. All about the drainage and the water table and cost and the view from the club deck that i found interesting. lower the pitch at a cost that would not pay for itself for many years and the ones at the back of the club deck get a restricted view and shafted for their old car park space as half of the Albion car park has been sold off.
Those old debenture holders in the club deck must be wondering why did i ever bother.
http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/topic/326080-ibrox-expansion-lowering-the-pitch/page/2/#comments
Big Pink 22nd June 2020 at 19:21
Sorry to report that the company which is trying to leverage several hundreds of pounds from us for the use of an image (which was only a crowd-shot on a hot day illustrating a comment about record temperatures last August) are not going away and are now threatening legal action.
:
:
So the bottom line is that on top of the recent trojan attacks, DoS episodes, and other stuff, if we don’t get a favourable reply from PicRights (something I am not sure a debt collection agency will provide), we may have to close up shop.
=============================
That all seems a bit out of order BP, but threats and litigation are the way of the world these days. Keep us up to date with developments, particularly for those making regular contributions.
If the worst comes about then a voluntary liquidation would appear the sensible way out. You can always resurrect the site as “The SFM”, and transfer the posting history.
I believe that it is a perfectly normal process.
I’ll return to my “mothballed” status meantime.
Big Pink 22nd June 2020 at 19:21
Some very jealous people out there see this site has a very healthy daily contribution from old and New posters.
Big Pink 22nd June 2020 at 19:21
There is an irony in us being forced to liquidate to avoid debts, but we have always been on the margins cash-wise.
easyJambo 22nd June 2020 at 19:59
You can always resurrect the site as “The SFM”, and transfer the posting history.
……………….
Irony? change to The SFM.
poetic licence i would call it.
EJ
Will keep everyone posted. The company concerned is of the "scour the internet in search of images" variety and appear to be ruthless in pursuit of cash.
Trouble is I really don't believe that this is an IP infringement, but we can't afford the legal fees to find out.
Again, I would ask if there are any legal types on here who could give me a steer on what our rights and responsibilities are. Not sure if good faith arguments come into it, but it is a public forum and I don't see how we should be held liable for something a poster put in a comment.
I know the law is often counter-intuitive. Would like to know if this is one of those instances.
BP, You might be interested in this article, if you have not already read it. It mentions PicRights specifically. they sound like carpetbaggers
https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/website-permissions/linking/
Thanks Scott. On that basis, we’re fecked ?
On the bright side it’s not all that clear what someone putting an embedded link on a comment is. Is it deep linking or is it a frame. It’s neither from my perspective. There is case law in England that suggests it’s not a rebroadcast if we couldn’t be expected to know the source site had published illegally. And the fact that we didn’t use it to make profit.
There appears to be some EU case law that suggests that there is no copyright infringement merely by posting a link to a publicly accessible site.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/european-court-decision-copyright-owner-consent-not-required-to-hyperlink-or-embed-l
EJ
It was an embedded link that the poster added. Had it been a clickable link it would have been fine, but it was a piece of html injected into the post.
File was never served by us. I get the feeling that the site that was serving the file is beyond the reach of PicRights so they’ve come after us.
If it was £50 I wouldn’t mind, but £600 is not feasible for us.
32,000 tickets sold. Cash paid and credit applied for. Ordinarily I'd have my doubts; but then companies have a responsibility to investors and shareholders to report the facts; so the MSM cannot be blamed for reporting inaccuracies; if said company issue statements to this effect. Whether they stack up or not is for another day. Based on the inaugural post old-co uptake, the numbers are feasible as much as they are gullible. Gullible 'Math' is important, for example: 1891* – 2003 – 2005 – 2009 – 2010 to ∞ (infinity) = 50.
Big Pink 22nd June 2020 at 23:15
Advise them that the image should have contained a protected piece of code in its it's HTML blocking the copying and pasting option or should have contained the copyright infringement notice therefore the person copying and pasting the HTML link to the image on your site was intending or was unintentially causing malice.
Advise you wish to see the copyrighted HTML text and its warning notice that should have alerted sites the consequences of copyright, however ask them to show their policy regards a third party attaching to another site and the consequences and what filters they have inbedded to alert sites of malicious behaviour.
The onus is not on you to prove anything and you already have a disclaimer that you are not liable for the actions of others that post standard HTML or any URL that may appear without your knowledge as a copyrighted image, there was no warning when the image appeared that it was an an image that infringed copyright and if it was and brought to your attention then you took the approriate action to remove it.
Fucking chancers
Mickey Edwards22nd June 2020 at 19:30
I think that's my point. You keep harping on about it thinking it is going to change anything.
Maybe Budge wasn't tactful in this instance but for me it rates a 2 out of 10 in terms of importance when assessing the cluster£&@k the game finds itself in, not a mention every few posts.
You will of course note that the SPFL are reported today to be considering what is effectively a "temporary adjustment" to the lower divisions "as a consequence of these exceptionsl circumstances".
I wonder where that idea came from?
BP
Check a post in moderation with advice on the image issue. Looks useful.
Thumbs.
I've just read Phil's latest piece and it saddens me. Why the need to consciously and seemingly deliberately, in carefully arranged manner, to single out Morelos?
'Senor Alflredo Jose Morelos Avilez'? '..good to see him back from Columbia and out of quarantine looking suitably svelte and ready for action.? QUARANTINE? Really? Does Phil really not know the difference between quarantine and 'self isolation'? But then, far be it from me to explain the difference in definition between this, I could go on and explain the difference between stenography, journalism and fact.
Why not just 'Morelos' or 'Alfie' ('Alfie' as he entitles his piece). I for one couldn't have given John Humphreys his full name on Mastermind.
And then he (Phil) in his piece, goes on to refer to the 'Ibrox Klanbase' and … 'Fascists have feelings too you know'. Klanbase? REALLY?
C'mon folks. Besides his racist overtones, Phil's rugger man has kicked his last penalty.
Auldheid/BigBoab1916
Thanks for that. I did see a piece on a legal site that seems to back up what you say.
The problem is that the embedded link in the post was to a site
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/
I don't know who or what that site is, but if it belongs to the rights holder, there was no warnings about use. Of course if it was a site using an unauthorised copy there is no way we could be expected to know that.
Also worth noting that the site will not serve the image any longer, which suggests that it possible they have belatedly denied access to their own image – something they should have done in the first place.
Being non-legal though, it just seems to me to be unfair that they should expect a fee that is so high for something that is of little consequence. It is a standard shot of football fans at a match.
Not a good exercise in talking up the positive side of human nature
Big Pink
23rd June 2020 at 01:11
Is it worth reaching out to other football forums and individual clubs fans forums Mods to see if they have encountered a similar issue?
While a believer in cock ups as opposed to conspiracies has hanky panky been ruled out. That being the offending post wasn't placed as a 'sleeper' for these sharks to come along and take action at a later date?
On a lighter note maybe James Anderson might like to help the site out!
Big Pink – PM
Cheers
Reading Auldheid's ideas to take the PLC out of Celtic makes you wonder if Peter Lawwell will ever be seen as a positive force by anyone other than the PLC board and DD, the main preference share holder, who rakes in a large six figure sum each year.
There is no chance the PLC will be at all open to conversation of such change as long as the chance to somehow gain access to more lucrative pastures remains in the orbit of Lawwell at the European Club Association (ECA).
Societal shifts nearly always filter downwards. From economics to the age of in your face spin. The broad aims of the main players at the ECA runs more or less parallel to neoliberal economics and unless the whole economic shooting match was to undergo fundamental change away from forever pushing the flow of wealth and power upwards then that same power will, by hook or by crook, hang on in there.
The known unknown is the question of just how bad will the economic situation become in the next few months/years, what it will look like and what actions/changes will result from it.
My guess is that those with far too much concentrated power have known that sooner or later something nasty was coming down the track and if not completely prepared, will have a good broad idea of how to react. In fact, it's probably a matter of speeding up measures already being put in place . It will involve technology and look to better control the population at various levels and different ways.
How would that filter down to football clubs ?
I'd venture that the big PLC's will dominate and those others that manage to continue will significantly downsize becoming part-time/amateur. New generations of supporter will be pointed towards the PLC's and as far as Scottish football is concerned, it'll be unrecognisable compared to today.
At the moment, there is an upsurge in community spirit and collectives have sprung up and in some cases football clubs have been at the centre of it, eg. Stenhousemuir FC. This is a big positive but the powers that be won't want the idea of collectives to gain much traction and will look for ways to prevent people from coming together and using that power to try and better their lot. Think Thatcher, partly destroying trade unions back at the onset of neoliberalism. The 80's, the last time a club outside the big two Glasgow clubs won the league.
Generally, it's going to be a period for major shifts/changes and after four decades of accumulated wealth and power, agendas at the big PLC's will be difficult to stop. As far as Celtic PLC are concerned, they have the main bulk of the support where they want them and will point to eg., charitable foundations, in an effort to justify links to the past.
Big Pink 22nd June 2020 at 20:56
EJ
Will keep everyone posted. The company concerned is of the “scour the internet in search of images” variety and appear to be ruthless in pursuit of cash.
…………….
Let’s say i work for said company and in my spare time have a wee read of some sites. Not a lot of cash at the moment so why don’t i post a pic on a site and when i go back into work chase that site up for £600.
Chancers i would call it
wottpi@23:54
"I think that's my point. You keep harping on about it thinking it is going to change anything."
I know that talking about will change nothing but I do believe that there are differing views on the matter that are worthy of respect by all.
In that post also was the first time any acknowledgement from you as to the in/advisability of her stance appeared. From the off you echoed her cries that everyone else was acting under self interest and that was punishing HMFC. Her stance on taking the chair of the working group, by insisting on a temporary fix, was immediately to make public that what she was concerned with was self interest on behalf of her club.
No matter what you think about others already having made up their minds there is no proof of that but what we do have is proof that Ann Budge entered into a no preconditions review insisting that the self interest of HMFC should be accepted as a restriction.
My problem has never been whether the working group would have successfully resulted in reorganisation but the accusations and assertions that followed in which Heart's stance was that everyone else were at fault through their self interest but not Hearts. This is the sort if attitude that we see on a regular basis coming from Ibrox, it is not one that I would expect from Tynecastle.
If the premise made by Hearts that they "could have" reached safety is accepted then we cannot ignore the fact that many other clubs "could have" achieved better. Are we then to accept that they all deserve compensation or that they all should take legal action? Or do you want TRFC to go to court to have Celtic stripped of the title because it "could have" ended up at Ibrox?
What Hearts, Partick and Stranraer have suffered in an attempt to deal with a situation that the pandemic has created is the extreme end of the scale, although it could be argued that TRFC's denial of Champions league income is worse, but all clubs are financially disadvantaged by the pandemic and a good number further disadvantaged by the ending of the leagues. We need to accept that these are exceptional times and how we deal with them can never be perfect. How we move on from here will decide what future damage Scottish football will face.
Mickey Edwards 23rd June 2020 at 10:06
I agree, due to these unique circumstances, everybody probably needs to take a hit one way or the other.
The question is how big should that hit be and is it reasonable for the biggest part of that hit to be focussed on a minority of members. (see Auldheids video contribution)
Hearts and Thistle feel the ‘ask’ by the SPFL is far too big. It really is that simple.
On the radio on Saturday it was mentioned that a start of season payment was usually handed out in August.
Premiership teams will receive £660k a piece. Championship clubs £66k. No idea what the minuscule sums are for the lower divisions.
Therefore the £100k to £200k drop you mention as being suffered by Hibs moving to 7th spot is but a drop in the ocean when compared to a club being relegated from the Premiership in a curtailed season that did not allow them to win or lose on the pitch.
Hearts and Ann Budge have been ahead of the curve in this pandemic.
They were first to realise running costs such as wages would need to be controlled. They took absolute pelters for it in the MSM from commentators pundits and ex players and low and behold, Hibs, Aberdeen etc are all cost cutting and pleading with players to take a cut like its going out of fashion.
Les Gray talked about seeking permanent reconstruction but as we seen yesterday, regards Leagues 1 & 2, football is facing a situation, which Budge highlighted weeks ago in her interview on Radio Scotland, where some teams might not even be able to play. Therefore it is ‘temporary adjustments’ that are required for a changing situation.
How daft would it have been if 14,10,10,10 had been agreed last week for season 2020/21 only for the end of this week for the SPFL to say no, we are having to go with with 12,10,16, mothballed?
If Stranraer say they can play next season and others can’t will they be included in League 1, expanded or otherwise, or will their relegation stand? If playing in League 1 they will effectively have been spared relegation, through circumstances outwith their control and not by results on the pitch.
Meanwhile they could be playing against Partick Thistle who will have been relegated through circumstances outwith their control and not by results on the pitch.
Now the results may have been exactly the same at the end of the day but I am assuming this is the thrust of the Hearts / Partick petition.
If getting money to the clubs was the main priority you could have a) dealt with it by loans or advance payments or b) call the leagues and splashed the cash. However, you could have declared champions and agreed (or at least pencilled in) the Euro slots but kept promotion and relegation and potential league structures on the back burner until a clearer position on the virus situation was known. That would have given everyone time to assess where they were and how best the league, as a whole, would progress.
Instead we have these piecemeal decisions being made with all the required information regards clubs intentions for 2020/21 unknown and sudden deadlines popping up all over the place.
Never a good way to make the best decisions.
As I discussed a few weeks ago, in the event of mothballing how do you then deal with promotion, and more so relegation from an expanded League 1 to get back to 12,10,10,10.
Is it fair that , lets say, Edinburgh City, Elgin and Cowdenbeath could find themselves jumping from league 2 into League 1 for 2020/21 and then, over a shortened number of games, achieve spots in the top of that division thus securing League 1 football for 2021/22 when in normal circumstances they may have still been fighting it out in League 2.
The resolution on 10 April was supposed to be designed to draw a line under things, pay out money and give a degree of certaintly regards how best to plan going forward.
We are now at 23 June and still there is no obvious plan or clear solutions for how the SPFL are dealing with this crisis for the good of the game and their members, as a whole.
Hi folks. We've decided to do a proper audit of the site to ensure there are no unauthorised pics. We've changed some header pics as we are worried there may be doubts about provenance.
If one stray image can cost £600, there's no telling how much else folk could find if we had misstepped.
stifflersmom 23rd June 2020 at 00:15
As I understand it someone returning to the UK from abroad is quarantined. That is the terminology which is being used.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-52544307
21 June 2020
"A two-week quarantine period for anyone arriving in the UK is now being enforced."
Nice Ocean ripple effect or is it Glass?
https://www.docdroid.net/xcy36g8/petition-of-heart-of-midlothian-football-club-and-another-p-20-petition-pdf
………………
Don’t think there are any images so hope ok.
CONTACT SFM.
The link you followed has expired.
…………
Treid to send a message by CONTACT SFM but got the above so sent an email
Cluster One 23rd June 2020 at 12:53
Like wet paint ! But no problem .
https://sfm.scot/contact-us/
BP@12.00
Fingers crossed for the audit. Would an emergency funding request be an non-starter?
Ex Ludo. Definitely not. Only so many times we can go to the well. Already do two fund raiders every year. Next one is due at end of the month and we’re not doing that just to fill the coffers of what amounts to an extortionist.
No fund raising until this goes away.
Big Pink 22nd June 2020 at 23:15
…
I get the feeling that the site that was serving the file is beyond the reach of PicRights so they’ve come after us.
If it was £50 I wouldn’t mind, but £600 is not feasible for us.
========
Absolutely, BP.
And £50 is significantly better than receiving nothing for these vultures.
StevieBC
Since found out that it was The Guardian that was serving the file.
Curiously, the link is now met with a permissions error.
I suspect that the correct security was not put in place to protect the file until it was spotted.
That would mean that they are trying to get us to pay for their mistake.
wottpi@11:20
Not sure that your judgement on the hit that Hearts will take is all that severe. I am not in any way experienced in finances but to my uneducated mind to compare the 2015 and 2016 seasons accounts when Hearts were in firstly the championship and later the top league would perhaps be indicative of what to expect.
The year in the championship showed a turnover of about £7M and the following year in the top league a turnover was around £9M. The latter figure included about £1.5M in income from transfers that was not equaled the previous year. It was also a season when they finished third in the league and so give a higher income.
No doubt my presumptions will be torn apart by those more experienced but it is a starting point.
Now your finances will be negatively affected by the way your wage bill has soared by an increase in your playing squad to point that is so out of kilter with the club's earning potential. Your point that Budge was pilloried by the press for looking for cuts in players wages is also misleading. I think it's fair to say that our respect for any action by the media has long since departed and their attacks are of no consequence. We must though look at the reasons that Budge did this so early. In her own words this was made essential because when she first took the reins she changed the wage structure from being mostly win bonuses to a much higher basic wage. Combine this with the huge hike in playing squad size meant that the club were vulnerable when income ceased. The win bonus based wage structure is recognised as the more appropriate means of paying wages in football so has a bad decision been made as far as the business side of Hearts is concerned. You must also ask if this maybe contributed to the performances you saw from your team. That is for Hearts supporters to decide of course but I can't accept that the other teams are wrong for having left the decisions on wage cuts till later. More time has been taken by them to assess what an uncertain future holds for their clubs. There has also been no wholesale use of threats of contract cancellation of the type that Budge opted for. There was of course a more pressing need for her in that the higher base wage incurred a bigger drain on the finances so "being ahead of the curve" is not necessarily a compliment that she deserves. These are all results created internally by the club and not the fault of other teams.
The rest of your post has been already been answered by my belief that uncertainty will continue well into the future as the world is flying by the seat of its pants through this new world catastrophe.
If you want to get into detail on planning perhaps work with what is most likely thing to happen in the near future, the restarting of the top league in August. With the start probably meaning games for some will more than one a week what happens if a referee shows symptoms after officiating two games in one week? Isolation for 14 days for the six teams involved would mean the cancellation of up to 24 games. Is this really workable?
I can't help feeling that I am falling in line with those that believe I am posting too frequently.
My reason is that my whole intention at the beginning was to point out that to claim that other clubs acting out of self interest was somehow an attack on Hearts while their statement of intent was so full of acting through self interest on their own behalf. This would only result in any clubs open to discussion being forced to look to themselves.
I think that I have made my point as clearly as I can so I will try to reduce my output. I can't promise though as having to self shield leaves you sometimes fighting boredom.
No idea what the current position to the end of the 2020 financial year but Hearts accounts to end of June 2019 show
Turnover – £15, 067m
Wages – £8,220m or 54.5% of turnover
Hibs accounts to same period of the end of June 2019 show
Turnover £10,800m
Wages £6.350m or 58.8% of turnover.
Hearts list the following
Players and Staff – 122 (up 6 from 2018)
Commercial & Admin – 71 (up 21 from 2018)
Part time hospitality – 146
Hibs only list
Players and Staff – 75 (up 11 from 2018)
Commercial and admin – 35 (static)
(No mention of part time hospitality staff, so have to presume it is outsourced)
Therefore even if you totally discount the part-time hospitality staff at Tynecastle and divide the total wage bill of £8,220m by the 193 main staff members it works out at an average £42.6k per employee
Down at Easter Road they are dividing £6,350m between only 110 employees resulting in an average salary of £57.7k per employee.
