The Last Thing Scottish Football Needs Right Now ..

by

.. is More Secrecy

We all now know Lord Clark’s judgement on Friday has kicked off an arbitration process to solve the case raised by Hearts, Partick and their sleeping partner, Stranraer.
He seemingly had no option and did this because it is the “pre-decided” SFA procedure for football disputes.
Accordingly three qualified persons will be chosen from an existing SFA list and in effect become the judges and jury tasked with coming to a decision on a complex and complicated situation.
Be cogniscant that this is a situation where relegation will have huge financial impact to the three clubs and their members of staff at a time of pandemic related economic hardship.

Real people and real jobs cast aside by what could be classed as myopia and lack of leadership.

And potentially exacerbated by a decision made in secret, in an unreported process, with no avenue to appeal.

Did Hearts and Thistle and Stranraer deserve to be relegated I hear you ask?
Yes so far, and on points per game, but there were enough games left and all three could easily have avoided the drop.
By the same judgement Hearts should already have been awarded the Scottish Cup as they were statistically the remaining club with the best cup record and goal difference!

The three Arbitrators will now hear the SPFL case and the Hearts and Thistle case put forward by their expensive legal teams and then decide.

Simples.

Maybe not.
From press reports the SPFL even tried to block their own members, Hearts and Thistle, getting access to their co –owned SPFL documents but Lord Clark seemingly stopped that.
It seems being aware of the severe time constraints, and maybe also possibly suspecting downstream game-playing, he also offered his and the court’s availability if required.

Let me clarify something that I didn’t know until last week.

Arbitration is not the same as mediation.
Not even close.
From what I’ve read since, mediation would have been better for all concerned but progressing that way that would have taken a less dysfunctional corporate structure across our game.
It could and should have been the best way forward for us all.

If only.

But fair enough we all need a result and arbitration we’ve been told can maybe deliver that in around 10 days.

In the meantime ask yourself if an arbitration decision made and dished out without any kind of public scrutiny or redress is the way to go?

What if deep inside the system there is any kind of unseen bias?
By the way that’s just a question.
I’m not suggesting that there is inherent bias.
Surely no biases in Scottish football exist.

Being positive I can see the advantages of coming to a conclusion in a process that is quicker and less costly to our game than going to the courts but something about the whole thing is wrong.

My instinct says it’s the secrecy.

Most of the people I have spoken with agree.

We all live in Scotland where our government is open to the public and where government committees are on the public record.
The fourth estate is all over everything they do.
Likewise our courts are generally open to the public and to the media to report on what is happening within.

There is nothing in this dispute that should be kept secret from the real stakeholders in the game, the fans.

We all have a stake in the game.

There is nothing healthy about this closed doors charade.

It should all be out in the open.
Any judgement made without the presence and scrutiny of the media and SFM’s very own Easyjambo and John Clark is open to retrospective revisitation ad infinitum and will never bring the fairness and closure we all need.
It is not in any way the formula for the reconciliation that is needed across all 42 clubs.

Football fans don’t always have to agree but we need to know that it is refereed fairly. Arbitration rules laugh at that basic requirement.

How The Hell Did We Get Here?

As I write the countdown to the new season is underway and a sans-Hearts fixture list is imminent.
I have no idea what will happen if the three wise arbitration men decide to block the Hearts, Partick and Stranraer SPFL enforced demotions.
They might indeed.
The majority of fans wouldn’t disagree with them if they did even if it becomes a mess.

Yes that would be a doomsday scenario for all but we’d bounce back.
If it is the right thing to do for our game then a bit of hassle for Neil and Co should not stop it happening.

10 days or so will tell.

Were the Leagues Called Too Soon?

Chick and Tam on the radio certainly, and indignantly think so.
Most fans concur with many of us already watching English football nightly and wondering what if?

I think only four countries in Europe ended their leagues early.

We’ve been told the SPFL came to the decision to trigger payments because of our new TV contract.
Seems plausible enough and to be fair there was great club impecuniosity and huge amounts of uncertainty at the time.
I’ve since also heard that the old broadcast contracts were renegotiated and compensation paid for the lost games as the new Sky deal became the focus and probably the driving force.
Money rules and Sky calls the tune in their 4 old firm games view of our world.

This combined and meant two big decisions were immediately on the horizon.

First Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer were to be relegated.
(“Bye-bye guys, tough luck and take your medicine”, from your erstwhile football family friends, almost certainly avoiding eye contact in the zoom meeting)!

Secondly Brechin City, or another, was spared the play offs and with the pyramid chain broken the top team from the play offs was told to forget their hopes of joining the SPFL.

Outrageous.

Someone at the SFA should have thrown a hissy fit and done something for their 2 disadvantaged members but I don’t think they ever did.
A real insight into how heartless our game can be.

Along the way
We all sat back in amazement as Neil’s “Good Friday Disagreement” evolved when John Nelm’s Dundee’s vote got first lost, then found and then changed over the weekend.
Didn’t smell right then.
Smells even worse now.
Along the way Dundee somehow became the casting vote.
(I hope there are full records of what really happened for the Arbitrators).

At the time, and rumbling still, there was huge criticism of the SPFL board for conflating approval of something or other to the much-needed payments due to the clubs.
(Apologies for the brevity but it all merges. So much was going on and a lot we never heard about too).

Rangers then came in live on radio demanding Neil D and Rod McKenzie to be spanked very hard but never quite being able to tell us why.

Other stuff happened after the vote too.

Maybe it was clever diversionary tactics, maybe something else, but for two or three weeks it was all go in all directions.
We had task forces set up here, there and everywhere.

So many I can’t actually remember their remits and to be honest like so many I can’t quite be bothered now.

It seemed we had the game looking at the genuine change that fans want and even us the independent SFSA were asked to help by Les Gray one of the task force co-chairs.