So, to the end of 2019, even with a larger number of players and staff, lower costs per employee and lower percentage of wages to turnover at Tynecastle than at Easter Road, but at the end of 2019 neither club outrageous in terms of wages to turnover ratio (as it should be).
Maybe there has been a change at Tynecastle this past season, as clearly a handful of new and bigger money signings can alter things, but I'd guess a wage structure is in place and would be surprised if there was an almighty spike in the ratio.
Frankly I'm not overly concerned with the financial predicament Hibs find themselves in having to pay off academy staff and close the operation down. Its up to their players if they want to follow the path of outrage as trodden by Tam McManus or get real.
Going forward each club will have their own issues to worry about rather than mulling over those of another club.
Apart form T'Rangers of course, they always need to be kept under full financial scrutiny
.
Mickey Edwards 23rd June 2020 at 18:11
Mickey, I know the feeling but maybe don't stop posting, just broaden things out a bit.
If the court case gets going that will really give us something to get our teeth into.
Plenty other things to be discussed other than Hearts and Ann Budge.
For instance we are nowhere near knowing whats going to be happening re grassroots footballs restarting.
One issue is that is on my mind was asked of the SYFA recently regards not being able to get first aid courses updated.
Their response was as follows:-
So I have a previous certificate that expired during lockdown and my fellow coach has a first aid qualification via his work, but, if nothing gets sorted soon, neither of us will have the required up to date SYFA specific course.
The worry is, if grass roots football does restart our kids might not be able to play due to the red tape.
Whats is better? Festering in front of an X-box/Playstation or kids getting back to training and games with the minimal risk of needing first aid, especially when I view myself and my fellow coach as being more than competent to deal with injuries.
Big Pink 23rd June 2020 at 17:42
StevieBC
Since found out that it was The Guardian that was serving the file.
Curiously, the link is now met with a permissions error.
I suspect that the correct security was not put in place to protect the file until it was spotted.
That would mean that they are trying to get us to pay for their mistake.
Thats what i posted in my reply further back, even Phil Mac's site contains a no copy protection when attempting to cut and paste his images. So basically when sites do not carry a hands off warning then they are fair game as a user will not without warning.notification be able to determine if the image in use is royalty free or is exempt if used for educational or iforming purposes.
Do not even reply to them let it be and use freee image search software to verifym, as long as you are taking action to protect copyright, you are doing all that is required.
Free software that can be used to search and to reverse search. Two below of many free to use.
https://www.pixsy.com/
https://tineye.com/
Wottpi@19:00
I'm afraid you miss the point. Your comment that Budge was "ahead of the curve" suggested that other clubs weren't acting in their own best interests. My point about the reason for it being earlier than others was taken directly from a Budge radio interview.
While my comment regarding the accounts was done without a background in accounting the general drift was suppose to be that the difference the last time a two league comparison could be made showed that there was not a huge. If I had wanted to take that further I could argue that comparing income from closed door games in two leagues will be even less.
You are right that the club accounts are a concern for the individual club and their fans alone. As I have repeatedly said though our conversation stems from your accusations that for clubs OTHER than Hearts to act through self interest is bad and Hearts self interest is good.
Still, it has been an interesting conversation.
wottpi@20:11
I totally agree and it is why I raised the point of next season stopping and starting.
The point I made about 24 games being cancelled because of one positive test did not include others that may by affected by track and trace from footballers having contact with the outside world. A fag packet calculation leaves me believing that 3 or 4 positive tests would make it impossible to conclude next season as well.
Are we to have a repeat of this year's aggravation next year? We could see those who are seeking to get promotion/relegation put on hold going through the courts next year with a petition that is completely the opposite.
Too much uncertainty.
Mickey Edwards 24th June 2020 at 09:42
The issue if what happens if games have to be postponed next season due to a Covid outbreak is interesting. Especially if the season cannot be completed again or one or more teams cannot, due to time constraints, complete their allocated number of games.
However, depending on how the petition goes, the SPFL could have locked themselves into a situation where their take it or leave it, Points Per Game formula is used again to determine league positions.
In the event of a general second wave or a football related outbreak we could again find a situation of teams being declared champions or being relegated by a lottery.
Given the majority vote for such measures this past season I trust very few clubs will complain if they find themselves down the bottom of the table.
Mickey Edwards 24th June 2020 at 09:42
PS I believe, in legal terms, the ongoing petition is specific to the resolution, the manner in which it was handled and the resulting outcome for season 2020/21. It is not asking for anything to be written into stone for future seasons.
If the petition fails and the same thing was to happen next season I suspect that Hearts/Thistle and perhaps others may simply suggest the best solution is for a ‘temporary adjustment’ to league structures that does the least harm to all members in these uncertain times. Therefore Hearts/Thistle would be wholly consistent in their stance as that was their position this past season.
If the petition fails and the same thing was to happen next season and the SPFL come up with a different solution, then surely questions will be asked again as to why that wasn’t available this season. (The reason most likely the conditions of the Sky deal).
If the petition succeeds and the same thing was to happen next season then the SPFL will no doubt have to review all matters again and try and come up with what they believe is the best solution for that point in time.
Given their conviction this years solution was the best then I wouldn’t be surprised if they pursued the same approach, thus being ‘locked in’ by a blinkered approach.
wottpi 23rd June 2020 at 20:11
Mickey Edwards 23rd June 2020 at 18:11
Mickey, I know the feeling but maybe don’t stop posting, just broaden things out a bit.
……………..
On the broaden things.
Been asking about what a few have been doing since there is no football. Although all have said they miss the football i have been given mixed reviews about watching the games with no fans, ie. “It is on but i’m not bothered”. Rubbish.etc.
Many have took the time to learn something New. Play the piano, learn the guitar, took up fitness and gave up the drink, started painting etc.
How many fans will be lost to the game now that many have taken to fill up their free time with other things and the routine of football being broken?
Clubs may have to do more now to keep the average fan on board, if a cycle can be broken these last few months have taken a sledgehammer to it.
Many, many fans have already been lost to the game due to the corruption of the governing bodies of the game, how many will feel it is just not worth it anymore and will just become one of those fans that just enjoy the odd day out for a cup final.
Cluster One 24th June 2020 at 13:01
Yes indeed and I posted a while back re my concerns about what this means for the future of the game.
In terms of fans we will just have to see. Some may drop away but others may realise how much they miss the game and actually attend more when crowds are allowed back in.
However, my main fear is that this will all set our clubs and national team back regards developing the next generation of home grown players.
John Collins was very passionate on the radio on Saturday re how best to develop the players of tomorrow. He was very critical of potentially closing down academy programmes and was supportive of the Colts idea.
The logic being we need our developing players to be playing in a 'real' environment and not always in age groups. Paraphrasing – he intimated that what you might be able to get away with in terms of skills in an age group game might be a lot harder versus an experienced semi-pro on a £50 win bonus.
None of the boys in the team I coach are at a level where they will play pro (I'm no Alex Ferguson!!) but the situation is still the same. While all my team have said they want to return for next season, how many decent young players will end up drifting away from the game over this period come the time they might restart.
In my experience kids who are decent at one sport are often blessed with the physicality and skills that result in them being fairly decent rugby players, golfers, tennis players etc. The lack of football may see them take up opportunities elsewhere in other sports that, through accident or design, are harnessing their resources and planning for the future.
If Scottish Football doesn't grasp this part of the problem we could just end up dropping further down the rankings and relying on imports.
I may be wrong but I have not seen anything re forward or contingency planning in these areas.
It's the steady breaking of the cycle that has been the problem for a while now. No set day/time for kick off means no definite time where the diary can be block booked. The invite to go to the in-laws placed three weeks in advance can't be rejected with "Naw, that's when I meet the mates for a pint before going to the match".
I don't like the swing towards season tickets either. I think it makes the clubs lazy and leaves the fans without any power other than at renewal time. It may allow the clubs to plan more easily but it takes away the need to improve mid season if they know the money is already in the bank. I've not attended regularly for a long time now but when I did consider returning on a regular basis it was the whole season book idea that put me off. It doesn't make me any less of a fan though. I'm not a TV football supporter and I normally prefer listening to the games.
Interesting development regards what Mickey and I were discussing earlier.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53167718?intlink_from_url=&link_location=live-reporting-story
So now the SPFL board are seeking control over Covid 19 related decisions for next season.
Will be interesting to see where folks stand on that, given nearly a third of members clearly wanted a review of the decisions and handling of the Covid 19 related resolution from this past season.
Just the other week the SPFL appeared to be promoting and basking in the glory of a huge democratic majority passing their resolution but now they don't seem to trust the self same system to deal with future issues.
wottpi,
I suppose it means that all the clubs would be united with only one target to blame and everybody won't be at each other's throats.
I doubt that's their thinking though. They're sleekit and not to be trusted. It's more likely that they don't want others to interfere with their dealings with the broadcasters.
wottpi 24th June 2020 at 15:06
“…So now the SPFL board are seeking control over Covid 19 related decisions for next season”
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Without seeing the full text of the Resolution it’s difficult to decide whether or not it is an indication that the Board now realise that they might have got things very badly wrong and that this resolution is one that should have been discussed and voted upon before any decision about calling the league, or relegation (and the basis of it ) was ever discussed!
If they have indeed recognised the (no doubt well-intentioned but driven by panic ) mistakes both of substance and form that they made, perhaps the SPFL will hold out an olive branch to the Petitioners by offering to negotiate ,without precondition on the part of either party, a way of arriving at a temporary solution that will avoid relegations now, if the Petitioners agree to withdraw their legal action and participate in urgent discussions now, before the ‘resolution’ of today goes for discussion.
Clearly, if the SPFL are now seeking powers to deal with the effects of covid -19, then by inference they must think that what they have already done was done without the necessary powers and is therefore questionable.
If they have been so advised, I for one will be glad.
Much, much better if a sports governance body does not take upon itself powers that it does not have!
[ If, when RFC plc was put into Liquidation, the SFA, SPL and SFL had simply and openly acknowledged the truth that it was Liquidation and that RFC of1872 had ceased to exist as a participant in Scottish Professional Football in the same way that Gretna, Third Lanark etc had done, and that they had no powers to allow the newly admitted CG club even to claim to be RFC of 1872 never mind to market itself commercially as such, how much more credibility would our governance bodies have!
But for all we know, today’s ‘resolution’ might be another sneaky, fundamentally dishonest attempt to acquire powers that may be used with less than acceptable levels of accountability( the wee story about the fox and the scorpion is based on a wealth of human experience)]
John Clark 24th June 2020 at 22:09
According to the BBC article the letter sent to clubs said.
Therefore, as per T'Rangers admission into the league, the board made some up some new ones (of their choosing) and put it to members.
In an emergency such as this, I can see the logic of the executive perhaps being given powers to allow quick decisions to be made and remove all these lengthy meetings, sub-groups etc.
However as we have seen in this current debacle the SPFL Board included three members whose clubs could be said to have benefited from the resolution being proposed.
Motherwell secured third place along with the associated prize money and a Euro spot.
Hamilton avoided the potential of being in a fight to avoid relegation
Brechin avoided the potential of a fight for SPFL survival.
In a members organisation where clubs put forward representatives to be voted onto the board, it is difficult, in certain circumstances, to see how an executive could avoid charges of 'self interest' amongst board members depending on who was on the board at the time of the emergency and the nature of the 'emergency'.
Yes, allow the executive to take control in an emergency but transparency should always be the main aim.
We have no idea if Burrows, Gray and Ferguson championed the resolution with full gusto or took a back seat knowing the potential for a yes vote clearly protected their clubs interests.
As discussed earlier it is hard to see the required numbers of the membership supporting the current board given around a third of them wanted an independent inquiry on the handing of the Good Friday resolution.
BrianMclauchlinSport@BBCBMcLauchlin
Hearts and Partick Thistle case against SPFL and others to have initial hearing on Tuesday 30th June at 10.00am at court of Session. Hearing will take place via teleconference. This stage will determine further procedure.
The SPFL board are seeking control over Covid 19 related decisions for next season
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Wouldn't it have been much better to have just had a comprehensive Independent Inquiry into the SPFL executive. It would, one way or tuther, have made this proposal a less contentious question.
Is it a good idea to give more power to arrogant incompetence and untrustworthy schemers ?
Very obvious answer.
easyJambo 25th June 2020 at 13:23
'…Hearing will take place via teleconference. .
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Good spot, eJ.
Incidentally, have you noticed on the Rolls page the distinction made between public and media when it comes to Outer House as opposed to Inner House business- see the italics I've added :
"The Courts are committed to promoting access to virtual hearings when possible and appropriate in the current challenging circumstances. Currently the media and public may be able to access substantive Inner House hearings and the media may be able to access certain Outer House procedural hearings. Please contact Judicial Communications for further details."
I tried to contact 'Judicial Communications' using the Courts' email page to ask whether that was a policy matter or just a mistaken omission of a second reference to 'the public', but the page wouldn't open!
BrianMclauchlinSport@BBCBMcLauchlin
It will be Lord Clark who will be presiding over the Hearts/Partick Thistle case v SPFL and others next week at Court of Session. #bbcsportscot
John Clark 25th June 2020 at 14:17
“The Courts are committed to promoting access to virtual hearings when possible and appropriate in the current challenging circumstances. Currently the media and public may be able to access substantive Inner House hearings and the media may be able to access certain Outer House procedural hearings. Please contact Judicial Communications for further details.”
As I understand it, access by the public to Outer House business is limited to substantive hearings only. If, as Brian McLaughlin suggests, it is only a procedural hearing, then I would not expect public access on Tuesday.
Assuming that is only a “Procedural Hearing”, then no evidence will be heard. Its purpose is to set out and agree on how the case will proceed, with dates set for disclosure of documents, submission of new or amended arguments, future hearings and their expected duration. If witnesses are to be called, or witness statements are to be provided then each party will be asked to submit details.
Given the time frame, then it is possible Hearts/Partick could ask the court for restrictions to be placed on the SPFL by means of interim interdict, e.g. to prevent the issuance of the Premiership fixture list. I think the odds are against that though.
I haven’t seen the SPFL’s answers to the petition, as yet, but the only snippet I have heard is that the SPFL has asked that the issue be referred to the SFA as the recognised football appeal body.
I would expect that Hearts/Partick would argue against that on the basis of a conflict of interest with ND one of the Professional Game Board representatives on the main SFA Board. Most of the arguments involve the application and interpretation of Company Law in any event.
Looks like Tuesday will be a busy one for the cases we have been following
LORD TYRE – T Sadler/C Stark, Clerk
Tuesday 30th June By Orders
CA86/19 David Grier v Philip Gormley &c Kennedys Scotland Ledingham Chalmers LLP
CA9/20 David Whitehouse v Philip Gormley &c A & W M Urquhart SGLD Kennedys Scotland Ledingham Chalmers LLP
CA10/20 Paul Clark v Iain Livingston &c Kennedys Scotland SGLD A & W M Urquhart Ledingham Chalmers LLP
LORD CLARK – L Cranston, Clerk
Tuesday 30th June
By Order
P499/20 Pet: Hearts of Midlothian FC &c for section 994 & 996 of the Companies Act – Gilson Gray LLP – Shepherd & Wedderburn – Lindsays
I note that it is not a “Procedural Hearing” as such, but “By Order”
From the CoS glossary:
By order A hearing of a case put out for the hearing at the instance of the court and not on the motion of a party.
John Clark 25th June 2020 at 15:55
easyJambo 25th June 2020 at 15:00
'..As I understand it, access by the public to Outer House business is limited to substantive hearings only'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Thanks, eJ.
easyJambo 25th June 2020 at 16:25
'..I note that it is not a “Procedural Hearing” as such, but “By Order”
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Can we take it from that ,eJ, that if the SPFL did indeed ask for the matter to be referred to the SFA, it would seem that Lord Clark is in no doubt that the matter is one for the Courts, right from the off?
I would imagine that there wouldn't be any 'reporting restrictions', but with private companies and commercial matters being discussed, who knows?
It would be instructive and probably quite entertaining (depending on who leads for the parties) to be present in person to hear the arguments.
Congratulations to the Scotland Captain, Andy Robertson, on his English Premiership winners medal, to go with the amazing European Champions League ribbon. His rise in the game has IMO, been the best and most uplifting footballing story to come out of Scotland in the last decade.
A league medal won on the pitch, not awarded in an office, on the back of a railroaded and dubious vote process.
Many on SFM have repeatedly commented on how they feel that the official line of there being no sporting advantage gained through the use of EBTs, is simply not logical and are angry at how the MSM aided the narrative to go relatively unchallenged.
Regards current events, I would say that trying to twist the title award for the 2019/20 SPFL season into being completely normal and not giving an asterisk it’s rightful place is a blatant case of trying to twist the truth into something false.
The extraordinary circumstances that led to an uncompleted league needs to be shown as having happened. In Scotland there was a media push to close down conversation on this. I’m reminded of a Harold Pintor quote on receiving his Nobel prize “…Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening…”.
At the end of the month, the Court of Session will provide a reminder that it did happen.
A few days ago the Liverpool manager, Jurgen Klopp said “We don’t expect to get it as a present, we didn’t want to have it on a points per game thing. So we were really happy when it was decided we can play again,”
'John Clark 25th June 2020 at 21:36
Can we take it from that ,eJ, that if the SPFL did indeed ask for the matter to be referred to the SFA, it would seem that Lord Clark is in no doubt that the matter is one for the Courts, right from the off?…'
####################
…or that the matter isn't one for the Courts until all existing SPFL & SFA procedures have been exhausted (which is probably the SPFL's position as regards the action). Then remember that the SFA's JPP decisions seem to be binding on members & do not allow for external legal appeals, so the CoS may have no place in the dispute.
reasonablechap 26th June 2020 at 07:46
A league medal won on the pitch, not awarded in an office, on the back of a railroaded and dubious vote process
…………………..
I believe Celtic being top of the league when the league was called to a hault won the league on the pitch. No other team was ahead of Celtic.
Only downside was that during this pandemic the fans never got to see the team being awarded their Medals on the winners podium,But i can say for sure that all the players never turned up at an office to get their Medals, not when everyone was advised by the Goverment to stay at home.
reasonablechap 26th June 2020 at 07:46
'.I would say that trying to twist the title award for the 2019/20 SPFL season into being completely normal and not giving an asterisk it’s rightful place is a blatant case of trying to twist the truth into something false.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
That is possibly the most ridiculous observation ever made on this blog!
There is absolutely no equivalence between the consciously cheating and lying behaviour of the Football Authorities in creating and sustaining the Big Lie (that TRFC is RFC) and the decision, in the face of Covid-19, to call the League, and relate to the actual sporting position at the time.
It is an absolute truth that RFC of 1872 was liquidated and ceased to participate in football.
It is an absolute truth that TRFC was newly created and admitted into football in 2012.
It is an absolute truth that TRFC is not RFC of 1872.
It is also an absolute truth that when the League was called, Celtic were clearly in pole position.
The calling of the league was not the consequence of sustained cheating and lies.
The Big Lie was the result of a decade of sports cheating by SDM, which you and the fawning lickspittles of the SMSM have for 8 years tried to ignore and deny.
I think someone has started his normal (for him) practice of moving from presenting as, and this time around even naming himself as, reasonable to his default setting, i.e. hellbent on another award of the Order Of The Boot.
Some common or garden trolling includes a bit of Zen enlightenment; "I'm reminded of a …quote". Not very accurately reminded it would seem; the man quoted is named Pinter not Pintor. The quote itself refers to truth.
You know the shark has been well and truly jumped when Spoutpish is lecturing us on truth.
In other news Quasimodo tells us to sit up straight.
"Steven Gerrard doesn't want any fixtures to be played behind closed doors
SPFL and SFA chiefs announced last week that the campaign would be suspended until further notice.
At least one top-flight club is ready to demand league chief Neil Doncaster scraps the season if it cannot be completed.
But SunSport understands that is a non-starter for bosses at Hampden, who are prepared to declare Celtic champions and relegate Hearts.
Whatever happens, Rangers boss Gerrard says the remaining fixtures cannot be played out in empty stadiums, insisting fans are the life blood of the game."
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/5389394/rangers-steven-gerrard-fans-coronavirus/
https://rangers.co.uk/news/club/rangers-position-impact-of-coronavirus-on-scottish-football/
…."Furthermore, we are strongly opposed to playing games behind closed doors. Rangers fans have stuck by our club in the darkest of times. Their loyalty will not be forgotten and they will not be left behind."
Away back to your bed multinames.
Cluster
The salient fact is that the league season was called at a point when INCOMPLETE and two teams were still competing for the title, beyond that is opinion.
Up until that point, Celtic had accrued a significant points advantage, on the pitch.
What came after was not on the pitch.
A title award that the records should list accordingly *
ps. being called a troll for pointing out facts is ironic but not surprising.
Lugosi, thanks for the correction on the Pinter spelling but I note you can’t point to errors regarding the main substantsive point of the post.
I am by now convinced that RC does suffer from argumentative personality disorder (which however, in most cases, is not terminal). The best way to treat this condition is to ignore what said cantankerous person is arguing about and concentrate on their agitated motivation for doing so – if you must!.
This requires a very high level of self-discipline, as the natural inclination is to engage (especially if p*** is being spouted) – thereby exposing oneself to the condition.
If this doesn’t work – show some humanity and leave the poor soul alane!!
Bect67
Ignoring the facts here is covenient.
Why would a title awarded in an INCOMPLETE season not have an asterisk ? I invite someone to actually tell me why instead of getting personal.
You say “…to ignore what said cantankerous person is arguing about …”. Another point of view would identify that person as being someone else, JC (not Jesus).
ps. Lugosi, *substantive
Didn't a club tear up their pitch before the league had been completed , thereby dispelling any notion that they wanted to finish the league on the pitch ? Before any decision to end the leagues had been taken ?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/first-pictures-rangers-tear-ibrox-21832000
reasonablechap 26th June 2020 at 11:19
Cluster.
The salient fact is that the league season was called as there was a pandemic. The goverment and the governing bodies agreed no more games could be played, all clubs agreed celtic were champions.
Are you saying that your opinion on these facts are different and you have a solution against these facts? If you do i would like to hear it.
Cluster One26th June 2020 at 12:56
reasonablechap 26th June 2020 at 11:19
with due respect Cluster One, I would not like to hear it.
Do not feed.
SPFL secretary Iain Blair says clubs face playing spells of four games in eight days this season due to a packed fixture schedule.
They’re looking to publish fixtures in the first week of July.
https://twitter.com/ClydeSSB/status/1276463166222974978/photo/1
Paddy
The new pitch has been ready to go since around the 9th of June.
This predates most leagues returning to the 19/20 season (eg. EPL return being the 17th of June).
Cluster
Thanks for actually playing the ball, not the man.
The main salient point is not about why it was called or the decisions, votes, etc ensued. What you talk about is of course part of the overall discussion.
The very simple fact of there being an INCOMPLETE season, with the title still undecided is why an asterisk or suitable footnote needs to be attached to the 2019/20 Scottish League season.
Thereafter you, me, the club boardrooms, league executives or various QC’s can discuss or argue about what happened next. Whatever opinion that is formed by whoever, doesn’t change the base fact of it being an INCOMPLETE season with an undecided title, when called.
Celtic are awarded the title and get access to CL qualifiers but records should not ignore the fact they didn’t win the title over 38 games played on the grass or plastic. The same goes for all of the leagues, not just the Premiership.
This is obviously an important issue given that prior to this season Celtic had won 8IAR and are looking to break the record of 9.
Cluster One 26th June 2020 at 13:30
First question for Mr Blair should the Hearts /Thistle petition go further in court.
Petitioners QC – Well Mr Blair, if four games can be played in eight days how long would it have taken, say starting from 22 June 2020 as allowed by the Scottish Government, to play the 8 remaining regular season Premiership games of 2019/20?
I really do wish that the season had been completed! Aberdeen could have ended with 69 points and overtaken Rangers who could have lost all their remaining games, but much more realistically could have overtaken Motherwell and finished 3rd with the financial benefit that would have resulted.
But the season wasn’t completed and the league was “called”. Presumably history will reflect this unusual (unprecedented) situation in the records? But Celtic still won the league.
Also presumably those who do not accept the title being awarded because the playing season was incomplete would be taking the same view even if it was mathematically impossible that Celtic could have been caught? On the other hand I have often wondered if the SPFL would have had the balls to propose “calling” the league if the position at that time was that there were only say a couple of points in it between Celtic and Rangers*? Hypothetical I know but a thought.
reasonablechap 26th June 2020 at 13:34
The very simple fact of there being an INCOMPLETE season, with the title still undecided is why an asterisk or suitable footnote needs to be attached to the 2019/20 Scottish League season.
===========================================
That's not a "fact" though. The rules don't say that a season consists of 38 games. They say this
Season means the period of the year commencing on the date of the first League
Match in a Season and ending on the date of the last League Match in the same
Season or otherwise as determined by the Board and which excludes the Close
Season
So the season is complete.
The title has also been decided.
The Club occupying position one in the League at the end of a Season shall be
declared the Champion Club of the League and shall hold the "The Scottish
Professional Football League Championship Trophy" until the next Season's League
Competition is concluded.
The league has been finalised, by the agreement of the member clubs and the champions have been decided. It doesn't matter if you don't like that, or don't like the rules, they exist.
reasonablechap 26th June 2020 at 13:34
Where did you see that , or whose word are you taking ? It was dug up when the league was still in progress . I dare say all pitches in Scotland will be rested enough to allow games to be played. Have you distilled your thoughts on your opinion on a fair end to the season ?
bordersdon 26th June 2020 at 14:23
The answer is there before your very eyes.
PPG, as voted by the majority – rules is rules and all that, worked fine to allow Raith to be awarded their division and promotion on the basis of a one point lead, so why would that not be similarly applied to the scenario in the Premiership that you outline?
Surely, you are not suggesting that the SPFL board might have had alternative solutions for different scenarios depending on which club was where?!! Have you not heard this was the best and only solution and they might even have to try and prove it in court.
reasonablechap 26th June 2020 at 13:34
This is obviously an important issue given that prior to this season Celtic had won 8IAR and are looking to break the record of 9.
………….
prior to this season Celtic had won 8IAR and were looking to equal the record of 9, which they did, And good for them as they deserved it, and every club in the SPFL agreed that they deserved it. On the 5th of April Celtic vere very vocal against Title declaration, but they followed the rules and were crowned champions and every club agreed that celtic be crowned champions.
Hearts / Partick v SPFL now moved to Wednesday.
BrianMclauchlinSport@BBCBMcLauchlin
Initial hearing of Hearts/Partick Thistle v SPFL and others now moved to Wednesday 1st July at 11.00am. Lord Clark presiding at Court of Session. Expected to last 1-2 hours. #bbcsportscot
=============================
Also today, the FFF backed up the Ligue 1 decision to relegate Toulouse and Amiens, after being asked to reconsider the decision by a French court. The decision was taken following a vote of 200 or so member clubs with over 80% of the clubs backing the league.
It’s akin to the SFA backing a decision of the SPFL and demonstrates why Hearts and Partick are seeking to avoid referral to the SFA as an appellate body.
It isn’t clear whether or not the two clubs will take it further. The FFF immediately announced their fixtures following their meeting with clubs.
easyJambo 26th June 2020 at 17:42
Hopefully sounds the death knell for the joint challenge .
Regardless of whether one agrees with Hearts & PT , their decision to avoid referral to the SFA as an appellate body is totally understandable. They (SFA) couldn't run a menage in my humble opinion.
jimbo 27th June 2020 at 10:12
'.. their decision to avoid referral to the SFA as an appellate body is totally understandable. '
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Decidedly so, jimbo!
Who in his right mind would expect any measure of judicial objectivity and integrity from a governance body which which went into a sordid, secret agreement to permit a new club that they themselves had newly admitted into Scottish Football to masquerade as and cheatingly market itself as being 140 years old+ and laden with honours ?
The SFA is about as honest as a Wild West sheriff addressing a lynch mob " Fellers, let's give the guy a fair trial and then we'll hang him"
Yes John and look at their impartiality, integrity and ingenuity with Nimmo Smith. World class!
A World Class Joke.
The sad thing is everyone involved in it don’t give a toss. They will lose no sleep over it. I could offer suggestions why but I will not.
‘jimbo 27th June 2020 at 10:12
Regardless of whether one agrees with Hearts & PT , their decision to avoid referral to the SFA as an appellate body is totally understandable. They (SFA) couldn’t run a menage in my humble opinion.’
##############################
They haven’t, at this moment in time, avoided referral. They’re attempting to avoid going down the SFA route, but it’s been widely-reported that that body’s Compliance Officer has already written to HoMFC & PTFC re their legal action.
As I wrote yesterday, I suspect that next week’s CoS activity may well revolve around whether the clubs have the right to court action before all SPFL & SFA internal procedures are complete (including the JPP appellate process, which appears to be absolutely binding & excludes further external legal action).
On Wednesday, Lord Clark may decide he wants nothing to do with it & that the SPFL & the SFA’s procedures are competent to deal with the matter. Then again, he may decide that the clubs have a case & that the SPFL’s actions are worthy of scrutiny. We’ll have to wait & see.
Jingso.Jimsie 27th June 2020 at 12:07
‘jimbo 27th June 2020 at 10:12
Regardless of whether one agrees with Hearts & PT , their decision to avoid referral to the SFA as an appellate body is totally understandable. They (SFA) couldn’t run a menage in my humble opinion.’
##############################
They haven’t, at this moment in time, avoided referral…
=============
That does highlight another aspect of this fallout.
The CoS action could be taken as a very public 'vote of no confidence' in the SPFL,
and likewise, to try and avoid an SFA referral could also be viewed as a 'vote of no confidence' in the SFA itself?
Either way, I can't remember any club(s) being so openly defiant towards Hampden – although these are indeed unusual times.
To see the governance bodies challenged externally – for whatever reason – is actually encouraging, IMHO.
Jingso.Jimsie 27th June 2020 at 12:07
'..I suspect that next week’s CoS activity may well revolve around whether the clubs have the right to court action before all SPFL & SFA internal procedures are complete ..'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
You may very well be right, Jingso.
In so far, though, as this action includes the assertion that the SPFL is in breach of the Companies Act 2006 which ,of course, is far more binding as statute law than any piddly little rule book of a football association, I rather think that is a matter for the Courts than for the SFA.
I hope so anyway, although surely the SFA cannot be as collectively stupid as it is wicked?
TRFC went to Court over the transfer embargo. I can't remember them being done for that?
New development.
Hearts & Thistle have issued a joint statement today as follows :-
Along with the other 40 SPFL clubs, Hearts and Partick Thistle have received a letter, signed by Neil Doncaster, that relates to the forthcoming Court case.
It is wrong and much of its content is misleading and the timing itself questionable, we are currently awaiting legal advice on what needs to happen next.
John Clark 27th June 2020 at 13:04
TRFC went to Court over the transfer embargo. I can’t remember them being done for that?
……………………
Rangers administrator Paul Clark said: “We welcome the decision by Judge Lord Glennie today that vindicates the club’s position that the original SFA judicial panel tribunal and the appellate tribunal acted beyond their powers in imposing a transfer embargo on the club.
“The costs for this legal action have been awarded against the SFA and it is our position it is very regrettable that court action was required.
“Both we, and the SFA, will have to study the full ramifications of the judgment when it is published and either side has 21 days in which to decide the next course of action or whether they wish to appeal.”
29 May 2012
………….
The ibrox club were hit with a 12 month signing embargo and a £160,000 fine. As they later agreed to the signing embargo i take it they agreed to the fine also.Ally was charged with “not acting in the best interests of Association Football” by calling for the panel members to be named in public.
Rangers successfully challenged the ban on signing players in the Court of Session but have since accepted the transfer embargo after gaining SFA membership last month.
Rangers and McCoist have until Aug 17 to respond, with a principal hearing date of Aug 30 set for both cases to be heard.
To late to Edit.
Ally was found guilty on Aug 30, 2012 for bringing the game into disrepute and given a 3 match touchline ban suspended for 12 months, i don’t believe the club was ever charged for going to court, with all the sanctions that could bring, i don’t remember them getting anything for going to court.
The club accepted the transfer ban as a condition for being granted SFA membership.
Again to late to edit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18261343
“If the Scottish Football Association decide not to take action against Rangers in relation to Rangers submitting the application to the Court of Session then Fifa can penalise both the Scottish association and the individual clubs and the national team of Scotland and impose an international ban on all of them.
John Clark 27th June 2020 at 13:04
In so far, though, as this action includes the assertion that the SPFL is in breach of the Companies Act 2006 …
===================================
Forgive me, I haven't seen the details, which particular past of the Act are the SPFL board supposed to have breached.
Homunculus 27th June 2020 at 16:18
'..Forgive me, I haven't seen the details,..'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
My apologies, Homunculus, for omitting the words 'possibly/probably ' between 'action' and 'includes'.
My amateurish reading of the Companies Act and how the law tries to protect minority shareholders led me to read about Board meetings and the powers of the board and how voting etc is to be conducted.
The procedural omnishambles that was the 'vote' in question seems to me quite possibly to have fallen foul of section 994 in being unfair to some members in the processes and the desperate rush to get votes in and all that nonsense.
Unfairness is the cry from HoM and PT and it would make sense for them to try to use the Act to declare the actions null and void and unenforceable?
I cannot see an appeal to the SFA being in any way useful or even relevant? And certainly to have the Court rule that the SPFL made an absolutely disastrous Bols-up of the legalities would warm the cockles of my heart, no matter who was suing them!
John Clark 27th June 2020 at 16:50
================================
Thanks for that.
It is probably worth pointing out that if relegation and promotion are cancelled three members would suffer. Those three clubs have apparently said they would be making their own representations.
Reconstruction was the only sensible solution, particularly as it was worth considering even before these events
Homunculus 27th June 2020 at 18:00
'..Thanks for that….
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
You might be interested in this, Homunculus if you have not already seen it. I was further pursuing my amateurish researches by googling 'heart of midlothian' and 'petition' and companies act etc, and literally 10 minutes ago came across this, which I honestly had not seen before my earlier post:
'Top sports lawyer shares fascinating insight into Hearts and Partick Thistle legal petition'
https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/sport/football/fascinating-insight-contents-hearts-partick-18458804
According to that piece, unfair prejudice under the Companies Act is being alleged.
That strengthens my opinion that the SFA could not be relevant, because (I think!) a football governance body is not competent to determine whether a separate limited Company's Board breached the Act.
The alleged letter from ND to the clubs has been published on twitter. (not sure about its provenance).
https://twitter.com/joe_black1509/status/1276973816934268928
It appears to encourage clubs with an interest to join the respondents action, but also intimates that, at Wednesday’s hearing, the SPFL will be seeking to have the court action “sisted”, while the SFA looks to arbitrate the dispute.
I suspect that Hearts & PT were unhappy with the suggestion that the publication of the petition on the internet (not by the SPFL) was in some way wrong or even unlawful. The petition actually requested that it be intimated on the “walls in common form”, which, to my limited knowledge, makes the document available to the public.
Cluster One 27th June 2020 at 14:47, 14.32, and 14.17
'..Again to late to edit'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
What a dab hand you are at finding source material, Cluster One! Thanks for that.
I'm not aware of any sanction having been applied by the SFA to any Scottish club for going to Court, or to the SFA for not taking action in any such case.
Another avenue of exploration during 'lockdown', which even I, a natural home-bird with a range of interests that I enjoy and that don't require that I 'go out' , am beginning to feel.
I am really struggling with the concept of prejudicing a members rights.
Every member has the same holding, 1 of 42 shares. So it's not like a major shareholder is seeking to disadvantage minor shareholders.
The board didn't make a decision, it put it to the members, who voted on it. A substantial majority agreed to end the season and by doing so finalise the league positions. So what happened is the will of the majority of the members.
If the decision is reversed 3 members will be disadvantaged, not 2. Had the SPFL members not made that decision more members would have been prejudiced, not less.
If they are including this in their petition, and using it as their reason to appeal to a Court, rather than the SFA, it makes no sense to me.
easyJambo 27th June 2020 at 21.56
'..The petition actually requested that it be intimated on the “walls in common form”, which, to my limited knowledge, makes the document available to the public.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I'm with you on that, eJ.
Unless the world of plumbing is an exception!
"P225/20 Pet: Plumbing Pensions (U.K.) Limited For Directions Re Sec6
Pinsent Masons LLP Author: lmclachlan3 Page 1 of 2 IH Basic Interlocutor Edinburgh 18 March 2020
The Lords, appoint the petition to be intimated on the Walls in common form and to be advertised on the “Plumbing Pensions” website https://www.plumbingpensions.co.uk , grant warrant to serve a copy of the petition by publication of an advertisement in form 16.5 of the appendix to the Rules of Court once in the Times newspaper appoint any person having an interest, if so advised, to lodge answers within 21 days of such intimation, advertisement and publication; appoint the solicitor for the petitioners to lodge the documents prescribed by Rule 16.5 (6) into process."
https://www.plumbingpensions.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/20200318-CE6A-First-court-order.pdf
Homunculus 27th June 2020 at 23:37
'…The board didn't make a decision, it put it to the members, '
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
As I read things, Homunculus, the petitioners must have had some difficulty over the speed and urgency and the whole rationale and basis of the vote.
Normally, as I understand things, a 'resolution' put to members of a company has to be fully and truthfully explained in neutral language by the Board (which can then , obviously ,indicate that it supports the resolution!), and then has to allow 28 (or whatever) number of days for the vote.
I conclude therefore that the petitioners must feel that the Board must have failed to conduct itself in accordance with its statutory duties in one way or another.
To be fair, the Board did not try to impose a deadline earlier than the statutory deadline, but requested votes be cast within a couple of days! And then published 'results' afore the statutory deadline.
A serious mistake to make while there was any doubt about a crucial vote!