We did by taking it to our members and to the SFM too, in good faith even though deep down we thought it was all part of a game and said so.

Sadly it was a waste of effort and time moved on but fair play to Neil and the SPFL board.
Fair play because at the 11th hour they tried to get approval from their members to temporarily extend the leagues.

Neil’s attempt to do that wasn’t an actual formal vote.
That never happened.
What was termed by the SPFL as an “Indicative Vote” was heavily defeated.

Several weeks on and 18 of our 42 clubs still won’t even tell us their fans how they voted.
I had already asked Neil Doncaster how clubs voted and he told me it was secret ballot.
So it’s still mostly secret and like all secrets has the inherent ability to fester.

None of us can blame the clubs for voting the way they did.

A couple of weeks ago when trying to analyse the vote I highlighted that Hibs inexplicably voted against an Edinburgh Derby.
Having enjoyed many I still don’t get that.

I’m also on record recently stating that Ross County also voted no and effectively sentenced their two nearest neighbours and friends, ICT and Brora, to significantly less revenue in the next year.
And at the same time their no vote helped stymie the pyramid that was introduced to allow clubs like Ross County of old access the higher leagues.
(I well remember them in the Highland League – and played against them at the time).
I haven’t spoken with Roy MacGregor about his vote but I know that if I was a chairman of a bottom six club I too would have foreseen the approaching tsunamic, post-Covid crunch coming down the tracks. That was the season when the Covid induced “temporary league” of 14 had to be reduced back to 12, meaning 3 clubs get relegated, and 1 goes into a play off position.
4 out of 14!

Ouch! Ouch! Ouch! and ouch!

Not good business for anyone.

Like Roy, I’d have said “Sorry” to ICT and Brora and voted the same as he did. Roy’s fiduciary duty is to his club not to his neighbours.

Roy, I respect your position and all other chairmen too but it should never have come to this in our totally unnecessary football civil war.

And you know after hearing John Collins say on the radio today asking “Where’s the fairness in any of this”? I can’t disagree.

Words Of Wisdom For The 3 Wise Men

Fairness would be my starting point.
We know fans will never all agree about anything because we love our clubs and they will always come first.
But we crave fairness, openness and transparency.
That’s probably the first time I have written the transparency word since Stewart Regan nearly wore it our 8 years ago.

Out message to our Arbitrators is as follows.

The Scottish Fans are the bona fide stakeholders in the game and fund the clubs.

We collectively want and will welcome bigger leagues.*

We want no extra damage to any club from Covid.

We believe that there should be transparency in everything in football.
We abhor and have no trust in closed doors and secrecy.

Please publish your results and allow access to the process along the way.

What would be wrong with that?

What harm could it do?

A significant majority of fans don’t agree with these enforced relegations and would prefer either to finish the season or enlarge the leagues permanently.

And finally fans demand to be listened to because it seems we are the only ones who are able and willing to see the bigger picture for the good of the game.

No Closed Door Festering Secrets in Scottish Football

  • Arbitrators we are happy to share our research with you.

327 thoughts on “The Last Thing Scottish Football Needs Right Now ..”

  1. Apologies if covered already, but it looks like the detail behind the new kit deal for TRFC is becoming clearer – and the SMSM doesn't want to talk about it…

     

    I went onto 'Bears Den' and they seem to be aware and not best pleased at being lied to by the Blue Room. They realise – belatedly – that Big Mike has not done walking away at all.

     

    From what I've managed to see so far, TRFC/Castore are claiming 50K pre-orders.

    IIRC, it was £50 to join 'Mygers' to have access to pre-order.

    Tops are c.£60 (?).

    The first orders are due to be issued on August 1st.

     

    I'm guessing the 50K orders total might be optimistic – but, back of a fag packet estimation;

    Castore has already pulled in c.£3M.

    Mygers has pulled in c.£2.5M.

     

    Not a bad start for generating cash up front.

    It does raise the rather obvious question though: will this small operation – which has never had a kit deal before – actually be able to deliver 50K tops on August 1st?

    …and that's even before taking into account the impact of the pandemic on production, supply chains and distribution…?

    It must be tempting to just do a runner with the money…  enlightened

  2. So the SPFL finally issues the Premiership fixtures for 2020/21.

    I’m sure that everyone will be astonished to find that the first Celtic v Rangers fixture has been scheduled for Round 11 of the first round of fixtures.  That of course offers the best opportunity for the game, scheduled for the weekend of 17/18 October, to be played in front of a live (possibly restricted) audience.

    Now, for Celtic, what league game would be their best opportunity of maximising revenues from the sale of tickets, hospitality, merchandising, advertising etc. Isn’t it an amazing coincidence any such game should end up being scheduled to offer Celtic their best opportunity to boost their income after having to deal with a number of games against other Premiership clubs behind closed doors.    

    I appreciate that it may not be possible to have that particular fixture played in front of fans in any event, but I find such gerrymandering of fixtures goes against all principles of sporting integrity and I find it as frustrating as hell. 

  3. eJ, I thought it was supposed to be “a computer” which generated the fixture list?  indecision

    Didn’t CFC get very lucky then to land the TRFC game in Round 11?

    And if you put your points to Lawwell, he would probably reply – with a straight face – that he hadn’t seen the fixture list, until published!

    Just another murky item to sweep under the SPFL carpet.

     

  4. It seems that the UDA PR man has taken a tight grip on any information about TRFC/RIFC . No info on the Katic injury last week , and nothing about Alfredo . I heard a rumour that Lovenkrands fell foul and got bumped . 

    Is there a protocol that that fixtures are mirrored ie if the home game against a club is bcd, the return fixture against the same opponent is also bcd to ensure the integrity of competition ?