The SPFL board made an absolute Bols of it, whatever their intentions.
And afore I go to my kip, am I surprised by this?
'And they’re astonished that SPFL lawyer Rod McKenzie appears willing to provide advice to clubs who wish to go up against the pair in court.'
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/hearts-partick-thistle-astonished-leaked-22264335
what is our Rod famous/infamous/notorious for?
Yep, got it in one!
‘John Clark 27th June 2020 at 22:13
What a dab hand you are at finding source material, Cluster One! Thanks for that.
I’m not aware of any sanction having been applied by the SFA to any Scottish club for going to Court, or to the SFA for not taking action in any such case…’
#############################
There have been several references to RFC’s (now RFC2012) court action against the SFA in 2012.
This was a Judicial Review of the process and reach of the SFA in giving RFC a transfer ban & fine. It was not an appeal against the result of the process, but a legal examination of the method used to decide the extent of the punishment, given the SFA’s published protocols.
Over to Lord Glennie:
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=168f86a6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
Para. 8 applies:
‘This matter is, in any event, to my mind, made clear by Rule 15.8.3.6 of the Judicial Panel Protocol to which I have referred, which provides that the Appellate Tribunal’s determination “shall be final and binding on the parties and there shall be no further right of appeal.” That excludes any appeal, including an appeal to the CAS. I note, as was submitted by the Dean of Faculty, that the present application to the court, by contrast, is not an appeal but an application to the court in its supervisory jurisdiction to correct what is alleged to be an excess of jurisdiction by the Tribunals.’
Lord Glennie found with RFC. The SFA had given RFC punishments which were beyond the scope/scale of those included in their current (at 2012) JPP. The SFA were to reconsider said punishments. Did they? I’m not sure (from memory) that they did.
Homunculus 27th June 2020 at 23:37
While Hearts and Thistle are the 2 petitioners it is still 3 v 3 in terms of those affected by the SPFL board's resolution. That's why Stranraer are named in the petition along with Dundee Utd, Raith & Cove.
The court has been asked to weigh up the level of prejudice by electing to relegate 3 clubs without a whole season being played. The simple corollary of that position is that promotion for 3 other clubs can't happen either. (Without as you say- some other solution such as reconstruction)
For the petitioners the test of unfairness, as viewed by a reasonable person, has been aided by the public utterances of SPFL board member Les Gray.
While the vote to alter articles/rules is legitimate it may be considered unfair and prejudicial if key information has been withheld or underhand tactics were used. That's the thrust of the petition.
Football done away with games of chance (tossing of a coin) long ago in favour of deciding matters on the pitch. Eg The unfinished Euro ties will go to a single leg but it is still on the pitch.
That being said the PPG approach could be seen by the court as being reasonable. It is interesting the petitioners avoid making a play on that and focus on a cackhanded process for the resolution
I think the petitioners can prove unfairness but, like you I think the prejudice issue is a bit harder.
You could even see Lord Clark giving the SPFL a slap across their wrists for their handling of the resolution but still say the result would probably have been the same regardless.
In the petitionrs favour is that, given the EU wide principles in the Companies Act, even without a Doncaster in charge, other countries have seen courts side with relegated clubs. Compensation has been paid or court action is likely to be ongoing even if the footballing authorities have pushed ahead.
Not counting any chickens though as the law can be a funny old thing in Scotland!!
We all like a bit of irony on here.
How many times have you heard Doncaster say "The SPFL are the club's and if they want something we in the board will do it"
Now clubs want to see the papers but Doncaster says he must fall in line with the law ( or his and Mackenzie's interpretation).
That is because the SPFL is not a members organisation. It is a company with shareholders – the clubs.
Jingso.Jimsie 28th June 2020 at 10:03
Lord Glennie found with RFC. The SFA had given RFC punishments which were beyond the scope/scale of those included in their current (at 2012) JPP. The SFA were to reconsider said punishments. Did they? I’m not sure (from memory) that they did.
…………………
The judge accepted the club’s case that only the specific punishments laid down under the related rule should be imposed on the club for bringing the game into disrepute.
The explicit punishments stated in the SFA’s rule 66 are a maximum £100,000 fine, suspension or expulsion from participation in the game, ejection from the Scottish Cup or termination of membership.
The independent three-man SFA disciplinary panel had considered ending Rangers’ membership, saying they viewed the offence second only to match-fixing in terms of seriousness,
Any one of these punishments that were in the rules would have killed the new club.
The SFA appeal tribunal, decision that a transfer ban was appropriate punishment for a failure to pay more than £13million in tax , was the softest of punishments that they could give the ibrox club, and they still never agreed to it, only when they had no other choice to agree to a transfer ban or face the choice of the punishments that were in the rules that would have killed them did they comply.
The choice was. Agree to the softest of punishments of a transfer ban that never kicked in until later in the year and you could still play trialists, and you get your membership.
And if you don’t agree we have no other choice than to give you the punishments that are in the rules, that will kill you.
You can see why they agreed to a lesser punishment of a transfer ban in the end after all their sabre rattling.
John Clark 27th June 2020 at 22:13
Cluster One 27th June 2020 at 14:47, 14.32, and 14.17
‘..Again to late to edit’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
What a dab hand you are at finding source material, Cluster One! Thanks for that.
……………
Would have gave a wee thumb up there.;-)
Cluster One @ 1144hrs:
Perhaps I should have used the word ‘outwith’ rather ‘beyond’ when referencing the scope & scale of punishments available.
However (to me, at least), the simple fact is that the SFA were adjudged to have acted ‘ultra vires’ in the punishment of RFC.
The rest that followed from the SFA was panicked little men, out of their depth, splashing about hopeful that their feet would strike some solid ground before the big wave rolled in.
wottpi 28th June 2020 at 10:59
The court has been asked to weigh up the level of prejudice by electing to relegate 3 clubs without a whole season being played.
=======================================
The whole season was played. No matter how many times people say otherwise.
The rules do not specify a number of games or dates for the season. The length of a season can be varied, and the clubs agreed that the rest of the games could not be played. The season was therefore curtailed.
People clearly don’t like this concept and it may be counter intuitive but it is also in the rules.
The bottom line for Scotland is we simply don’t have enough money to do what some other countries have done. Play the games behind closed doors with frequent Covid testing for players, staff, match officials etc. The clubs could not afford to do this, they also needed the prize money paid out, just to keep trading, so the difficult decision was made. The season was finished.
Yes some clubs lost out on this, Rangers were arguable the biggest losers, as it was still possible that they could have won the league, and made it into the CL. However what Hearts and Partick Thistle are now doing is saying that other clubs should take the hit, not them. Either that or every club in the league should pay them compensation.
So the Hearts and Partick Thistle proposal is this. Rather than prejudice us, prejudice three other clubs, who have done nothing wrong. Or prejudice absolutely everyone else.
I do not see on what basis a Court would do that.
The other solution I suppose is the SPFL inviting both clubs to find another league to play in.
Jingso.Jimsie 28th June 2020 at 12:12
…………
They had a few choices and all brought panic.
1. To make it believable you are the same club, for your crimes we have to punish you and the rules state that these are the punishments. But anyone of these punishments will kill you.
2. You are a new club and wee can’t punish you. But you don’t want it known you are a new club.
3. We will get a panel together that can come up with a punishment that is not in the rules that won’t kill you.
Again it was just another SFA balls up, and make rules up as they went along to try and save a club playing out of ibrox. the ibrox club were that stupid they were trying for as less of a punishment as they could get for all their cheating instead of looking at it as we won a watch keep our heads down and get on with it.
Homunculus 28th June 2020 at 12:21
wottpi 28th June 2020 at 10:59
The bottom line for Scotland is we simply don’t have enough money to do what some other countries have done. Play the games behind closed doors with frequent Covid testing for players, staff,
………………….
Think i read somewhere 20 to 30 grand a week. a lot of money with no income through the gates. how many SPFL clubs could afford that. Not many, and if many can’t afford it there was no other choice than to call league.
To late to Edit. Again.
Even at that there was no test kits available months ago.
Homunculus28th June 2020 at 12:21
I agree that the SPFL board seemed to have it in their power, within the rules, to call the league.
Main questions are, did they have the rights/powers to promote and relegate in the circumstances with a significant number of games still to play and did they go about giving themselves such powers regarding the follow on of ending the league early the correct way.
Last week, in potentially looking to seek executive powers, Doncaster admitted the SPFL rules were not fit for purpose to deal with events such as this Covid 19 situation.
Their own QC advice was that what they were proposing held the risk of legal challenge. The vote on the resolution was designed to lessen that risk should the matter come to court, because, as you point out, the board could have tried to fly solo without reference to the club's.
They and now you seem surprised that the potential legal challenge has emerged.
If there wasn't questions to be answered the I doubt there would have been any petition.
Yes a vote took place but, rules is rules and the law is the law. The petitioners are wholly within their rights to challenge the SPFL. Whether they win or lose is another matter.
As discussed previously the emotion needs to be taken out of this. The petition seeks to address the unfairness and predjudice allegedly suffered by Hearts and Patrick.
That is their sole objective. However there is a natural legal consequence for others if the petition proceeds and then succeeds. That will not be Hearts & Patrick's doing but merely the outcome of the legal process. That is why four other clubs are mentioned in the petition.
I would assume, if it comes to it, Lord Clark will weigh up the pros and cons for all six clubs. Indeed he will also no doubt have to consider if the compensation being requested is reasonable and the effect on the league as a whole.
(BTW with a five year £160m TV deal agreed there is plenty monies available to pay £10m. Maybe not now in one go but easily done in the future and in easy instalments).
If the court finds for the petitioners who is it that the three promotion candidates or the whole 40 clubs having to pay compensation will go after?
I cant see it being Hearts and Partick. It will be either the SPFL or an appeal against the legal ruling.
Hearts/Partick owned a car. It is alleged SPFL took the car when they had no power to do so and passed it onto Dundee Utd/Raith. Hearts/Partick want their car back or if not now possible seek monies from a compensation scheme. Court reviews evidence and tells D Utd/Raith to hand back the car. In that scenario are we to see Hearts/Partick as the bad guys? To whom would DUtd and Raith be best to direct their fury to?
Court finds SPFL had a right to take the car back and do what they want with it. Probable result – end of story for all parties, move along, nothing to see here……..Until the next time !!
wottpi 28th June 2020 at 14:40
I am not surprised that Hearts and Partick Thistle are attempting a legal challenge. I'm not sure what makes you think that. Hearts have pretty much said that, or at least implied it, for quite some time.
However, no matter how you try to spin it what they are doing is saying "prejudice every other club in the league, not us".
Your "There's plenty money there anyway" argument is specious. The question is not, is there £10m there to give to two clubs. It's what else would you do with that money to benefit all 42 clubs.
Homunculus28th June 2020 at 16:38
I'm not spinning anything.
As you say both Hearts & Partick were quick of the mark in mid April saying they believed they had a legal challenge.
At that time I can't recall them saying no promotion or relegation was their aim or even in their sights.
A temporary adjustment was Budge's preferred option.
Now it is where it is the lawyers will have simply put forward what they believe is the best approach to win the case.
Are you suggesting they back down because now, at the 11th hour, folk now realise others might get hurt because of a potentially flawed process.
The SMSM have spun that's it all about trying to do harm to the majority but ignore the principle of the majority being able to do harm to the minority.
As mentioned plenty times, if you are expected to 'take one for the team' then mitigation is nearly always offered.
Be it the minority Res12 shareholders or querying why Dave King is always diluting the fans minority shareholding, this site has always had a soft spot for David v Goliath battles.
I don't see any difference here.
The relegated teams have been treated unfairly and been told to take their medicine, so of course they are going to fight back and to hang with the consequences.
A decent organisation would not have put members in a 'nothing to lose and everything to gain' scenario.
wottpi 28th June 2020 at 17:35
There was a no (or little) detriment option, which the SPFL board tried to get through.
Reconstruction with no relegation, and promotion going ahead. In fact in that Scenario ICT would probably have been promoted as well.
The fact that is not going ahead is not the board's fault. They tried to get it agreed.
It is the clubs who did not want it, insisting on it being a temporary move would not have helped the argument.
So "A decent organisation would not have put members in a 'nothing to lose and everything to gain' scenario." is a bit unfair on the board.
The only "no detriment" option was taken away from them. The only option then available is to minimise the damage and in this instance they did the best they could. If a Court decides the two teams should get £10m from everyone else then so be it.
For clarity, I have no issue with Hearts or Partick Thistle doing this. I do have a bit of a problem with Anne Budge's attitude towards the others. I don't think she won much support for the reconstruction plan.
Homunculus28th June 2020 at 17:52
Reconstruction was an after thought, not a first 'do no harm' option for all members.
As such there was no leadership on the matter fron the SPFL board.
If it was a serious consideration wouldn't you normally have expected a £400k a year CEO leading the charge?
No, even then he shat it and passed the buck to Budge and put in Gray as his lackey!
The leadership of the SPFL in terms of leadership and legal advisor are the same corrupt bunch that Turnbull Hutton called out in 2012.
If it's the club's opinions / wishes that matter then they don't need to pay anyone £400k to just do the admin work.
I didnt hear all of Saturday's Sportsound but am led to believe Falkirks guy said in the latter stages Livingston promoted 14,10,10,10 then voted against it.
This is what we are having to deal with!!
wottpi 28th June 2020 at 19:12
============================
I disagree, from the start the feeling I got was that reconstruction was the desired outcome for the board. Maybe that was just me.
They certainly gave the impression they wanted it when it got to the stage of asking the clubs. If anything people seemed to think they were going to try to push it through.
The clubs have decided against it. Hearts and Partick Thistle are seeking to have the relegation / promotion put aside, with other clubs losing out. Alternatively being compensated by everyone else. Though agreeing the league could not be finished on the park hasn't really helped their case in my view.
There is no going back now, neither side (three if you count the other three clubs) look like backing down.
We will just have to see what the Court has to say, if it is willing to get involved at all.
It will be up to the Scottish football authorities to decide what action they take against the clubs. I believe the rules limit their options.
wottpi 28th June 2020 at 14:40
Homunculus28th June 2020 at 12:21
I agree that the SPFL board seemed to have it in their power, within the rules, to call the league.
Main questions are, did they have the rights/powers to promote and relegate in the circumstances with a significant number of games still to play and did they go about giving themselves such powers regarding the follow on of ending the league early the correct way.
Last week, in potentially looking to seek executive powers, Doncaster admitted the SPFL rules were not fit for purpose to deal with events such as this Covid 19 situation.
…………….
SPFL, SFA the then SPL and SFL rules are never fit for purpose, when something out of the ordinary happens it’s panic stations no forward thinking whatsoever, no planning ahead for different senarios that might happen. Just what is it they do all day?
Was watching something the other week about Tesco i think and the thing is that they had a senario planned if ever such a thing as a pandemic was to occur, and when it did they were ahead of the game in every aspect. They had a group of thinkers that plan ahead for every thing out of the ordinary.
The governing bodies of our game do not have this intelligence to think this far ahead they just sit in their bunkers and wait for the next unexplained thing to happen then hit the panic button and make up some rules as the go along.
Cluster One28th June 2020 at 21:11
Thanks CO. Thought for a while I am the only one thinking this.
The footballing authorities in this country, and admittedly, some of the club's have no long term view.
Its all short term fixes for whatever problem presents itself from season to season.
Our record in Europe and the National team performance is evidence of failure.
The resolution was just another short term fix to get money to the teams with apparently little or no thought of the future consequences.
I have tried to stay out the debate on the court case, but I’d like to clarify some things that have been discussed earlier today.
From the Briefing Paper to the SPFL Board (pre vote)
It goes on to discuss how the season may be ended, citing Articles 64.1 (a written resolution) and 99.9 (Powers of the Board).
Rod McKenzie had reservations about the use of 99.9 to end the season.
That seems to be the substance of why the option of a written resolution was used, although the consequential outcomes would appear to have been at the behest of the Board.
The Briefing Paper also gives some background of why reconstruction was not included directly as part of the resolution, but only as something to be considered should the resolution be passed.
The Paper recognises the possibility or restructuring
However, the Paper goes on to outline several reasons not to restructure.
A number of the above claims and reasons appear to be inconsistent with what has happened subsequently.
I hope that the above adds some clarity about why the SPFL Board included some elements in the written resolution and left out others. Rule changes were required to end the season. The SPFL Board chose which rules they wanted to change and equally so, not to change others.
I have not touched on the financial considerations about the early termination of media contracts or the implications for the new contracts, although I would expect these to be covered by the petitioners in the court case.
The ND letter to clubs suggested that they will be asking the court to "sist" proceedings to allow the SFA to arbitrate the dispute.
The Briefing Paper also includes extracts from the opinion of the SPFL's own QC, Gerry Moynihan, where he states:
So we have the SPFL's own QC advising the Board that ultimately it will be for the Courts to decide if the outcome of the resolution is challenged. There is no suggestion of such a challenge falling within the remit of the SFA's arbitration process.
Cluster One
I would suggest that to compare the SPFL contingency planning with that of Tesco is very unfair. There is no doubt that Tesco has performed well but they “play” for 52 weeks every year, 24 hours a day. They had revenue last year of nearly £64 billion pounds. They have over 3000 stores in the UK and for example Inverness has 4 with another 20 minutes further north in Dingwall, which helped keep me and my family fed during lockdown.
If looking for comparisons it might be fairer to compare Tesco and the other supermarket chains with the response of Governments but I’ll not go any further with that on SFM.
My personal opinion is that our football administrators, faced with events that brought the footballing world to a standstill overnight, had a lot more foresight than the agenda driven media will ever give them credit for.
That said mistakes have been made but even Tesco had difficulties with keeping some goods on the shelves in the early weeks! Remember also that Tesco are ultimately motivated by self interest too!
adam812 28th June 2020 at 23:26
I would suggest that to compare the SPFL contingency planning with that of Tesco is very unfair. There is no doubt that Tesco has performed well but they “play” for 52 weeks every year, 24 hours a day.
…………….
Very busy then, but still have time to plan ahead.SPFL should have all the time in the world then for contingency planning. 2012 would have been a wake up call, or should have been a wake up call that their rules were not fit for purpose.
The comparison may have been off, but if you want to play with the big boys and act like a big company you have to get people in that can plan ahead, like Tesco did and not sit back and hope that a disaster will not befall you, because if you do it most certainly will.
That said mistakes have been made, but do they ever learn from them? 2012 has shown that the don’t.
Cluster One28th June 2020 at 23:51
Even the events of 2012 have been forgotten by the SPFL.
From the bit I heard on the radio on Saturday SPFL secretary was speaking about how the made up the fixtures.
Without any pause, hesitation or qualification he mentioned the need to cater for the "4 Old Firm Games" as if neither team can finish bottom six or could suffer an event such as poor on field performance, financial or otherwise, that results in points loses, demotion, liquidation, etc.
wottpi@various
I still have difficulty with you claiming that a temporary reconstruction should have happened.