  5. StevieBC 6th July 2020 at 13:37

    It must be tempting to just do a runner with the money…  enlightened

    ===============================================

    Or have someone on board who has the infrastructure to deal with the demand.

    They would probably want a piece of the action as well though.

  8. I agree with the blog comments about removing secrecy at Hampden.

    It's supposed to be the 'People's Game', so why can't SFA and SPFL meetings be livestreamed, as routine?

    Ok, there might be an occasional meeting where commercial confidentiality has to be respected… but we're talking about the administration of a sport: it's not exactly State Secret level information being discussed.

    But, ANY/ALL 42 clubs could have pushed for such a significant move to improve trust levels with the fans – and for minimal cost.

    The clubs are not interested in what the fans think or want.  

    They're just interested in our money for overpriced ST's and exorbitantly, overpriced replica tops.

    Nothing changes: nobody at Hampden is listening either.

    As discussed many times over the years, it seems ever more relevant to have a professionally run, independent service to provide governance.  

  9. I note that under the Scottish Arbitration Rules ( which are laid out in  Schedule I to the Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010) there is not a requirement that witnesses be put on oath before testifying.

    “36   The tribunal may—[my bold]

    (a)direct that a party or witness is to be examined on oath or affirmation, and

    (b)administer an oath or affirmation for that purpose.”

    I think that it’s rather a pity that swearing an oath is not mandatory.

    We have had plenty of evidence that people in football governance and in football clubs in the recent and not so recent times have shamelessly lied.

    Indeed, one of the most outrageous untruths in the history of Scottish Football (you know the one I refer to) has been sedulously bolstered and propagated for several years now; and barriers were put up to block investigation into another, slightly earlier, set of covert dealings which were and are highly questionable.

    There is no guarantee that anyone asked to give evidence to the Arbitration Tribunal that will hear the dispute between HoM/PT and the SPFL would tell the truth even if he was under oath. But at least he would be liable for penalties if he lied under oath!

    In my view, anyone giving evidence in any legal ‘tribunal’ should as a matter of course be required to be on oath/affirmation.

    It can be argued , of course, that in the case in question no one is being charged with a ‘crime’, and that the Tribunal is not about proving criminal guilt on anyone’s part.

    But where relatively large sums of money,and sporting honour, position, and good name are at stake for either party, there might be a temptation to prevaricate, tergiversate, equivocate, obfuscate or even lie!

    As I say, we have seen and heard it done!

    So I hope  that witnesses are called, and are put on oath and cross-examined rigorously!

     

  10.  

    "Doncaster also insists Scotland’s Premiership has a golden opportunity to take centre stage across the globe in August.

    The SPFL chief executive believes a gap in the footballing calendar elsewhere opens the door for the country’s top flight to showcase the game in “its best light.”

    He said: “With so little other sport going then, Scottish football has the chance to be shown in its best light and we are looking forward to the return of it.”

    So our Keef reports.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/football/neil-doncaster-in-spfl-appeal-to-nicola-sturgeon-as-clubs-seek-pre-season-friendly-green-light/ar-BB16pARF?ocid=msedgntp

    I'm not sure what audience it is who will see 'Scottish football in its best light'  because in August there will be so little sport going then? 

    I am genuinely ignorant and not necessarily being critical. What does Doncaster refer to?

  11. easyJambo 6th July 2020 at 16:47

    '……save to say that it is highly unusual to see “sporting integrity” and “SPFL” in the same sentence.'

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    It certainly has been, since 2012!

    In the panic caused by the Liquidation of RFC in 2012 which came about because of sports cheating on an unheard of scale,  'sporting integrity' was cast aside and an absolute fiction was created to deny, in effect , the deliberate, planned , sports cheating (and tax cheating) that had been going on for  about a decade by a guilty, cheating, dishonest football club's knighted majority shareholder.

    The SPFL bought into that fiction to save liars and cheats!

    Yet, in the circumstances of a pandemic  they yet find themselves bound by 'Rules' to inflict damage on clubs innocent of any crime or fault!

    It is  a measure of the dirty mind of Scottish Football (and the SMSM ) that a normal liquidation of a club was 'specially'  dealt with at the expense of sporting integrity, while the wholly unique circumstance of a pandemic is allowed to damage innocent clubs.

    In my opinion.

     

     

     

     

     

  12. Peter, the most influential man in Scottish Fitbaw doesn’t tend to do surprises. He much prefers to deal with his many friends in the SPFL and SFA and help them to arrange outcomes.

    Peter prefers to work/lobby/demand in secret, silently wandering the 6th floor. Although, during that smelly Good Friday Vote fiasco, there was a leaked whatsup message from Eric Drysdale (Dundee) that included this revealing expectation regarding who Neil Doncaster would first turn to when the plan was somewhat in the air.

    “..I’m imagining that Neil will have been talking to Peter just after 5, and the SPFL not having received our vote, has led to further discussions with John of which I currently have no knowledge..”

    Let’s park that for now and move to the fixture list, where Peter got what he wanted.

    What use friends and influence, if you can’t use them to help you and your club get your way. To hell with thinking about other clubs, it’s Peters duty to look after number one, Celtic and self. A man has to look after his seven figure renumeration package in these hard times.

    Why wouldn’t Ian Blair (SPFL fixture guru) think of Lower Leagues clubs, who start on that same October weekend and make sure that the media spotlight wasn’t so consumed by an Old Firm match. Last week when on Sportsound, Blair said and I paraphrase, that because of other circumstances, the first Celtic v Rangers fixture had 4 possible dates? Mr Blair is one of Peters Friends and so it seems as if the Lower Leagues can go hang. Not to mention every other club who would ideally have wanted their big revenue raising match on that weekend.

    Silent Peter can always be found when you follow the money.

    He doesn’t do sporting integrity, but sometimes likes to talk about it.

     

     

  13. A SECRET hearing (arbitration) suits the SPFL down to the ground.

    That kind of says everything about the type of corporate goverance and dealings that they like to engage in.

    Don’t know if it’s a Scottish thing but apparently, Peter doesn’t like leeks.
    They aren’t in season but the Scottish game could do with some big beauties, so as to help cast some light in secret corners (help clear passages, so to speak).

  14. Oh, the memories come flooding back, the vocabulary (administration, insolvency event, points deductions , potential rescuers……) How corrupt is English football ? Will there be a genuine out-of-admin purchase, or a Scottish- Football-style Big Lie a la TRFC ?

    We wait with bated breath!

    "Wigan Athletic's administrators have launched an appeal against the club's impending 12-point deduction, while rugby league side Wigan Warriors have announced their intention to bid for the stricken football club.

    The Sky Bet Championship club entered administration on Wednesday and are set to be handed a 12-point penalty by the EFL once the season has been completed."

    https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11682/12022798/wigan-athletic-appeal-12-point-deduction-wigan-warriors-intend-to-bid-for-football-club

  15. Maybe somebody in the ever diminishing (in power influence – and sales) SMSM could Castore some light, by emerging from their very own secret corners, on Big Mike’s position vis-a-vis the Sevco kit deal, and refute the following

    Wiki Castore reveals “the Fraser Group appears to own Castore…Ashley is CEO of FG, and among their dozens of brands is Castore which means, in fact,we believe Ashley retains control of Rangers kits after all”. (6th May!).
    I couldn’t swear to this being a fact, you understand, but I know where my money would be.

    How (or, just as importantly importantly why?) did they apparently/ allegedly they miss this from a simple Google search?

  16. bect67 7th July 2020 at 13:41

    ==========================

    I would refer you to the most recent shareholder list dated 8/8/2019 and the persons with significant control submission dated 15/1/2020 for Castore’s operating company J.CARTER SPORTING CLUB LIMITED.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09670915/filing-history

    Can you identify through which of those shareholdings Fraser Group controls Castore?

  17. The SPFL fixture fiddle fiasco is a disgrace and only goes to confirm the fixation with 2 teams and 2 teams only. Sky no doubt stating that they want to maximise the "match day experience" for audiences throughout the country/world by having fans present if at all possible. I am already sick of this season. For the MSM it is only about getting or stopping TIAR. Why do they not just have these 2 teams play each other every week and put the games on Sky and see how quickly interest fades (or would it??).

    Scottish professional football is broken! How do we mend it? 35 years since any team out with these 2 teams won the top league FFS! And who would bet against, if things continue the way is is, that in another 35 years folk will be saying 70 years! Is it mendable? I would love to put some realistic proposals forward but sadly can't. I think there are too many professional clubs in Scotland and 2 of them are too big compared to any of the others in terms of available resources (wherever the money comes from). I would shed no tears if new Rangers went tits up (don't think they will though) but that would not solve anything as we saw when their was not a Rangers in the top league.

    I could go on but really what's the point.

  18. Easyjambo – 2019???
    So – the situation hasn’t changed since then? My apologies if so (though I’m not so sure).

    May I humbly and innocently suggest that the source I quoted is as good as any impartial one. However, just a wee follow up question (and please be gentle as you remember I didn’t claim any fact here!)

    At which outlets will kits be sold (other that TRFC, Frasers and maybe  ‘The Barras’/Turkey?)

  19. bect67 7th July 2020 at 13:41

    Maybe somebody in the ever diminishing (in power influence – and sales) SMSM could Castore some light, by emerging from their very own secret corners, on Big Mike’s position vis-a-vis the Sevco kit deal, and refute the following

    Wiki Castore reveals “the Fraser Group appears to own Castore…Ashley is CEO of FG, and among their dozens of brands is Castore which means, in fact,we believe Ashley retains control of Rangers kits after all”. (6th May!).
    I couldn’t swear to this being a fact, you understand, but I know where my money would be.

    How (or, just as importantly importantly why?) did they apparently/ allegedly they miss this from a simple Google search?

     

    ================================================

    I think some wee devil added castore onto that wiki listing rofl have a check not there now.

    =========================================================

    reasonablechap 7th July 2020 at 12:53

    A SECRET hearing (arbitration) suits the SPFL down to the ground.

    That kind of says everything about the type of corporate goverance and dealings that they like to engage in.

    Don’t know if it’s a Scottish thing but apparently, Peter doesn’t like leeks.
    They aren’t in season but the Scottish game could do with some big beauties, so as to help cast some light in secret corners (help clear passages, so to speak).

    =====================================================

    Yes and all the way back to when oldco died paranoid much. 

  20. bect67 7th July 2020 at 15:34

    Easyjambo – 2019???
    So – the situation hasn’t changed since then? My apologies if so (though I’m not so sure).

    =========================

    The company would be required to notify Companies House (within 21 days?) of a change that affects a “Person of Significant Control”, i.e. controls 25% or more

  21. The company would be required to notify Companies House (within 21 days?) of a change that affects a “Person of Significant Control”, i.e. controls 25% or more
    ============================================================

    Are there any penalties for not so doing?  Do they check up that companies do obey their rules?

    We have seen how JC is being messed about by the people that are supposed to protect shareholders. 

     

  22. ‘easyJambo 7th July 2020 at 14:40

    I would refer you to the most recent shareholder list dated 8/8/2019 and the persons with significant control submission dated 15/1/2020 for Castore’s operating company J.CARTER SPORTING CLUB LIMITED.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09670915/filing-history
    Can you identify through which of those shareholdings Fraser Group controls Castore?’

    #####################

    I’m not a trademark expert, but the term ‘Castore’ appears to be unprotected. I can’t find it, anyway!