The reconstruction issue was handed to Ann Budge to run with without a "temporary/permanent" restriction on it. The first thing she did was insist that it could only be temporary. In doing so she immediately alienated those in the "permanent" camp, pretty well guaranteeing the failure of the working group. Yes, it probably would have failed anyway but, through the legal action, she is saying that it was all the SPFL's fault. A strange viewpoint. I know next to nothing about the law but surely the SPFL could say to the court that they DID give Hearts the opportunity for reconstruction but they hampered a successful outcome by their stance.
"No, even then he shat it and passed the buck to Budge and put in Gray as his lackey!"
Now you really are stretching it too far. You have no proof of the thinking behind the decision to have a working group and instead use an invented reason that is tainted by your view of being hard done by. Your reference to Gray's position is insulting and shows you in a very poor light.
Stick to the facts.
adam812 28th June 2020 at 23:26
“..My personal opinion is that our football administrators, faced with events that brought the footballing world to a standstill overnight, had a lot more foresight than the agenda driven media will ever give them credit for.”
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
I respectfully disagree,adam812.
A glance at the 7 reasons cited by the SPFL board for not restructuring [seeeasyJambo 28th June 2020 at 22:31 ] shows a disgraceful level hand-wringing spineless, gutless negativity and lack of any kind of leadership quality at a time of great crisis.
Around the world bold, but careful leadership found ways, or at least tried to find ways , to harness the ‘we are all in it together’ readiness to survive the effects of Covid-19.
The SPFL in panic mode charged recklessly down a divisive and (probably unlawful) path without even an attempt to encourage and maintain effective harmony in the face of a crisis which was not occasioned by Football and really has to be dealt with by extraordinary means, for the good of all.
And they made an absolute farce of it, as even they now realise.
The members of the SPFL Board should do the decent thing and resign en bloc.
But accustomed as they are to having helped create and sustain the Big Lie decency is not one of their attributes.
The other thing I can't get my head around is the lose/lose situation that Hearts could find themselves in at the end of the legal action.
In attempting to stop the promotion and relegation for this season through the courts they can either –
Lose the case and be faced with the legal costs
OR
Win the case and have a potential bill from Stendel. They took advantage of a clause in his contract that allowed termination if they were relegated and have since signed a new manager. That clause will not be applicable if they win in court. Stendel remained at Hearts without taking his wages to help the club during the pandemic and stated he would be prepared to stay with the club in the championship. If I were him I don't think I would still be filled with good will towards the club and be would looking for recompense. But then I am not him and maybe he doesn't the same appetite for revenge.
It doesn't matter if you argue that what the clubs are looking for is compensation. It is what is being asked for, a halt to relegation/promotion, from the court.
It's a strange situation, accepting the relegation with regard to their manager and not accepting the relegation with their legal action.
Mickey Edwards 29th June 2020 at 10:03
My point, possibly clumsily made, was that if reconstruction was a priority you would expect a £400k CEO to take a lead on the main issue affecting our game.
I am questioning what exactly is it that Doncaster does to earn his salary. He hasn’t shown any particular leadership or dynamism in dealing with this crisis.
From what Easyjambo has posted, of course trying to deal with this crisis was never going to be easy but the league’s CEO seems to have body swerved it and fallen back on his ‘get out’ excuse of ‘ I just do whatever it is the clubs want”
If you want facts regards self interest and double speak here are the thoughts of Falkirk Chairman Gary Deans. Comes across as an honest broker who has been in the game one year and has it sussed already.
wottpi 29th June 2020 at 00:33
'..Without any pause, hesitation or qualification he mentioned the need to cater for the "4 Old Firm Games" as if neither team can finish bottom six '
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Ach, wottpi, an organisation which can blatantly lie about a new club being one and the same as a much older club that died as a consequence of serial sports cheating would not find it too difficult to accommodate the failure of either cheek of the stinking ar.e of football to remain in the top six.
Any necessary re-jigging would be arranged without a blush, believe you me.
Mickey Edwards 29th June 2020 at 10:20
As it stands Hearts are relegated. That's it – contract over. Players have already been let go to prepare for life in the Championship and the new financial position. Hard decisions have to be made.
I think Hearts performance re Stendel was perhaps on the poor side with regard to the manner in which Neilson was appointed but his contractual position will be sorted one way or the other behind closed doors regardless of how the petition goes.
I doubt you will see any more spoken of the matter.
If you were so interested in the goings on at Hearts you would have known Stendel tweeted on 23 June as follows:-
I don't get the impression he is a man to be too worried about this. Probably glad he got out of Hearts and Scottish Football when he did.
It doesn't matter who is wheeled out to say how hard done by they feel because the leagues were called as result of COVID19 my position is still the same – I support reconstruction.
My point is that the opportunity was given for the affected teams to get the reconstruction they requested. Probably an impossible task but it was guaranteed to fail by them placing restrictions on the outcome. Other peoples' u-turns or, as in the case of Doncaster, failure to commit is no more than par for the course and, while frustrating, neither here nor there.
As to Stendel, I read his farewells, which was before the legal action was started, and I also read his interview stating that he was prepared to work in the championships.
Now, back to my genealogy.
From the BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52822935
Budge is very keen to stress her proposal is a short-term measure and reconstruction is only temporary. Unless enough clubs vote otherwise, the structure would return to 12-10-10-10 in the summer of 2022.
This idea is not popular with several clubs contacted by BBC Scotland, who point out that it could mean three clubs being relegated from the Premiership that season, and six demoted from the Championship. Are those who that would endanger going to support that?
One senior club official said that he was "sad" about the proposals, adding: "We had a real chance for change – but a two-year deal?"
Change is needed and the fans want larger leagues and not just for a season.
The change won't come from within though.
The current set up is not capable of change because of the voting structure and the entrenched and entwined power bases.
We have effectively a two club top league and a gentleman's club structure stopping any significant or structural change and dominated to all purposes by a few clubs with placemen and friends in all key positions.
TV money and one fixture four times a year is all that seems to matter to our well paid administrators.
What we've seen since covid has been predictable and the end, whatever the detail after the spat that starts on Wednesday, will leave us all the poorer.
Scottish Football has itself and our clubs turn by turn into Lose-Lose land with no preferable options and no sensible outcomes or compromises.
"Major changes to insolvency law come into force
The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act has received Royal Assent and came into force on 26 June 2020."
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/major-changes-to-insolvency-law-come-into-forcem_source=d074743a-057c-4a03-b3ad-9c89496b1f5e&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate
____________
There may be some in the world of football who will be glad of this:
"The Act also provides temporary relief until 30 September 2020 from being subject to a winding up petition and from wrongful trading provisions where a business can demonstrate its difficulties arise from trading conditions arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. These easements are explained in more detail in a series of factsheets.
Changes to company filing and meeting requirements have also been introduced to relieve the burden on businesses during the pandemic and allow them to focus all their efforts on continuing to operate.
Published 29 June 2020
It's been a quiet day on the blog but with some perceptive posts.
So I've had a minute or two to return to my weary saga with the FCA!
I give you (free of charge) the text of an email I intend to send tomorrow to the FCA( I can't do it now because there has been a fuse upstairs where the printer is! I had a lousy wee dribble of a shower a little earlier on!)
"Dear Ms ____
Thank you for your email of 19 June in which you observe that "however, without seeing an original copy of the email (as an attachment), I do not have enough information to reconsider my decision on your complaint"
I am sorry to appear to be a bit dense, but I'm afraid you've rather lost me there! Of which email do you need to see an original copy?
The first email I sent in this matter was my email in response to Mr Pete Scrivener's letter of 6 September 2019 , in which he said that neither the Chairman nor the then CEO had received my posted letters and reminders to them, and asked me to provide copies either by letter or (' for a more timely response') by email. (I attach a copy of that letter from him as evidence of the existence of the earlier letters I had written to Messrs Bailey and Randell)
I responded by email, and subsequently copied that email (with the texts of the original snail mail letters) to you, on 18 May.
To keep things relatively simple:
I complained that the FCA had breached its statutory duties when it authorised the issue of what I consider to have been a misleading IPO prospectus by Rangers International Football Club plc[RIFC plc] in 2012.
That is a serious matter, a serious complaint.
[And I de novo make the same complaint afresh, to keep the pot boiling.]
It would not have taken too much investigation for the FCA to look again at that prospectus in light of the fact that RIFC plc was the holding company NOT of Rangers FC ( founded in 1872) but of 'The Rangers Football Club Ltd', freshly admitted into Scottish Professional Football in 2012, while Rangers FC of 1872 died the death of entering Liquidation , from which it has not yet emerged!
In the opinion of many, the prospectus clearly implied that potential investors would be investing in 'the most successful football club in the world' when in fact they would be investing in a newly created football club, which had only just been accepted into Scottish Football ,and into the bottommost division thereof to boot!
I have had no response to that complaint, and no assurance that it is being investigated by persons not involved in the authorisation of that prospectus.
I'm not too bothered about complaining about how long this matter is taking, except in so far as it might possibly indicate a reluctance to investigate for reasons that would be quite unacceptable.
[I know that the FCA was singularly slow to pursue the majority shareholder of RIFC plc in the matter of his 'concert party' share purchase]
In what is not all a criticism of you personally, Ms__, who have been very helpful, I will copy this email to my MP , and will arrange to have an interview with him presently, Covid-19 and his free time for constituency work permitting!
Thank you, best regards, and stay safe,
[me]"
As it’s quiet…
I’ve tried to watch a few games on TV but still finding it a challenge. It may become more watchable if my own team is involved?
I planned to watch the Norwich v. ManU cup game on BBC1 but had to give up before half time as it was truly dreadful! To be fair, even with a full crowd I don’t think it would have made that particular tie any better!
But that was a Cup game, for a semi-final place: like the games/highlights I’ve seen do far, there seems to be a distinct lack of intensity amongst the players.
The ‘canned crowd noises’ are getting better, but still feels like watching a preseason friendly.
I still have to try out watching a game with volume off and music playing instead, as suggested by others.
Ironically, despite all the technology around the games played, and the TV services provided… some aspects remain unchanged in over 100 years: the professional game is indeed “nothing without the fans” actually being there – to create the event.
J C @ 00.00
Class, as always John.
Good luck JC. Your perseverance knows no bounds!! As you point out though the FCA has form.
bordersdon 30th June 2020 at 14:50
'….As you point out though the FCA has form.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
As I mentioned yesterday I couldn't use the printer upstairs because there was a fuse blown when I had earlier in the evening turned on the power shower.
I fixed the fuse today and scanned the letter I had received from Scrivener, and tidied up my email to Ms Knight ,added the attachment and sent the email on its way.
It really was such an outrageous bit of evil cleverness, the concept setting up a company to buy some of the major assets of a football club In Administration, run that club into Liquidation to get shot of the debts, call your wee company a football club, and then cast a magic spell to induce the Football authorities to admit your new creation into Scottish Football and tell the world that the new football club is really the old football club in every respect except that it is not liable for tens of millions of pounds debt!
And the next clever wheeze- go to the market looking for investment by trying to con potential investors into believing they will be investing in a highly successful football club laden with honours and sporting titles!!
The sheer unadulterated bare-faced cheek is insultingly shocking in so many ways that it is very easy to persevere in trying to draw attention to it!
And when one begins to think that perhaps even the FCA may not be an entirely clean potato, conveniently losing mail/emails that they would rather not have to deal with., .. well..
Not that I think that, at the moment!
I see that Rod Petrie has stepped down from his role as SFA President temporarily for health reasons.
While I may have issues with some of the things he has been involved with, I wish him a full recovery.
Mike Mulraney will take over RPs resposibilities for the time being.
https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport/18551796.steven-naismith-claims-rangers-chiefs-tried-bully-players-signing-new-deals-clubs-administration/
Steven Naismith claims Craig Whyte and the Rangers higher-ups tried to bully players into signing new deals following their slump into administration in 2012.
…………….
As the word Bullied was in sharp focus during the last few months, i thought i would post this article.
Now the claims Craig Whyte. From what i remember Whyte walked out the door on Febuary 14,2012 never to return.
The Rangers higher-ups. Gordon Smith and Ali Russel had left by the end of Febuary.
Just who were these rangers higher-ups?
John Clark 30th June 2020 at 00:00
…………..
Great work again JC.
easyJambo 30th June 2020 at 18:33
'…Rod Petrie has stepped down from his role as SFA President temporarily for health reasons.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
If he is genuinely ill then I wish him well, of course.
But such is the desperate state of things 'governance' in Scottish Football , I would be ready to believe that it might simply be an engineered , diplomatic temporary demittance of office to get him out of the way while some sensible person takes charge.
John Clark30th June 2020 at 20:39
easyJambo 30th June 2020 at 18:33
Never nice to hear of anyone getting ill to the point they are unable to do their job. Regardless of who it is.
On another subject I know at least one of you looks like they are planning to ensure their mobile is fully charged overnight.
wottpi 30th June 2020 at 21:00
'…planning to ensure their mobile is fully charged overnight.
'
"""""""""""""""""""""""
I would of course be in Lord Clark's court-room tomorrow , notebook in hand, keen to see which QCs are in action, and find out if there is any possibility of Lord Clark deciding [God forbid!] that the business is not for the Court, but for an appeal tribunal under the SFA Judicial Protocol;
and to renew and refresh my nodding acquaintance with various Court personnel, and cause at least one 'Macer' (if I were to pass him in the corridor) to remark that there must be something on to do with 'Rangers'!
[I'll try to find out tomorrow whether there is any possibility of members of the public seeing the proceedings via webcams or whatever]
And that "whatever" tells you that I'm of the pen and ink , steam radio and red telephone box generation, although, mark you, I bought a smashing wee leather-cased tranny {tranny radio, ffs] in the flea market in Rome in 1961, on which I first heard (on Radio Luxembourg) Chubby Checker's "Let's Twist Again' as I typed on my 'Olivetti Lettera 22' my lecture notes of the day.
Oh, I've come over all nostalgic!
Homunculus 26th June 2020 at 14:25
—————————————————-
reasonablechap 26th June 2020 at 13:34
The very simple fact of there being an curtailed season, with the title still undecided is why an asterisk or suitable footnote needs to be attached to the 2019/20 Scottish League season.
===========================================
That's not a "fact" though. The rules don't say that a season consists of 38 games. They say this
Season means the period of the year commencing on the date of the first League
Match in a Season and ending on the date of the last League Match in the same
Season or otherwise as determined by the Board and which excludes the Close
Season
So the season is complete…
—————-%%%%%%%%%——————–
Sorry for the long delay in replying.
I accept that by hook or by crook the season is finished but it is as plain as day that it was curtailed prematurely without having completed the fixtures. Not forgetting that the matter is in the Court of Session.
I would ask you how many times in Scottish League history has a season been called without completing the fixture list ?
The exceptional circumstances of an incomplete set of fixtures being played when the league was called, quite obviously should be recorded with due prominence in the history books.
It is exactly what an asterisk is often used for
——————————————
It's obviously through no fault of Celtic that a pandemic struck this year but it did and we need to inform those who come after us of it's consequences.
SPFL Premiership Winners
2017/18: Celtic
2018/19: Celtic
2019/20: Celtic *
* Incomplete fixture list due to Pandemic
paddy malarkey 26th June 2020 at 14:39
Where did you see that , or whose word are you taking ? It was dug up when the league was still in progress . I dare say all pitches in Scotland will be rested enough to allow games to be played.
———————
It was in the press (with pics) on the 10th of June.
Look it up on google, 'Rangers new pitch' takes you straight to article on first page of results.
Homunculus 28th June 2020 at 12:21
The bottom line for Scotland is we simply don’t have enough money to do what some other countries have done. Play the games behind closed doors with frequent Covid testing for players, staff, match officials etc.
How much will it cost the SPFL to go the route they have embarked upon ?
Including Deloitte UK, BT Sport, Sky Sports, etc., etc.
John Clark 30th June 2020 at 20:39
…
Rod Petrie has stepped down from his I would be ready to believe that it might simply be an engineered , diplomatic temporary demittance of office to get him out of the way while some sensible person takes charge.
=============
Agreed, but where will this "sensible" person you mention be found…?
And – presumably – in Petrie's absence, the unqualified, inexperienced, but 'useful' Maxwell becomes the combined CEO and 'Executive' President?!
This ludicrous scenario is the direct result of ALL the 42 clubs' complacency and/or acquiescence.
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 12:44
Thanks for the reply – I'd completely forgotten about asking . I followed your advice and the first link was to the Daily Record , and if I believe that article , I need also to believe the one where RFC is liquidated and 140 years of history went down the drain .
By doing the work in the first week in April , they were effectively signalling that they would be unable to play at home post split . I didn't see any contingency plans to play their fixtures elsewhere (there may have been , but kept quiet), so to me the message they were communicating is that they were unprepared to play out the season .
Paddy
The Record article you mention is from April and is about starting the work on the pitch. If you go to the next one down, an article by The Sun from June 10th, you’ll see the pics and that it was ready for games at that point.
You say…”By doing the work in the first week in April , they were effectively signalling that they would be unable to play at home post split . I didn’t see any contingency plans to play their fixtures elsewhere”
No, they weren’t.
When work on the pitch began, there was no realistic possibility of a quick re-start to the Scottish Leagues. They carried out the work at that point because there was always going to be enough time to have it ready for any re-start (for example, the EPL restarted on the 17th June).
I note that Peter has another one of his men (Mulraney, vice president SFA) now taken over from Rod Petrie, who unfortunately is unwell. That’s both the SPFL and the SFA that are green and it nothing to do with the environment.
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 15:53
Just your opinion – mine is that they conceded .
For those interested, as opposed to the 1-2 hours quoted a few days back, the CoS action went all day and will spill into tomorrow afternoon.
Even then we could still see some play on Friday.
Paddy
Your opinion is dependent on what would have been a totally unrealistic restart date.
Starting work on the pitch in April was simply common sense.
Had the League restarted, the pitch would have been repaired and ready to go. In such a restart scenario, there probably wouldn’t have been time to do the work at the eventual end of 19/20, in time for the beginning of 20/21.
Wottpi
Sounds like a timeline for a cricket match #bodyline
The Petition.
Well, that was an interesting experience, listening on the phone in the comfortable surroundings of my own kitchen to the the lawyers in Lord Clark's court-room from 11.00 am until 4.00 pm, with an hour's break for lunch. Sound only, no visual.
Borland QC (for Dundee Utd, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers) was easily audible although I lost sound a couple of times and twice briefly lost connection (having to redial on each occasion). Moynihan QC for the SPFL was also clearly audible without strain. But Thomson QC for the Petitioners was largely inaudible or heard only with the ear close to the phone. His microphone was possibly a bit too far from him , or he kept turning his head away.
I was able to make some notes which I'll maybe try to make sense of .
I don't know who set the original time-slot of 2 hours, but he or she was very far out!
At one minute to 4 pm, Lord Clark had assurances from Mr Thomson that he would be able to recommence at 2.00 pm tomorrow, and would need about an hour; from Mr Borland that he too would be available and would (subject to what might come up) need about 30 or 40 minutes; and from Mr Moynihan who said that as tail-end Charlie, he'd accept being guillotined at 4.00 pm.