    A company of that name was incorporated on 31.03.20 (by a David Jason McLaughlin: David Jason/Del Boy!), possibly with a view to a future sale of the name to a third party; a popular & sometimes financially rewarding pastime.

     

  24. (Un)Reasonablechap , I swore I would nt bite but how you can come on here and spout supposed injustices  when you have witnessed your team CHEAT every club in the land for years and years . Have you no brass neck ? ( rhetorical question ) not just that but your team (Mk 11 ) were allowed to play in the bottom Leaugue which in itsef should nt have been allowed . Any other club would have been grateful that they  were indeed allowed to participate in the bottom league . Not your club or its fans , no because in your warped mind you Arra Peepul and you are entitled. ….. Your Club died …fact…can you acknowledge that ? Your club was never properly punished , can you acknowledge that ?  Again rhetorical questions . ……Now you are rabbiting on about secret meetings , Which I actually agree that nothing should be seceret in our game. But its not for you to try and take the moral high ground , you have no right to ask those questions … Why not you may say , I,ll tell you why . Your club and its fans are in complete denial about how the original Rangers have behaved . Your club along with your SFA cabal of friends had secret meetings all for the purpose to benefit ONE club only, your club or should I say clubs , Rangers  and  "the Rangers" . You even rigged a so called enquiry , set up in a way that the outcome was pre determined . Remember Super Ally with his cheeky wee grin telling everyone before the enquiry " They wont be stripping our titles " ….yes he knew the fix was in , he knew the SFA and "Lord" Nimmo Smith were in the blue corner. So dont come on here playing high and mighty with guys who genuinely want whats best for Scottish football . You have been on here loads of times under different names ….do us all a favour go on to the OCNC part of the blog and argue with yourself or get guys like Daryll Broadfoot to join you and you can let off steam with each other til your hearts content

  25. roddybhoy

    Although to most posters on here, RC, in terms of reasoning, is a ‘goner’, your relapse is perfectly understandable – so don’t be too hard on yourself about responding to his drivel (if you think that what it is!?).

    Just sing the following words to yourself every now and again;-

    “Here he goes again, spouting p*** again etc” a la Green Brigade

    and you will feel better.

    Then ‘cease and desist’ from feeding him – ah’m no’ tell ye again boy!

  26. Re my post of 1703hrs:

    After a bit more Googling, I've found a series of UK TMs referring to Castore.

    WE00001413119

    UK00003153614

    EU017839259

    Apologies if anyone was misled!

     

  27. looking at the last few posts I rest my case. Good luck for the coming bigotfest season!

  28. EJ points out no change in the companies house details of significant ownership in so much as any Mike Ashley involvement, but on the 16th of January this year the Beahons also relinquished their position as persons of significant control.Begs the question just who/what body does exactly have significant control?

  29. bordersdon 7th July 2020 at 21:54

    looking at the last few posts I rest my case. Good luck for the coming bigotfest season!
    ========================================

    There were a total of 9 posts between your own 2, surely you didn't find fault with them all. Just for clarity, what's ones did you object to and find bigoted?

  30. gunnerb@22:34

    I'm with you on this one. It's easy to read the "relinquished control" as a matter of choice but it isn't. It is a statement that the Beahons now hold less than 25% control. The set up now suggests that no-one has more than 25%, that's all.

    At around about the same time there was a cash injection of £7.5M from an unnamed source and, as far as I'm aware, the source is still unnamed. In exchange for what?

    As far as I'm concerned this all meshes in perfectly with SD's exclusive claim for the strips and the fact that big Mike has "allowed" the deal to go ahead without matching it or even commenting on it. If the Castore deal went against the matching agreement then I would doubt very much that we would be seeing the strips being sold in HoF. Apart from anything else it would leave SD on very shaky legal ground should they decide to chase it through the courts again.

  31. But we crave fairness, openness and transparency.
    That’s probably the first time I have written the transparency word since Stewart Regan nearly wore it our 8 years ago
    ………………
    Now 8 years later we have a club involved in a deal that was so secret and given No Transparency screaming from the roof tops for even-handedness and fair play, equality and respect.April 2020.(Respect. The old Buzz word used by Mark Warburton many a time)Anyway.

    …………………….
    The Scottish Fans are the bona fide stakeholders in the game and fund the clubs.
    We believe that there should be transparency in everything in football.
    We abhor and have no trust in closed doors and secrecy.
    ……….
    If you were to ask any ibrox fan if they would like the Final draft of the secret 5 way agreement to be made public the answer would be NO. Fans can’t pick and choose when they want Transparency the same as clubs should not be allowed to pick and choose when they want Transparency. You can’t call for Transparency on one matter
    that involves the whole of scottish football and at the same time turn a blind eye on another matter that involved, and still involves the whole of scottish football.
    ……….
    No Closed Door Festering Secrets in Scottish Football.
    …
    Good luck with that request.

  32. How things change !

    It now appears that squirrels can change colour and investigate an individual club kit deal on wikipedia when the football authorities are having an omnishambolic summer.

    Peter and Neil would approve. 

     

    According to Neil, the decisions and actions of the SPFL have been vindicated #NaeShame

    Peter has supported him and the SPFL executive all of the way, mainly because Peter got what he wanted from his friends. From the conflated and railroaded push in April all the way to the fixture list that was published on Monday.

    At the GM (via zoom?),we hear that Peter gave a rousing speech against an Independent Inquiry. Peter prefers the status quo, silence, darkness and secrecy. It gives him a better platform to do his thing….Wearing his ECA hat, did Peter put in a word for Neil to get on the UEFA ethics committee? Mibbes aye, mibbes naw but I wouldn’t bet against it. Maybe Peter has a dry sense of humour.

     

    Follow the Money.