A number of cases were cited by parties- Partick Thistle's own approach to Courts in recent years, Fulham, Exeter City, Capital Trusts Investments, St Johnston, Bridgehouse, Patel v Patel, Eagle Star, Babcock Rosyth, on the right to go to Arbitration, on whether the 'public interest ' requires that access to the Courts was ultimately available, or whether in any 'football dispute' a club could only go to the Courts with the permission of the SFA, on whether the contract between members of the SPFL and between the membership collectively and the SPFL , and the relationship between the SPFL and the SFA necessarily means that Art 99 of the SFA's Articles is binding on the members of the SPFL and the SPFL collectively…….and so on.
There were opinions expressed on whether reference to Arbitration would enable the dispute to be resolved before the 1st August, and opinion given that the court, already familiar with the case was better placed to provide an early decision whereas the selection of two Tribunal members would take time, and then those two would have to agree on whom they want to be Chair, and availability would have to be checked out and so on…
And it was observed that if the Court did decide and decided in favour of the Petitioners, there might be a reclaiming motion that would have to be heard by the Inner House.
Tomorrow might be quite interesting.
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 12:37
SPFL Premiership Winners
2017/18: Celtic Champions.
2018/19: Celtic Champions.
2019/20: Celtic Champions.
That is all anyone looks for when looking at who won the league in those seasons
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 12:44
paddy malarkey 26th June 2020 at 14:39
Where did you see that , or whose word are you taking ? It was dug up when the league was still in progress . I dare say all pitches in Scotland will be rested enough to allow games to be played.
———————
It was in the press (with pics) on the 10th of June.
Look it up on google, ‘Rangers new pitch’ takes you straight to article on first page of results.
……………….
Pitch was ripped up on April 7, 2020.
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1278365591934586880/photo/1
……………………………………..
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 13:00
Homunculus 28th June 2020 at 12:21
The bottom line for Scotland is we simply don’t have enough money to do what some other countries have done. Play the games behind closed doors.
……
Not just about the money to do what some other countries have done. Play the games behind closed doors.The ibrox club were dead against it and released a few statements to that effect.
Cluster
That is all anyone looks for when looking at who won the league in those seasons.
%%%%%%%%%%
I think your version is what Celtic fans want to see.
Rangers fans want to see the asterisk attached.
Ask yourself this question.
Why wouldn’t you attach an asterisk/footnote, when the 2019/20 season ended in absolutely exceptional circumstances with the Fixtures incomplete and Celtic not having secured the title when the final whistle blew on matchday 30 ?
Better to ask someone unconnected to Scottish football. It’s an obvious * from a truly impartial observer.
reasonablechap
I note that Peter has another one of his men (Mulraney, vice president SFA) now taken over from Rod Petrie, who unfortunately is unwell. That’s both the SPFL and the SFA that are green and it nothing to do with the environment.
……
Is Stewart Robertson not on the SPFL board not very Green is he or has he walked away before his dismisal for Gross breaches of confidentiality.
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 17:37
Ask yourself this question.
Why wouldn’t you attach an asterisk/footnote,to leagues won during the EBT era? We could play this game all day.
But the Blog is better than that.
Cluster
Robertson was on the board but I refer to what club actually hold real influence at the SPFL (Celtic) and now at the SFA (Celtic). Their allies are in the positions of power (Doncaster, MacLennan, McKenzie, Maxwell, Mulaney).
Asterisk
Given you haven’t really a leg to stand on regards the current question, it’s no surprise that you take what the blog refers to as the whataboutery approach (EBT asterisk).
Here is the real irony.
Our old friend Peter is both blocking res12 and pushing the current Celtic political agenda by pulling the usual strings.
It would appear that Rangers are not as free of Sports Direct as they have been claiming.
Either that or Sports Direct are publicly taking the p155
This is currently on their facebook page.
"Be prepared for the biggest season in a decade. New Rangers Kit lands exclusively at Sports Direct 1st August."
Somebody somewhere is at it.
John Clark 1st July 2020 at 17:21The Petition.
Well, that was an interesting experience…..
Thanks John, EJ and anyone else who shares and shines the light on this confused and confusing world.
It is much needed and appreciated.
Homunculus 1st July 2020 at 18:07
It would appear that Rangers are not as free of Sports Direct as they have been claiming.
Either that or Sports Direct are publicly taking the p155
This is currently on their facebook page.
“Be prepared for the biggest season in a decade. New Rangers Kit lands exclusively at Sports Direct 1st August.”
Somebody somewhere is at it.
Do we think sevco fans will be loving this as much as I am.
Be prepared for the biggest season in a decade. New Rangers Kit lands exclusively at Sports Direct 1st August.
Looks like Sports Direct will be selling the new ibrox kit. Wonder how that will go down with the ibrox fans, kept in the dark by their own board.
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 18:02
Cluster
Robertson was on the board but I refer to what club actually hold real influence at the SPFL (Celtic).
………..
And you know this how? Are you part of the SPFL board and know of first hand experiance or is it just hearsay on your part.
………………..
Asterisk
Given you haven’t really a leg to stand on regards the current question.
…….
Rangers fans want to see the asterisk attached.Gives me all the standing room i need.
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 17:08
Glad you agree that they dug up their pitch before the league was called
My opinion is that they were in such a horrendous run of form that they bottled it from playing CFC on the Sunday , having been horsed by Leverkusen on the previous Thursday night , humped by Hearts , beaten by the Accies at Ibrox , but managing a 1-0 win away to Ross County . They capitulated , in my opinion .
Would anybody know what this refers to ?
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-live.ch.gov.uk/docs/XQUMendJzAZRz55DZmJvXP2Eh1hF3dRaTDKfhSCaGOU/application-pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAWRGBDBV3COYSZZVW%2F20200701%2Feu-west-2%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20200701T195142Z&X-Amz-Expires=60&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjELP%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FwEaCWV1LXdlc3QtMiJGMEQCIDJxjLZ7kpxDlkSlxqtsOdbRrNPrp1NNhydcKRsWF1rwAiBk%2BbwVHNvs4mNtvgUNMu%2BPgEc44XmzfWwLzqoFxzigdSq0AwhMEAIaDDQ0OTIyOTAzMjgyMiIMmfx7yPynHhEOpz8QKpEDzPe9Ys6OnF3JkURDIiUfECc2DzI7%2BugAWy2udqtTGBf8w2fW%2BjVUwVzMpgNHRlGpwm096AzTlOeFuoIBXU%2BZaheJKqv9iTS2VKjCbQcdQod%2BMvUH7QPocRxJHDi8q7k3m9wHFWxgL8gY5gzEHoRmWR%2Bkc6RCYNv41hyPKb9akl9vCdTTE7sRNvcYc8kJKstAOA4fNmZobEUiX4LsFaUhPVNURSYGOh8rbPY8titNkR22Wt1bR%2FmeOzOeVWujgkY%2Bds7ISLYy9BXpjNKyLXfGF5QuNPLVrpULMl4IrBVC6jFrIXT9nvIOTSvb6z6YNMmLHtyE9PoAbcdIeRBtYaXwoNgEicOg5vxb%2BZAsRYZ%2FQgYnNa3BJRMPOxtBLf4ZoqVZKknt3BRCj3V5VPSYiJl%2FrtgOrqqnRqhhZAiCG4JrzE7Q%2FnW%2FC4oa1HMZzsd%2FDHbgDRDF%2B4CYG7SQWs8iqYpnMoBKWk4%2F1A1PbqN92gY3hvfi3xBa54uhXpwZCUzDgari5SGuuxB88B9J6pEDOHBbPjgwurnz9wU67AE1H9AHHIu7b%2B1BYOu0DgkqJYtMYLf6eRr2yVqxDuW2euRYcLjUFHrY9BPSS6aSCgfXF2HA4saVbXra7wTXrMNJaXqFeRQSNjZgxqTg49vA0Yofy4UOW4j6wh0x5sEwmDR5b3SOOQDSqcHXGamR2nakveXB5yLR4j8RmjEfhv9I%2FKir8CNCtl46IoCYssWtKxcV%2BWc2hZDGOsvN%2FgZyOhRraF7%2B%2Fq%2BfuNz1BvUcoMVN1xktBv%2FPOkMmlO2rzQm889%2BYqJBCx5Ttfd8DjWyNYrvrAN%2Ff5RF8d3gHxtPAswG5z%2F1Su5bjeT%2B7Qh8I0A%3D%3D&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=1d05f9d6b81982daac56cf0eb1c09ab81d3076e228c08c5d0fb7ee88b75097e8
If it is one of those word search things, i’m not very good at them;-)
Cluster One 1st July 2020 at 19:23
Looks like Sports Direct will be selling the new ibrox kit. Wonder how that will go down with the ibrox fans, kept in the dark by their own board.
===========================================
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/club-statement-96/
RANGERS & Castore are delighted to confirm the new Ibrox Retail Store will officially open on 1st August 2020, which will be operated by Castore as the clubs official retail partner.
The new Rangers Ibrox Retail Store will be complimented with a number of other key retail sites in Glasgow and further afield, now identified by Castore and Rangers and close to agreement. The Ibrox Retail Store will undergo a £250,000 renovation and become a key venue for all Rangers supporters and on matchdays will be supported with further pop up stores within the Stadium.
Following today’s unveiling of the 2020/21 home jersey, Rangers continues to look forward to their long term exclusive partnership with Castore, which, for the avoidance of doubt, is a direct agreement between those two companies with no other persons party to the deal.
As previously stated, it offers a fresh start for the Club and a chance to purchase high quality clothing and other products that directly benefit Rangers.
As is common practice in teamwear retail, Castore will form a number of wholesale supply arrangements with high street retailers in the UK and overseas because that is key to the global aspirations of both Castore and Rangers but the purpose of these arrangements will always be to maximise the availability and sales channels for Rangers products.
Rangers exclusive partnership with Castore ensures that Rangers always directly benefits with a royalty from the sale of all of the Rangers products manufactured, distributed and retailed by Castore. This includes all products distributed by Castore to high street retailers.
==========================================
They have done well not to mention two particular words in that article "Direct" and "Sports"
paddy malarkey 1st July 2020 at 20:58
'Would anybody know what this refers to ?'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Copying just the first line and keying it in to search gives this (about half way down the results page:
"22/06/2020 · HTTPS everywhere, soon. You’ll notice that S3 gave us an HTTPS image address. There are initiatives to move as much as possible of the Internet to HTTPS and avoid “mixed content” – such as Google, LetsEncrypt for free certificates, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s “ HTTPS everywhere ”.. SparkPost supports AMP for email HTML. AMP requires HTTPS for content."
So that suggests it's geek speak about programs for particular technical uses ..
I've no idea what it all means, of course, any more than I have of what E =mc squared means!( I read recently that Einstein might only have been half right about that!)
Cluster One 1st July 2020 at 21:25
I'm the same !
John Clark 1st July 2020 at 21:48
I was looking to find a document here .
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC425159/filing-history
paddy malarkey 1st July 2020 at 20:13
reasonablechap 1st July 2020 at 17:08
Glad you agree that they dug up their pitch before the league was called
…………………..
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1278453245426442241/photo/1
First pictures as gers tear up ibrox pitch April 8, 2020
Take up to ten weeks rangers sources insist it can be done in half the time a rangers spokesman it will be completed in 4 weeks
easyJambo 1st July 2020 at 21:42
They have done well not to mention two particular words in that article “Direct” and “Sports”
………………
But mention castore 9 times
paddy malarkey 1st July 2020 at 22:38
I was looking to find a document here .
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC425159/filing-history
………………..
10 Jun 2020 Confirmation statement made on 29 May 2020 with no updates
View PDF Confirmation statement made on 29 May 2020 with no updates – link opens in a new window – 3 pages (3 pages)
………………
All blank
What iis it with our SMSM journalists and anything to do with TRFC?
Can I be the only person who would like to know why someone like Andrew Smith of the 'Scotsman' appears not to wonder how Sports Direct can claim (as Smith reports) that the new 'Rangers' kit would be sold exclusively in their stores, while the TRFC statement can say "As is common practice in teamwear retail, Castore will form a number of wholesale supply arrangements with high street retailers in the UK and overseas because that is key to the global aspirations of Castore and 'Rangers' .." [my italics]
Is Ashley telling porkies?
Or is the TRFC statement's use of the phrase ' a number of …high street retailers' simply an attempt to conceal the fact that the only retailers may be SD's retail outlets?
Honest to God! If I can ask that question, why doesn't a journalist. The TRFC/Ashley story was a big story. If King and Co are still not free of him, that's a bigger story. Has a deal been struck to avoid having to fork out a huge lump sum in damages owing to Ashley by granting Ashley exclusivity until enough kit has been sold to pay everything that Ashley is due?
[Scotsman editor, gie 's a job, gonny?]
John Clark @ 1106hrs:
I suspect that TRFC’s desire to sell kit via third parties in the ‘High St.’ is complicated by the apparent news that CFC’s new merchandise will be available ‘exclusively’ from that well-known ‘High St.’ retailer, JD Sports, which has shops in most reasonable-sized towns. However, in the TRFC mindset, that would immediately exclude that company as a possible retail partner.
I can’t think which other companies have the sportswear-related, ‘High. St.’ retail reach & outlets for TRFC except SD.
John Clark 2nd July 2020 at 11:06
Might it be that the merchandise will be sold through the Fraser Group of companies , eg Jack Willis , Sports Direct , Evans Cycles , House of Fraser ,etc ?
Cluster One 1st July at 19:28
reasonablechap 1st July at 18:02
Robertson was on the board but I refer to what club actually hold real influence at the SPFL (Celtic).
………..
And you know this how? Are you part of the SPFL board and know of first hand experiance or is it just hearsay on your part.
===============================
You don't have to be on the SPFL board to know that Peter, on behalf of Celtic PLC, wields considerable influence. People like MacLennan, McKenzie (H&McL), Blair and Doncaster are on his side of the fence and have enjoyed his support during these omnishambolic times.
Nor do you have to be on the board to know that Robertson and Rangers are on the outside.
Don't let us forget the whatsup group messages that became public after the Good Friday vote. This is what Eric Drysdale (Dundee) sent:…: I’m imagining Neil will have been talking to Peter just after 5, and the SPFL not having received our vote, has led to further discussion with John of which I currently have no knowledge.
It's the same at the SFA. Maxwell and Mulraney are friends of Peter, the most influential individual in the Scottish game.
The SPFL would have run their ill-fated, omnishambolic plan past Peter in April to make sure he was happy with it before going ahead. Peter picks up the bat and hits resolution12 out of the park, because he can. The PLC has it's priorities and Peter needs his considerable bonus.
Keeping track of Peter is easy #FollowtheMoney
What seems like a fairly comprehensive summary of Day 2 in Court from a poster on Jambos Kickback, David McCaig.
Thank’s David !
===============
Heart of Midlothian/Partick Thistle v SPFL: Day 2
David Thomson QC – Hearts/Partick
The effect of Section of 2010 Arbitration Act – the language is clear, unambiguous and speaks for itself.
The court does not have a discretion to overlook this language. This seems to be at odds with the position in England and is based on different historical context.
Feels that the motion is ill-conceived and that the right to seek a sist depends on the applicant doing neither of the actions stated in 10(1d). To retain the right to seek a sist the respondents must not place substantive answers.
Thomson disputed Borland’s argument that they had to give a substantive answer. There is no basis that this could be considered to be a 2-sided dispute.
Motions for interim order argued daily without defences being lodged.
Therefore argues that the right to seek arbitration has been lost.
Any referral to arbitration would lead to valuable time being lost and more importantly the matters raised are of significant public interest and concern.
Reference is made to the extraordinary communication made to clubs last week telling them that it was necessary for them to support the SPFL in order to see the papers.
Lord Clark highlights that the email from Dundee was received at 4:48pm on the day on question. Does this help in speeding things up.?
DT refers to the debacle of the Dundee vote and the public interest in clearing this up.
We are entitled to discover the truth of what happened in that episode.
Lord Clark: Will evidence, afadavits and witness statements be required? Will witnesses be required to be led.
DT – the focus of the petitioners is likely to be on documentary evidence, but cant say for certain there would be no need for cross-examination… particularly the conversations between John Nelms and Neil Doncaster. There would also be an evidence requirement for any compensation demand.
Lord Clark: A requirement for evidence and limited cross-examination.
DT – Submission 2
No valid arbitration clause is in play. The starting point in any consideration should be the SPFL rules and these are not clear or definitive about arbitration
Reliance about SFA disciplinary rule 78 by Moynihan to suggest agreement to arbitration process does no such thing.
In the context of the present petition the arbitration provision of article 99 has not been incorporated.
Lord Clark – Is there a members agreement amongst clubs to resolve disputes via arbitration.
DT – Yes but only under article 99 and this petition is brought as shareholders within the SPFL Ltd. This why this is not a football dispute.
Temporary break in proceedings due to Broaband Issues – court not in session
No arbitration incorporation unless made clear.
Submission 3 – is unfair prejudice arbitrable: Refers to the papers
Submission 4 – Article 99.1 does not purport in any sense to refer all disputes to arbitration. It only says certain disputes ie SFA or Football dispute.
Is this a football dispute? The SPFL is not in any way an associated person.
Whilst in one way every dispute could be considered a football dispute, the problem with that argument is that the SPFL’s own rules only refer to disputes of a certain type.
This is a company dispute of unfair prejudice brought by shareholders of a company against how the affairs of the limited company, the SPFL have been conducted.
Reference again made to the articles involved in the Fulham case and how these are very different to article 99 by the SPFL.
Lord Clark: No ruling on motions until he has heard both.
Response from Garry Borland QC:
DT has referred to article 99, provisions relative to nomination of arbiters, time period, choice of chair and how this may be conducted. He said there might be significant delay. DT has added nothing specific to this. He has given no substantive grounds that the arbitration agreement is incapable of being performed.
He merely argues that arbitration is a less attractive option.
Article 99.1 provides in terms that it comprises an agreement by parties subject to it, to specified arbitration. This article is explicitly and arbitration agreement.
Article 99.15 the need for prior approval from SFA does not offend public interest, as it does not preclude any party from going to court and is reasonable for any parties seeking arbitration.
Lord Clark – refers back to St Johnstone 1965 when a similar precondition existed.
GB – similar but different as the SFA were more heavily involved and there was no independent arbitration tribunal.
This is no different from other contractual obligations in business life.
Therefore 99.15 is legal and enforceable.
What would a public hearing achieve? Extensive written submissions already placed
Lord Clark – Yesterday Mr Moynihan made reference to the SFA having the power to clubs ‘oot the gemme’ and said this consequence was something he had to consider.
GB – Refers back to 10.1(d) of arbitration act and the precedence in English Law and that the respondents have not prejudiced their right to arbitration. Substantive answers had to be lodged to show that there was a real dispute that fell within remit of arbitration. The case highlighted by DT (Norwest/Holst) vouches that this is correct. Requirement to demonstrate there is a 2-sided dispute suitable for arbitration.
Therefore it is entirely legitimate to provide answers.
There is no compelling reason why this should not go to arbitration.
On the issue of the clubs saying that they are sueing as shareholders of the SPFL. Petitioners are contractually obliged to comply with the SPFL rules.
Rule B4 of the SPFL rules contractually obliges petitioners to comply with the SFA articles. The 3 clubs are seeking to enforce the provisions of the SPFL articles.
Section 33 of Companies Act 2006, bind the members as if there were covenants on each member
Reconvene at 10 tomorrow morning
Court adjourned till 10.00 am tomorrow.
One or two points that I am particularly interested in:
Mr Thomson QC argued that the dispute is not a 'football dispute' in terms of the SFA's articles, but a shareholders' dispute with the company of which they are shareholders; and that the mere reference in the SPFL's Articles to Arbitration did not imply that the Arbitration provisions in the SFA's Articles had been incorporated into the SPFL's articles as (apparently)they would need to have been if those provisions had to be complied with by members of the SPFL.
Mr Borland QC argued that the basis on which the parties are shareholders in the SPFL and members of the SFA is that they are members of the SPFL, and therefore bound to comply with the Articles of the SPFL, and those Articles require compliance with the SFA's Articles, because Section 33 of the Companies Act 2006 says that a Company's Articles bind the members of the company.
And that the respondents (HoM and PT and the other 3 clubs) were also shareholders in the SPFL and members of the SFA and entitled to enforce the Articles of the SFA against fellow shareholders/members.
A number of cases were cited , of course.
Mr Borland will continue tomorrow, then Mr Moynihan, and then on to Mr Thomson for his motion on recovery of documents.
Technically, things went generally well, although there were two briefish interruptions one lasting three or four minutes as far as I could estimate and the Judge halted proceedings while the techies sorted things.
John Clark 2nd July 2020 at 11:06
……………..
Reminds of the pop up shops and sell as much as you can before a court order comes through the door.
reasonablechap 2nd July 2020 at 16:07
You don’t have to be on the SPFL board to know that Peter, on behalf of Celtic PLC, wields considerable influence.
……
I’m imagining Neil will have been talking to Peter just after 5,
…
with John of which I currently have no knowledge
…………..
Words like I’m imagining and no knowledge are just hearsay not facts.
………
The SPFL would have run their ill-fated, omnishambolic plan past Peter .
And you know this how?
Again all speculation on your part.
Cluster
Your need for the complete factual story and absolutely no room for speculation is very much at odds with your stance on The Asterisk.
The following sentence is factual.
It is speculation that Celtic would have won the league had all teams completed their fixtures.
*
ps. Why do you think that Eric Drysdale (Dundee) would imagine that Neill would speak to Peter just after the 5pm deadline closed ?
Arranging a game of golf, a chat about French wine or we may have a problem, so who do we need to speak to ?
reasonablechap 2nd July 2020 at 17:48
It is speculation that Celtic would have won the league had all teams completed their fixtures.
………………
It is wishful thinking to believe that a team like celtic would have lost a 13 point lead ( A feat that has never happened before in The SPFL) and a 25 goal difference advantage, to a team who were beaten by two clubs at the bottom of the league.
Was the reason why all clubs agreed that celtic were champions.
….
Ps. Why do you think that Eric Drysdale (Dundee) would imagine that Neill would speak to Peter just after the 5pm deadline closed ?
……
He could imagine Neil would speak to Peter and imagine that Neil would speak to anyone else on the SPFL Board.
Cluster
reasonablechap 2nd July 2020 at 18:18
Celtic did complete the fixtures, the league was called to an end,and all clubs Agreed they be crowned champions.
reasonablechap 2nd July 2020 at 18:18
By your reconing, if there is an anomaly there should be an Asterisk.
Do we add an asterisk if the league finishes on a thursday? do we add an asterisk for the scottish cup as it will take place months later than normal, do we add an asterisk to the european trophies as they will take place not in May?
Cluster/RC
Your game of ping pong is getting a bit tiresome. Can you not just agree to disagree?
Wiki has a note against the 2019/20 champions to the effect that a PPG basis was used to decide the CHAMPIONS due to the season being curtailed due to Covid 19. I think this is a reasonable point to record for posterity although maybe it should have added that Celtic (having played 30/38 matches were 13 points ahead of Rangers who had played 29/38 matches. It also notes that Rangers 54 includes 1 that was shared with Dumbarton. No notes against the EBT years though!
bordersperson @18.57
For what its worth, I have already opined that RC suffers from (what sadly could now be terminal) argumentative personality disorder – meaning that no one would ever be overturn his 'closed mind' attitude. On that score – ye cannae win! He wid start a fight 'in an empty hoose'.
Perhaps these words from a Bob Dylan song might help you accept this:-
"you're right from your side and I'm right from mine …
we're both one too many mornings an a thousand miles behind"…
… except, according to RC – he wouldn't be!
For what its worth, I feel it would be in the best interests of all members of the SFM community if he were given a free transfer form this site as he seems to be 'dragging a lot of people down' (living 'rent free' in a lot of people's heads) by shifting the focus from genuine, honest and open minded discussion to … well whatever the anti social 'beehive in his bonnet' is.
bordersdon 2nd July 2020 at 18:57
Cluster/RC
Your game of ping pong is getting a bit tiresome.
Agreed.
David Thomson QC, acting on behalf of the relegated clubs…;
“It is a debacle.
It is of significant public interest and concern.
Given the legitimate public interest present in the case, the matter ought to be determined in a public forum like a court because it serves the public interest to do so.”
========
Any sympathy I had for the complaining clubs evaporated with this plea “in the public interest”.
In 2012, the SPL instigated the Lord Nimmo Smith Commission. The SFA was the agreed appeals body.
Despite the massive public interest – and concerns – then, I don’t seem to remember ANY club complaining – or demanding that a “public forum like a court” should be involved, e.g. to ensure fairness and transparency.
The complaining clubs can’t just pick and choose when the public interest is relevant, for their own purposes.
The 42 SPFL clubs have the dysfunctional, corrupt, incompetent governing bodies they ALL fully deserve.
StevieBC 2nd July 2020 at 19:34
==============================
Whilst I take your point, that's not really the fault of the petitioners. They are just doing the best they can to try to win. If they think they have a better chance of doing it in Court than at the SFA then they will clearly try to get the matter dealt with there.
Clearly the club back in 2012 had more faith in Scottish football seeing things their way than a Court examining the evidence and looking after their interests.
StevieBC 2nd July 2020 at 19:34
In 2012, the SPL instigated the Lord Nimmo Smith Commission. The SFA was the agreed appeals body.
Despite the massive public interest – and concerns – then, I don’t seem to remember ANY club complaining – or demanding that a “public forum like a court” should be involved, e.g. to ensure fairness and transparency.
……………………
Maybe they learned something from 2012
I may be entirely wrong in this, but I don't think that going to Arbitration under the Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010 would mean that the case would be decided by a Judicial Panel set up under the SFA's Judicial Panel Protocol?
That would be like an in-house inquiry such as the LNS Inquiry, drawing on persons on the SFA's list.
As a member of the public, I wouldn't be at all satisfied of the independence of such an 'Arbitration'.
John Clark 3rd July 2020 at 09:58
……………
I would ask the SFA and the SPL to release THE FIRST DRAFT of the five-way agreement put together by their lawyers to reveal all of the sanctions. Stripping of titles was definitely within that document.
In terms of this commision, if the SPL agenda prevails then rangers will be found guilty and being found guilty we will lose five titles.
What i said before is that this COMMISION IS NOT INDEPENDENT BECAUSE THE SPL HAVE SET IT UP. saying that they are not independent is not saying that they are not impartial.
That is what i have an issue with and i will make these points when i go see the SFA.
Alistair johnston Sep 18, 2012
………
First point, you never hear him Asking that the final draft of the 5 way agreement be revealed.
second point is that he was no longer at the ibrox club so what right has he to go to the SFA for anything.
Rant over.
………..
Only when the 5 way agreement was changed to there be no stripping of titles, the independance and impartiality of the commission was not called into question, move along nothing to see here kind of thing.
Nothing is independant or impartial if the outcome has already been agreed, only when the outcome is agreed the question of independence and impartiality is not questioned.
Court adjourned for lunch.
Will reconvene at 2.00 pm when Lord Clark (no relation) will give his judgment.
To late to edit.
Something i just seen Is Alistair johnstone saying “Stripping of titles was definitely within that document”
How did he know this?
As a guy not involved at the ibrox club at the time of saying this, how did he know or not know what was in the first draft of the 5 way agreement.
And if he is saying while not being involved with the ibrox club at this time that he has seen it, just how the hell can Peter Lawwell say he has not seen it.
Maybe PL should have been asked have you seen ANY OF THE DRAFTS of the 5 way agreement.
If you have? like Alister Johnstone may be saying here that, he has. Why then PL have you not seen the final draft?
Cluster One 3rd July 2020 at 13:05
…
Peter Lawwell say he has not seen it. Maybe PL should have been asked have you seen ANY OF THE DRAFTS of the 5 way agreement. If you have? like Alister Johnstone may be saying here that, he has. Why then PL have you not seen the final draft?
===========
Lawwell has been the highly successful CFC CEO for the last 17 years.
Partly, that will be because he knows EXACTLY what is going on across the game – and also what could be in the pipeline.
He probably knows what everyone at Hampden has for breakfast!
His 'daft laddie' routine WRT "I haven't seen the 5WA" just doesn't wash.
Lord Clark's judgment: Arbitration.
John Clark 3rd July 2020 at 14:40
Other key points.
Hearts won petition to get access to key documents for use in Arbitration (or potentially any future court case).
In the words of Lord Clark parties ‘need to put their cards on the table’.
Lord Clark stressed that Hearts/Partick Thistle were wholly correct in not seeking court action or arbitration while the potential for reconstruction was still a possibility.
Hearts/Partick v the Three others clubs – expenses shared.
Hearts/Partick v SPFL, petitioners to pay the cost of the SPFL case but only to the amount of 50%
So far a 0-0 draw in the first leg.
John/ Wottpi/ Anyone
What happens if arbitration doesn't get a result or if Hearts Thistle or the three are unhappy with where it takes them to?
Is there an appeal and court option for either side to pursue?
Finloch 3rd July 2020 at 15:02
Please rember its four not three. The SPFL are still very much the first respondent in all this despite QC Moynihan letting the other teams QC to the heavy lifting.
They want this to be seen seen a club v club but its not really as they were the ones who put the clubs in this stupid position in the first place.
There appeared to be mention of the possibility of being able to return to court after arbitration in the deliberations but I'd be more comfortable on JC or EJ possibly covering that as I may have misheard / misinterpreted.
wottpi 3rd July 2020 at 14:52
John Clark 3rd July 2020 at 14:40
Other key points.
Hearts won petition to get access to key documents for use in Arbitration (or potentially any future court case).
………………….
Would that be key documents that Dellotie were given?
StevieBC 3rd July 2020 at 13:39
Partly, that will be because he knows EXACTLY what is going on across the game – and also what could be in the pipeline.
He probably knows what everyone at Hampden has for breakfast!
His ‘daft laddie’ routine WRT “I haven’t seen the 5WA” just doesn’t wash.
………………….
Maybe i put that there for future reference;-)
The written copy of Lord Clark's oral decision
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2020csoh68.pdf?sfvrsn=0
wottpi 3rd July 2020 at 15:15
There appeared to be mention of the possibility of being able to return to court after arbitration in the deliberations but I'd be more comfortable on JC or EJ possibly covering that as I may have misheard / misinterpreted.
===============================
I haven't looked at the Arbitration rules, but I suspect that the decision will be binding on both parties.
I'm unsure whether or not the Arbitration panel has the power to impose any remedies sought, e.g. reinstatement or the level of damages claimed, should Hearts and Partick be successful. The CoS case remains open with the CoS, although sisted, so I presume could be restarted to make such determinations.
Cluster One 3rd July 2020 at 15:38
Not sure what was on the list but from the arguments put forward by the SPFL and the other clubs they seemed worried. The Three clubs more due to concerns of commercial confidentiality etc but I assume the SPFL more concerned that Hearts & Partick would have full view of everything that went on. I'd assume the Deloitte report would be in there as there was much talk of the Dundee vote situation these past three days.
Regards your earlier question Lord Clark said he was ruling on the petition being 'sisted pending the outcome arbitration'. So I think the petition still stands but nothing further happens until we see what the arbitration brings. That being said I think the matter can only go back to the court if the arbitration is in someway failing or incompetent in some major way.
When the SFA put forward an independent panel. Will there be a call of “who are these people”?
wottpi 3rd July 2020 at 15:15Finloch 3rd July 2020 at 15:02
Please remember its four not three.
They want this to be seen seen a club v club but its not really as they were the ones who put the clubs in this stupid position in the first place.
…………………….
Agreed wottpi and well clarified. I just think after arbitration if Hearts and Thistle don't win that it will head for the next option.
Anyone know where that will be?
Just my personal view on the proceedings.
I felt that Lord Clark was sympathetic to the Hearts/Partick pleadings in the substantive case, but was legally obliged to direct that the dispute should go through the arbitration process by dint of the provisions within the articles and rules of the SFA and SPFL.
It will be interesting to see who are appointed to the arbitration panel, and how quickly they meet. Gerry Moynihan suggested that it should be possible for the panel to adjudicate within the same time scales as the court (proof before answer hearing provisionally scheduled for 14-16 July). We will find out soon enough if he was good to his words.
wottpi 3rd July 2020 at 16:00
Thanks for reply
I believe like the (Flawed independent)LNS inquiry. findings will be final. All that will be left is what punishment will be delt for going down the court route.
Transfer ban anyone.
Cluster One 3rd July 2020 at 16:00
One side picks one arbitrator from the list, the other side pick the second.
Then the two chosen pick the third. If I heard correctly the third arbitrator takes the chair and should always be a person with at least 10 years relevant standing in the legal community. Retired sheriffs Judges etc.
Could be another LNS situation but it really depends on how matters are argued.
I suppose as the petition is only sisted, there is more pressure on the process being pristine as, per EJ’s confirmation, there is an outside possibility of it going back to court if any hanky panky is at play or the process if seen as being flawed by one side or the other.
In relation to the potential fines for taking a football matter to court Lord Clark seemed very interested in that. He seemed to suggest they were totally within their rights to do what they were doing. I suspect if Hearts/PT were punished in a major way by the footballing authorities it would be challenged as being overly malicious.
Again like EJ, from the bits I heard I thought Lord Clark would have been keen to preside over the case (maybe that’s my maroon tinted specs) but the interpretation of the law means it has to go to arbitration.
As a footnote the footballing authorities have to get this arbitration right and started quickly because Lord Clark ends his ruling with the following offer:-
A 3-person arbitral tribunal is now likely to resolve the Scottish football dispute; from the existing @ScottishFA
Tribunal Candidate List, the @spfl
nominate an arbitrator; @JamTarts
& @PartickThistle
nominate an arbitrator; the 2 arbitrators then nominate a 3rd to act as chair
It’s also possible within the rules that both parties agree to the appointment of a single arbitrator. Either way , the findings of the tribunal “shall be final and binding on the parties”.
…………………..
From twitter.
Findings shall be final, that is what i thought earlier but happy to be corrected
………………..
Edit. just read your post.wottpi 3rd July 2020 at 16:31
wottpi 3rd July 2020 at 16:31
In relation to the potential fines for taking a football matter to court Lord Clark seemed very interested in that. He seemed to suggest they were totally within their rights to do what they were doing. I suspect if Hearts/PT were punished in a major way by the footballing authorities it would be challenged as being overly malicious.
……………Felt sorry for them, but football rules are football rules.
……….
I suspect if Hearts/PT were punished in a major way by the footballing authorities it would be challenged as being overly malicious.
Transfer ban anyone.
That is why i said that earlier. if Hearts/PT were punished in a major way, all they have to do is bring into focus the ibrox case and a transfer ban for years of cheating.
wottpi 3rd July 2020 at 16:31
'….. any hanky panky is at play'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Surely there won't be another person in the ranks of the SFA who will give us an opportunity to create a new 'ism' to describe a piece of fatuous nonsense, or Arbitration Panel chair and members ready to accept any nonsense argument from an 'expert' SFA witness?
I know that the SFA is not a party in the dispute, but it is the body that has to give permission to approach the Courts. It cannot be right that a board member of the SPFL which is party to the dispute sits on the SFA.
In that arrangement there is theoretical scope for hanky- panky influence to be brought when leave is applied for.
Who can accept that state of affairs?
Am I correct in saying, in simple terms, that basically the Judge said
"You have signed up to the SFA rules, and this should be settled via arbitration. So you need to do that. However if that cannot be done in a reasonable time then I will deal with the matter"
Homunculus3rd July 2020 at 18:47
Yup that's a nice summation.
I think Lord Clark was keen to get involved but president etc dictated arbitration.
You still have to ask what kind of matter would actually allows clubs to go to the courts!?
Homunculus 3rd July 2020 at 18:47
'…Am I correct in saying, in simple terms, that basically the Judge said
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The Judge's very words would say you are indeed correct:
'.If for any reason, difficulties arise with whether the arbitration tribunal is able to deal with the issues in the time available and the parties change their minds and wish the court to deal with, time will be made available for that to happen.' (para 28 of the judgment)
Homunculus 3rd July 2020 at 18:47
Am I correct in saying, in simple terms, that basically the Judge said
“You have signed up to the SFA rules, and this should be settled via arbitration. So you need to do that. However if that cannot be done in a reasonable time then I will deal with the matter”
………………..
The way i read it also.
Meaning if the have no time to get a panel together or can’t agree on who to sit on the panel or if you get a panel together and someone falls ill or anything like that, the judge would be happy to step in.
On the subject of Arbitration agreements which deny the right of access to the Courts in matters where huge punishments for going to court are able to be meted out for so doing , Lord Clark clearly sees the danger that that presents of unscrupulous majority shareholders (God forbid that there should be any such!) screwing minority shareholders, who must surely be intimidated by such threat if they try to take on a corrupt board, and may therefore be reluctant to do so and thereby suffer loss.
I make this observation on the basis of what he says in Para 7 of his judgment.
‘In my opinion, questions may arise as to whether in that context a bar on raising legal proceedings without the permission of the Board of the SFA, subjecting a club which does so to the potentially extreme sanctions mentioned by senior counsel for the SPFL, can be viewed as contrary to public policy and hence unlawful. ‘
To be refused permission to go to Court by the very people whom you believe to have shafted you and who have power to hammer you for going to court without their permission is just plain nonsense, in my opinion.
Good heavens, that means that if there were ever to be [God forbid!]a majority shareholder of a company who was a crook who disregarded the provisions of the Companies Act and acted with unfair prejudice against minority shareholders he would be free to do so with impunity if the Company’s articles of association had an Arbitration clause that forbade recourse to the Courts under severe penalty.
That is the ‘public interest’ point. The law ought not to allow that kind of scenario where access to the courts is denied because you’ve signed up to an arbitration clause in good faith that the company will be run in good faith by people of integrity.
I would have wished that Lord Clark had found a way to use his misgivings in order to get an appeal to the Inner House to try to get the nonsense of the present law addressed.