    Money is power, Peter has power and wants more money for club and self.

    The rush to calling the Leagues was about various things but for Peter, the single most important aspect was access to CL qualifiers and potential group stage money. The losers would just have to take their medicine.

    The fixture fix wasn’t random. It was about giving Peter what he wanted, the potential opportunity to maximise revenue and home advantage against direct rivals. The losers can go hang, including 30 clubs in the Lower Leagues that will be kicking off the same weekend. At a time when clubs must try to maintain interest and not lose fans, the SPFL should have ensured that as much focus as possible was on getting the lower leagues up and running.

     

    I think that one club has a disproportionate and unhealthy influence within the Scottish football authorities. The rest can take their medicine.

    At least for a moment, please ignore the need that so many on here have, to view everything through what Easyjambo called the Rangers prism and look at the current state of play.

    That request is probably doomed but for those whose default answer to everything is something along the lines of “but TRFC 2012” ,then I’d invite them to look at Peter again and follow the money, Peter isn’t interested in Res12, it’s bad for business.

  33. easyJambo 6th July 2020 at 13:41
    ………..
    Since 2002 there have been, including this year 5 October derby games as a start date.
    8 September start date since 1998. and 4 Aug start date since 2000 and 1 November since 1999.
    But for this season coming and because of the pandemic, if i was a betting person like Albert Kinloch i would have had a bet that the Derby game would not take place in Aug or Sep. May have even had a flutter on no game in Oct.
    If only the bookmakers were open before the fixture list came out, could have booked a holiday to nowhere with the winnings.

  34. Re the kit sales/deal, Big Mike still has Sevco ‘by the short and curlies’ whichever way you look at it. In short, SMSM  jist no’ reportin’ it!

    Also, are there any outstanding court settlements to be made in his favour?

    Where’s ‘Cut throat Jake’ when you need 40 mill? (do I hear £10m max?)

    There ye go Mike – that’s you sorted – noo leezalane tae go doon the tubes wursels!

  35. Re the Castore ownership issues all I have to say is:- 

    ROOFS!

    While I would have a huge laugh along with the rest of you if it is found Mike Ashley had some controlling interest in Castore,  we have been here before.

    Remember when the roofs at Ibrox were falling down? Phil Mac had one of his ever developing stories that the council were calling in safety inspectors and the likes, nets were up to stop debris falling on fans, the repair costs were going to see the end of the Govan club etc etc etc.

    Many seasons of high winds, storms and the likes since then and they are still standing,  staunchly!!

    From Rangerstaxcase through to SFM what drew many people towards the sites was that we didn't lap up the types of conspiracies, nonsense and rumours that are sometimes spouted on some individual club's fans forums.

    We have tended to look at the facts, review the available evidence, debate and then make reasoned judgments and have been all the better for it.

  36. reasonablechap 8th July 2020 at 09:50
    ……………
    I get this feeling you don’t like Peter and the influence he may have or have not in the game in Scotland, Don’t worry about it, let me tell you a story.
    There was once this chap called David. One day David held great power over scottish football and the SMSM. This power sometimes he would say it’s only business. such influence he had that some of the smsm scrambled to have a seat at his daughters wedding, were the most succulent lamb was the dish of the day.
    But as spidermans Uncle was known to say “With great power comes great responsibility”
    This was David’s Downfall, The responsibility to stick to the rules was too much to Bear (no pun)
    In the end it all came crashing down on top of David and all he was left with was a shiny new pound coin(and anything else he could Syphon off for himself)
    Anyway. Ond day you may get your wish and peter will be gone, Will he be gone with a Golden handshake or a shinny new pound, only time will tell.

  37. As a general observation, I suppose many, if not most, of us have been guilty of the occasional fudging of the truth, perhaps about some little facet of our personal and social lives.

    It takes a certain kind of devilish malevolence for people to persist in sustaining and defending manifest and absurd lies over a period of 8 years or so, and to seek to divert attention from those lies. 

    People can be misinformed, or genuinely mistaken and therefore innocent of the charge of lying. 

    But liars know themselves to be liars and are driven to fury and further absurdities in trying to defend the indefensible.

    The SPFL no doubt , having been an integral part of the 'Big Lie', may very well have lied again in more recent times.

    We do not know ,however, that they rigged the fixtures list with the same certainty that we know that they continue to lie about TRFC being RFC of 1872. 

    But even if they did 'arrange' fixtures, that 'arrangement ' simply would add to their guilt, without in any way reducing or removing the guilt of RFC of 1872  for its cheating, the guilt of the signatories of the 5-Way Agreement for the construction of the Big Lie, and the guilt of RIFC plc for claiming to be the holding company of RFC of 1872!

     

  38. wottpi 8th July 2020 at 10:19
    Remember when the roofs at Ibrox were falling down?
    …Yes and the fans were removed from seats as part of the roof was hanging ready to fall. I remember Dave king stating there was a lot of money spent on repairs to the stadium as it had been left in a state of dissrepair by previous boards.I believe if parts of the roof was falling down safety inspectors would be the first to get called. celtic would have done the same when part of the cladding came off during one of the named storms. I am sure that if repairs were not carried out and at some cost the safety inspectors would not pass any safety certificate. Someone had to stump up the cost and in the ibrox roof, someone had to bite the bullet and did.

  39. Cluster One 8th July 2020 at 11:02

    On 1st December 2015 740 fans were moved before the start of the second half of a match because of issues with the roof. This cause a 10 minute delay to the game restarting. Basically bits of the room had came away and were swinging above the supporters. It is fortunate none of it actually fell down whilst they were below it.

    On 2nd February Glasgow Council announced that they would inspect the damage, and would expect any remedial work to be carried out by the time the next game was due, on 12th December. 

    Clearly the loss making club had to get that fixed. In November 2017 Dave King had this to say about the stadium.

    “A lot of the work we’ve done over the last couple of years has probably not rightly been termed ‘improvements’.

    “I think what we’ve done is refurbishing and repairing a stadium that had become dilapidated to get it back to being fit for purpose and something Rangers supporters should be proud of.

    “We’ve spent a lot of money on that side and we’ve already committed another several million to improving it.

    “There are areas – roofs, within the stands, painting – there’s a whole bunch of things that we need to be doing there.”

    That’s just looking at the facts, a reasonable inference is that there were problems with the roofs at Ibrox and the club had to pay to get them repaired.

     

     

  40. Ballyargus last night

    There were a total of 9 posts between your own 2, surely you didn't find fault with them all. Just for clarity, what's ones did you object to and find bigoted?

    —————————————————————————

    You misunderstand. I did not imply that any of the posts in themselves were bigoted but that, I felt, that they confirmed the obsession with all things Celtic and Rangers. Yes, as WOTTPI says, we would all have a good laugh if Mike Ashley controlled Castore. But according to Tom Beahon he is not the £7.5m investor and according to Companies House is not a major shareholder. 

  41. The Beahon brothers who formed the company were both persons of significant control up until January this year. It was then announced that they no longer held that position.

    On the same day this was announced a share issue was also announced. That presumably took them below the threshold. 

    There has been a general meeting subsequent to that, where special resolutions were passed to allow certain share dealing to take place, there has been another share issue. 

    Based on the above it would appear that someone, or group of people have been investing in the business. This is hardly surprising as they would appear to be trying to grow reasonably quickly and would need a cash injection in order to do that.

    In addition to the cash they may wish to tie in with someone who has the infrastructure and retailing experience / outlets to assist with the expansion.

    That people are conjecturing that Mike Ashley may be involved is hardly surprising. Particularly when he released the story about selling Rangers replica kit, when most of the support thought that he would never be doing it again. Particularly when he used the word exclusively.

    Rangers' nebulous equivocation in response to the supporters anger hasn't done much in my view to dispel that. Bearing in mind that they were actively seeking someone to promote and sell their kit for them.

    Castore were an unlikely choice and they may have had conditions of their own, with regards for example their own "partners", to allow them to take the contract on. Rangers may not have had much in the way of choice on this. 

    It is hardly surprising that their has been some conjecture. Even if that is for the most part mischievous.

  42. Cluster One 8th July 2020 at 11:02

    Homunculus 8th July 2020 at 11:56

    Yes there were issues with the roof , but it was minor external cladding damage in the area of the stands and clearly some repairs were required behind the scenes, as was admitted by Dave King in public. Money was clearly spent by the Ibrox club and will probably be able to be identified in annual accounts.

    My point is that it was nowhere near the catastrophic, major and hugely expensive refurbishment, such as lifting the roofs off etc, that was being talked about and hoped for.

    Every stadium in the country needs regular maintenance, it does not mean that they are unsafe,  ready to fall down and will result in clubs going to the wall.

     

  43. wottpi 8th July 2020 at 12:22

    =====================================

    What I have said is on record.

    Where do you get your response from "… it was minor external cladding damage in the area of the stands …"

    How for example was "external cladding" in danger of falling on the heads of supporters inside the stadium. Why were 740 supporters, in the stands, moved because of "minor external cladding damage".

    How much was spent in order to repair the damage. Do you have any idea or is that just conjecture on your part.

    At the time it was reported that there was damage to flashing leading to water getting in and damaging the roof. That does not sound like external cladding damage to me.

    You have accused others of conjecture, rather than examining the facts and drawing a conclusion. You seem to be doing that yourself. Look at Dave King's comments, he even used the word "dilapidated" and talked about spending a lot of money. I'm afraid your talk of "minor external cladding damage" does not fit with either his comments or a load of people inside the stadium having to be moved during a game. 

  44. John Clark 8th July 2020 at 10:52

    …

    It takes a certain kind of devilish malevolence for people to persist in sustaining and defending manifest and absurd lies over a period of 8 years or so…

    ==============

    Since you mentioned “devilish”, JC.

    My comment is not about TRFC or CFC – but about the Collective that is the senior, Scottish game: the 42 clubs.

    As time goes by, nothing seems to change/improve in terms of governance – but one aspect is becoming painfully clearer every day.

    In 2012 the Collective had a choice: change and improve – or lie.

    The Collective made its choice: the Big Lie was explicitly or implicitly accepted by the 42 clubs.

    In 2012 the Collective decided – in its wisdom – to sell the soul of the Scottish game (to the Devil? 🙁 ).

    A new club was not only fast tracked into the bottom league, but it was also accepted by the Collective as being the same club which was liquidated in shame.

    IIRC, not one club has ever publicly stated or protested otherwise.

    You, me and every other supporter had no say in any of this.

    All we could do was threaten to withhold ST monies and support: this resulted in the new club being forced into the bottom league – rather than either of the top 2 leagues!

    My attitude hasn’t changed since 2012: the Ibrox club should have been kicked out of Scottish football sine die – for sustained, industrial scale cheating over many, many years.

    Instead of using the circumstances of 2012 as a catalyst for change in governance and the game, the Collective decided instead to drag the Scottish game down to the level of a corrupt, cheating, lying club.

    All for money, of course.  Business trumped sport.

    Today the Collective desperately needs supporters’ cash to survive.  Well, the clubs chose to be businesses first and foremost back in 2012.  Businesses go bust and die all the time: pandemic or not.

    Maybe this is a time of reckoning for the Collective: I’m not overly sympathetic towards its fate.

  46. Homunculus 8th July 2020 at 11:56
    ………..
    Thanks for clarification on that matter, i did it from memory and did not yet have my morning coffee, and could not be bothered to look it up. Thanks again.