Sorry JC but your “major shareholder of a company” analogy is not quite correct. The SPFL is indeed a limited company. They do have shareholders, 42 in fact, and all pretty normal up to that point. The 42 shareholders hold an equal share; getting a bit unusual now, that are not available on the market and are not freely transferrable. They are completely interdependent with the other members and in their agreement to operate and compete within rules of an association; otherwise they are merely a group of clubs, companies or just people. They all sign up to participating in a commercial and sporting enterprise within the rules of the limited company and, more importantly, the national and global associations of their sport. The rules of their particular association must be within the rules of the global (Europe and the world in our case) associations otherwise the whole thing doesn’t work.
So if, for example, a member/shareholder club decides to pay separate remuneration to players under an undisclosed side contract it may be perfectly legal but it breaks the rules of the association and therefore the limited company League and they can be duly punished. Relating that to the current situation, the side contract paying club could, of course, take it to court as they could with any issue. Player tapping, transfers outwith window, playing a banned player, playing a ringer, slagging off the ref prior to a game etc etc. None of which is illegal.
Hearts (and Thistle) are in a bloody awful situation. I have no time for Neil Doncaster. The SPFL have been complicit with some of the worst crap I’ve seen in Scottish fitba since 2012. But Hearts/PT needed to fail in the court. We may disagree with any or all of the SPFL/SFA/UEFA/FIFA rules but not just when it suits us to do so or because we dinna like Doncaster. Like the laws of the land there are ways to change the SPFL rules and it’s a helluva lot easier for an equal shareholder to get changes through, by dint of approval of resolution, especially when 42 shareholder voting is at the core of it. Hearts and PT are actually founder members of the SPFL and have had the opportunity to propose resolutions and to vote on all the resolutions to date. They have had the protection of those rules to date.
ernie 4th July 2020 at 09:50
‘.Sorry JC but your “major shareholder of a company” analogy is not quite correct. The SPFL is indeed a limited company…..’
“””””””””””””””””””””””””
Yes, ernie, thank you, but I was not referring so much to the SPFL but to any plc, to which the Companies Act applies in respect of shareholders’ rights vis-a-vis the company. I should have made it clearer that my belief is that Lord Clark’s interest in the ‘public interest’ aspect was not particularly in respect of the case in front of him, but more generally.
ernie 4th July 2020 at 09:50
I largely agree with your analysis of the interdependencies of regulations.
The issue for the clubs seeking to avoid the governing bodies protocols is, and remains, one of trust. There is an inbuilt fear of bias in favour of the governing bodies, that a tribunal, panel, commission or other body will look at the issues from the viewpoint of footballing regulations, outcomes and expectations, rather than rely on legal aspects or natural justice arguments that might be heard in court.
SFA/SPFL processes have moved on over the years, primarily due to clubs engaging QCs or other legal representatives to argue their case. It has forced the processes to be conducted on much more of a legal footing. Arbitration is one such process, with at least the semblance of impartiality, although with each of the parties nominating a representative, their remains a risk of at least a perception of bias. Neither party is able to set a Terms of Reference, as such, as the case should be arbitrated on the basis of the complaint made. It has to include consideration of matters of law as well as football rules and regulations. Confidentiality of proceedings also remains a concern.
In contrast, the football authorities continue to be able to initiate (or decline) their own “internal” investigations or appoint commissions, inquiries, set terms of reference etc. There have been a couple of instances in the dispute about the “written resolution” and its aftermath, e.g, the internal Deloitte investigation and the rejection of the TRFC request for an independent inquiry. We are all familliar with the LNS Commission as another example of poor governance that has generated so much distrust in the processes to this day.
The invocation and independence of those discretionary investigations remain in need of revision.
Fair enough JC. Then there’s trust, now there’s an issue!
I wouldn’t trust the SPFL or the SFA to draw a cup round. Neither would I trust Ms Budge to do what’s best for Scottish fitba rather than play to her club’s fans’ bank accounts.
Arbitration! There's a whole world out there of which I knew nothing.
There's the Arbitration(Scotland) Act 2010, containing the Scottish Arbitration Rules, and
there is a list of 'arbitral appointments referees'!
It seems that if parties cannot agree who should be the arbitrators in their dispute , either of them can ask one of the 'list' to make the appointments.
Who's on the list?
Agricultural Industries Confederation Limited(2)
Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
Dean of the Faculty of Advocates
Institution of Civil Engineers
Law Society of Scotland
Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
Scottish Agricultural Arbiters and Valuers Association(3)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/cy/ssi/2010/196/made
And it seems that although the decision of Arbitrators is 'final' there cab be some rights of review or appeal!
And it seems the Arbitration Panel'spowers are full enough to 'reduce' (cancel) the SPFL's full decision, and not just award compensation to those affected adversely by that decision.
Can any of us see that happening?
I suspect they'll bugger about, and let the decision stand, and Hearts &Partick will walkaway with enough dosh in compensation to pay the fine the SFA will hit them with for daring to go the Courts, and a few bob left over!
There's a lawyer chap coming on 'Sportsound' to explain the arbitration process, which has nothing to do with the SFA, according to Richard Gordon.
So it's not in the Judicial Panel Protocol, and doesn't involve the Compliance Officer.
I heard the QC on 'Sportsound' say that an Arbitration award is 'final'.
That made me have another look at the Scottish Arbitration rules in case I had to apologise for saying in my earlier post that there were some possibilities of appeal or review
Rule 67
67(1)A party may appeal to the Outer House against the tribunal's award on the ground that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to make the award (a “jurisdictional appeal”).
Rule 68
68(1)A party may appeal to the Outer House against the tribunal's award on the ground of serious irregularity (a “serious irregularity appeal”).
Rule 69
(1)A party may appeal to the Outer House against the tribunal's award on the ground that the tribunal erred on a point of Scots law (a “legal error appeal”).
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2010/1/schedule/1?view=plain
I would imagine of course that there must be very, very few ,if any Appeals under these rules, but nevertheless the possibility of Appeal is there in the Rules.
John Clark4th July 2020 at 15:50
As always on SFM everyday is a school day.
I think the problem with the word Arbitration is that many folk may think of union v company disputes where a compromise is reached through the Concilliation element offered by an organisation such as ACAS.
The reality of the situation is what we now have a process that is one step below what would have happened in the CoS.
Any mis-step in the process or the decision making being dodgy in terms of the law then it can all go back to the CoS.
D Utd, Raith and Cove lost the call to dismiss.
The SPFL could hardly argue not going to arbitration as it is the football way. So Hearts Partick lose but it's really the status quo.
While commercial confidentiality issues are understood, SPFL D Utd Raith & Cove somehow feared information being made available. Hearts/Thistle win
Arbitration will resolve the issue but also be effectively the independent investigation the SPFL and some clubs were keen to avoid.
So a win for football, albeit fans may not manage to see the full details of what shenanigans took place.
wottpi 4th July 2020 at 17:37
'.. on SFM everyday is a school day…
…Arbitration will resolve the issue but also be effectively the independent investigation the SPFL and some clubs were keen to avoid.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Yes, I have been introduced and educated in so many aspects of life by being prompted to research by many posts and reflections by people in whose life experience has been is different from mine.
—
I was reassured when I read and heard the stuff about Arbitration, and especially by the answer the QC (Paul Reid) gave on 'Sportsound' to the question as to whether the Arbitration Tribunal might keep the 'wider picture' in mind (i.e. the 'inconvenience' that would be caused if it found that the SPFL's actions had been unlawful) and decided on balance in favour of the SPFL.
Time will tell whether there was any hanky-panky or significant irregularity in the whole of the 'Written resolution' process and vote!
The answer was that he couldn't imagine a Tribunal okaying something that it knew to be unlawful.
Hello everybody,
I have watched from afar for years and finally plucked up the courage to join the forum.
Good to see supporters of many clubs on a forum, having healthy debate, save for a comment I read in the last week that said The Rangers International Football Club had been the most inconvenienced club in this Covid Pandemic that Scottish Football as a whole has contrived to make a sows ear of! A leap into the world of fantasy that was a step too far I’m afraid.
Scottish Football in the last twenty five years has been run by rank amateurs with too many vested interests. It has seen the demise of a competitive international team, the biggest sporting scandal in British history and continues to choose the wrong option whenever it can. It should not be forgotten that the football authorities are there at the behest of the member clubs. They continually sign up for this circus, they provide the next in line for the rotational blazer wearers and first class cabin travellers. Only the clubs with a collective will for real change can reshape and modernise the football model in Scotland.
In any other multi million pound enterprise one would expect the administration to be carried out by the best available qualified professional in each particular field. The fact that we have David McCallum (Maxwell – I couldn’t even tell you what he looks like, hence invisible man jibe) as CEO of The SFA is a classic example of this as did the appointment of Gordon Smith some years back. Absolutely no qualifications to be in such a position, well certainly not publicly which allows some to ask why?
The real lifeblood of the game, the supporters, have been left out in the cold. They are turnstile fodder that are treated with contempt by the committees and some of their own clubs. One needs only look at the cynical marketing ploys to make fans feel compelled to part with their cash.
The Scottish media are complicit in the ongoing shambles too. In the majority I find them to be sub standard and, in many cases, incompetent and have no basis of fact for any of their articles.
They are particularly adept at convincing the largest demographic in the land that everything in the garden is rosy. They are complicit in the lies that lead to the pockets being picked of those supporters who are so starved of success they cling to these fabrications. It’s a shameful manipulation of the understandable desperation of the victims of these lies.
So many things wrong, but by golly do I miss the noise, the smell, the taste of football. I hold out some hope that one day everyone will come to their senses and see the bigger picture to reinvigorate our national sport.
I hope you are all safe and well during these unprecedented times.
Anyway………..hello!
John Clark 4th July 2020 at 13:34
I suspect they’ll bugger about, and let the decision stand, and Hearts &Partick will walkaway with enough dosh in compensation to pay the fine the SFA will hit them with for daring to go the Courts, and a few bob left over!
……………….
The cost of going to court, is the ibrox club still picking up that tab? or was that just another sound bite.
And if the ibrox club have shied away from that bill just who is picking it up?
John Clark 4th July 2020 at 13:34
Who’s on the list?
………
Equally, an original vision of the SFA’s wholesale reforms last year(2011) was to provide an arm’s-length body to consider football disciplinary matters. The member clubs agreed, as the SFA has pointed out this
week, to install a so-called ‘cab rank’ of legal, business and football experts to provide an on-demand adjudication service.
…….
SFA panel admits ‘rushed’ decision on Rangers
….
As a matter of fact, they worked their socks off to get the job done.
At which point Gary Allan QC, Eric Drysdale of Raith Rovers and Alistair Murning, erstwhile football commentator, discovered that their best intentions had paved the highway to hell. If you are a Rangers supporter you might well want to read that a few times – and reflect upon how much good it did them.
After listening to four solid days of Lord Nimmo Smith’s summation of the evidence against Craig Whyte and Rangers, the three men sat down last Friday to consider the courses of action open to them. Had they been dealing with just about any other football club they would have been well within their rights to have told themselves: “Stuff this – we’ll start again Monday morning, OK?”
Instead, they convened until 10.45 on Friday night. On Monday they again worked long into the evening hours. And for whose benefit, exactly? For Rangers – whose administrators had conveyed that they needed a verdict delivered with absolute urgency.
As Eric Drysdale told this column: “The administrators were desperate for decisions in respect of prospective buyers and there was extreme keenness on the part of the panel members to deliver the judgments to them
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/9229029/SFA-panel-admits-rushed-decision-on-Rangers.html
……
I see Lord Clark has given the SFA 28 DAYS to get it sorted, lets hope it is not another rush decision the last time the administrators were desperate for decisions in respect of prospective buyers.
This time they are urged to take every possible step to ensure there is NO delay to the new season.
wottpi 4th July 2020 at 17:37
John Clark4th July 2020 at 15:50
As always on SFM everyday is a school day.
I think the problem with the word Arbitration is that many folk may think of union v company disputes where a compromise is reached through the Concilliation element offered by an organisation such as ACAS.
================================
Yes, some people confuse arbitration with what is now more commonly known as "mediation". In mediation both parties are encouraged through a mediator to find a compromise position that is acceptable to both.
Arbitration is simply asking a third party to make a determination following the submission of arguments by both parties about the issue(s) in dispute. That determination may fully, partly, or fail meet the requests of either, both or neither party.
Moya 4th July 2020 at 18:49 Edit
Hello everybody,
===========
Hello yersel.
I listened to Sportsound today, some good input from SFSA on their survey seeking supporters views on impact of CoVid 19
https://scottishfsa.org/survey-results-the-effect-of-covid-19-on-supporter-behaviour/ (more later I understand)
a reasonable report on what will happen next on the Hearts/Partick Thistle v SPFL situation ( both will get relegated but with some form of solidarity compensation (as in Scottish football needs both) but when the pundits get on about financial aspects of CoVid 19 its funny they never advocate players taking a cut in contracted wages in case they upset their pals for at the end of the day its all an old pals act.
Auldheid 4th July 2020 at 22:19
… but when the pundits get on about financial aspects of CoVid 19 its funny they never advocate players taking a cut in contracted wages in case they upset their pals for at the end of the day its all an old pals act.
=================================
Why should they, I haven't.
People seem to think that football players should work to different rules than everyone else.
Most footballers in Scotland don't earn a huge amount of money and their career in the game won't be that long so why should they take "a cut in contracted wages" any more than everyone else.
This is the kind of thing that is a perfect example of the prostitution of journalism by the SMSM!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/football/matt-polster-set-for-rangers-departure-as-mls-suitors-new-england-revolution-close-in-on-deal/ar-BB16l7D4?ocid=msedgntp
I don't blame Matt Polster, of course, (I'd never heard of him) but the trivial, nonsensical sh.te that Fraser Wilson ( of whom also I have never heard!) has written is like an advertising puff for which someone might have been paid by a football club to boost its image as a club with claims to have world-cup-class players on its books!
It is just such absolute journalistic crap!
Honest to God, what are they like?
Auldheid 4th July 2020 at 22:19
" a reasonable report on what will happen next on the Hearts/Partick Thistle v SPFL situation ( both will get relegated but with some form of solidarity compensation (as in Scottish football needs both) .."
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Not, Auldheid, a reasonable "report" but, I humbly submit, mere speculation that the Arbitration Tribunal will conveniently find in favour of the SPFL.
I admit that I too was ready to believe that 'Arbitration' was no more than 'mediation' where no point of principle is involved and folk can be talked into agreement and shake hands and move on
But Arbitration , as eJ's post a little earlier explains, is no less a matter of application of law and legal principles than is a Court hearing!
And the process is not in any way under the control or direction of the SFA ( in a way that some people believe the Judicial Panel Protocol may have been some years ago)
On the ex-player 'pundits' , some of whom were EBT beneficiaries who owe the rest of us some money, and whom I despise and, in respect of their employment by the BBC, condemn BBC Radio Scotland for sliding them a few bob, I would not expect them to be anything other than protective of players, because they themselves bloody well needed protection!
But Homunculus makes a fair point: the majority of players in the SPFL are in no better position to take a cut in wages than the rest of workers in the same sort of wages/salary band.
Homunculus
The context was the cost of Covid19 and financial impact on clubs.
Wages, especially football wages are a large part of the cost.
If the club cannot pay them then Footballers have the choice as does everyone else, take home less pay or have no pay to take home.
My point is why no mention by ex players in the media that perhaps footballers might have to consider the same factors as those that ultimately pay them, the ability to keep paying?
It wasnt that they were all overpaid anyway.
John Clark
I should have made it clearer that the bit in brackets was my prediction of eventual outcome not what was reported on Sportsound which was setting out the technicalities.
I should also make it clearer is my prediction is based on cynicism having observed how SFA/SPFL always get the result they want by hook or by legal crook.
Now if only the case for revisiting LNS and concluding the 2011 UEFA licence could be put to arbitration but of course clubs weren’t interested.
Seeing Auldheid on here today brought together an idea that was planted last week on reading of more layoffs at The Herald.
Relatively regularly we see suggestions that the Res12 guys should take the whole thing to court privately. It is usually accompanied by suggestions of, and support for, crowd funding the case. It would of course fill the pockets of the legal profession and also run the risk that any outcome less than a 100% win would be regarded by the media as a 100% loss.
So, how about this? Let's crowd fund purchasing The Herald and for once print the whole story truthfully. It would be a lot cheaper than legal fees and might even introduce a novel concept to reporting in this country – Print the facts!
Mickey Edwards 5th July 2020 at 08:55
'..So, how about this? Let's crowd fund purchasing The Herald ..'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
That led me on an entertaining wee search to find from whom the Res 12 would buy the 'Herald' if they were so minded.
I think I knew already that it is owned by 'Newsquest' .
Yes.
But 'Newsquest' was owned by Gannet Inc until December 2019, when it was swallied up by New Media Investment Group Inc..(they say 'merged')
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/11/19/gannett-new-media-investment-group-merger-gatehouse-media/4203820002/
and folk began to get chopped!
https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2020-06-18/gannett-announces-elimination-of-the-ceo-position-for-the-operating-company-and-the-departure-of-paul-bascobert
He, however, who was CEO of Newsquest Media , and therefore UK boss of the Herald pre-merger with New Media Investment Group Inc ,still seems to be in post, as far as I can see, so maybe he's the one who would have to be approached!
I read about these things now in light of what I have learned about how our Football Authorities work. (Auldheid has nothing on me when it comes to cynicism!)
And, frankly, I conclude that if piddling little associations of football clubs can sell out truth and integrity in sport (in feckin Sport!) in the way that the SFA and SPFL did in 2012 and the SPFL has done this year, I can only imagine what the boards of companies like New Media Investment Group Inc might be prepared to do, where the filthy lucre involved is incomparably greater!
I still cannot believe that 41 football clubs, some of which have themselves had the bitter experience of having to claw their way out of Administration, were and are happy to accept the Big Lie.
They had courage enough to insist that Sevco, if admitted at all, should be admitted only as a new club, and into the bottommost league.
And then, whether corruptly or because they did not have the 'cojones', failed to follow through and tell the truth: that TRFC is not, and could not possibly be, the same RFC of 1872 that, even as I post, is still in Liquidation.
But instead accepted the nonsense-speak that TRFC acquired the share in the SPL that RFC of 1872 had had but lost when it was Liquidated!
Honest to God! How any of those men/women can look at themselves in the mirrror without shame!
The pandemic is not, of course, any fault of Scottish Football.
But if Scottish Football goes down the pan, hell mend any and all involved in the creation and fostering of the Big Lie.
And in particular, may the gentlemen (and, possibly, some ladies) of the SMSM descend into the deepest pit of Dante's 'Inferno' , for their craven cowardice and abandonment of any and all 'journalistic principle'.
Or , from a more earthbound perspective, who would give a toss if our 'sports journalists' got the heave? They have supported a devious, untrustworthy governance body and two deceitful football clubs in the Big Lie.
If New Media Investment Group Inc were to decide that the Herald was to be chopped I would shed no more tears than I would if BBC Radio Scotland Sports were to be axed.
New blog up