  48. Homunculus 8th July 2020 at 12:40

    How for example was "external cladding" in danger of falling on the heads of supporters inside the stadium. Why were 740 supporters, in the stands, moved because of "minor external cladding damage".

    Pictorial evidence of the damage to the roof that caused 740 fans to be moved can be seen here. 

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3341864/Rangers-match-delayed-300-fans-moved-safety-concerns-stadium-roof-Ibrox.html

    If given the size of Ibrox you wish, in engineering terms, to describe this as something beyond minor external damage then please go ahead.

    As far as I can see the damage was spotted on the night, those in charge at Ibrox assessed the situation and rightly moved fans away because while the damage was minor, the potential risk of injury was substantial should the panel fall into the stand. 

    Of course a larger section of external cladding fell from the Jock Stein stand due to high winds a while later and Celtic blogger James Forest described it as ".. a little structural damage on the side of a stand: a single panel has blown out in our freakish weather. Nothing that doesn't happen all over the country…."

    I'm not suggesting,  and never have,  that there wasn't some issues regards the roofs at Ibrox that needed attention. However, from what there is in the public domain it is clear that the issues and any expense to resolve matters were not of the magnitude that people posting on here and elsewhere were hoping for. That being, 'major works' with a cost that would bankrupt the club/company.

    People were full of conjecture that the roofs were going to be the latest in a long line of rumours that was going to see the end of the club from Govan. Fears were raised regarding the whole lot coming down if subjected to heavy snow or winds.

    At the time   I said this would not be a major issue and it would not result in  the end of the club. I also said that neither would anyone with an ounce of professional decency allow an unsafe condition to continue without reporting it to the relevant bodies or whistleblow to the the press if need be.

    Given that four and half years on they are gearing up for yet another season at ….err,  Ibrox with the roof intact,  I have so far been correct on both points.

    I'm not looking for an argument, just pointing out that I think SFM should be better than circulating what you describe as mischievous conjecture. 

  49. wottpi 8th July 2020 at 14:47

    —————————————————-

    You are still conjecturing, you don't know how much other damage there was, or how much it cost to repair it. Those photographs don't show any of the internal structure. 

     

    The only point I am making is that you are doing exactly the thing you are accusing other people of. To me Dave King's words suggest the damage was more than superficial external cladding. You choose to claim that's all it was, based on a few photographs showing very little, and a suggestion that it will be in the accounts somewhere. 

    Without further evidence there is little point in continuing with this. So I will leave it at that.

     

  50. There is a lot of stuff that comes out of ibrox and beyond ibrox of impending doom. just off the top of my head the Orlt winding up saga, At the time it was denied from ibrox to later to be found they had to pay a large bill if i remember correctely. The Rangers need £10 mill to stay afloat Malcolm Murray, to I paid gers electricity bill. Maybe in a few years all the material may come out about the roofs. In the meantime don’t be sad that this ibrox club has not gone bust yet just, be happy you were alive to see the old one die.
    Somehow these posts remind me of the Craig whyte interview he had with the vanguard bears on Feb 11, 2012 and there was no chance the club would goto the wall(those message boards must have been full of praise that night. Look how that turned out.

  51. Re the Castore shareholdings (J.Carter Sporting Club Limited)

    Here is the timeline of what has been notified to Companies House.

    12/04/2019 – Total number of shares issued 91,713

    8/8/2019 – Confirmation that the two largest shareholders P Beahon and T Beahon each held 25,000 shares, or 27.3% each.

    13/01/2020 – A "Written Resolution" (not another onefrown) authorises the issue of up to 11,625 new shares, (expires 6/3/2020).

    Also authorises P Beahon and T Beahon to each transfer 3.75% of the shares in the company to a "new shareholder" (expires 13/03/2020) 

    15/01/2020 – 7,751 new shares issued, raising £2.625m.  Total shares issued now 99,464.

    P Beahon's and T Beahon's 25,000 shares would each now represent 25.1%

    However, a Person with Significant Control statement (PSC08) issued on the same date indicates no PSC (no person with over 25%), suggesting that P Beahon and T Beahon had transferred at least some shares to drop below the 25% threshold. 

    6/3/2020 – 4,633 new shares issued raising £1.434m with a further 63 shares issued and purchased at the nominal value of "one tenth of a penny", raising 6.3 pence.  Total shares issued now 103,760.

    In summary 12,047 new shares were issued between January and March, raising  £4.059m in total.  The new shares represent 11.6% of the company.  The "new shareholder" (if a single investor) could therefore own that 11.6% plus 7.5% from the Beahon brothers making a maximum holding of 19.1%.  The Beahon brothers would each still own around 21%, depending on the exact date of their share transfers.

  52. Homunculus 8th July 2020 at 15:51

    Here is what I said earlier at 12:22

    Yes there were issues with the roof , but it was minor external cladding damage in the area of the stands and clearly some repairs were required behind the scenes, as was admitted by Dave King in public. Money was clearly spent by the Ibrox club and will probably be able to be identified in annual accounts.

    Therefore I was referring to both the minor 'external' cladding issue and other issues which wouldn't be visible to fans and the general public. 

    I have no idea why you think I was only referring to a piece of damaged cladding given King's public utterances were all clearly related to more significant works required.

    At the time people were conjecturing the issues with the roofs were going to:  

    a) cost the club so much they could go bust

    b) going to fall down. 

    Yes I had no specific knowledge of the extent of the problems or the costs but from what  I do know about such matters I offered a view that a) & b ) above was poppycock and have, to date been proven right.

    Same with Castore, people have been saying Ashley owns them. 

    IIRC,  this was dealt with on here a while back and shown to be false, as far as we know to date.

    The claim has been raised on here again but without any new evidence being provided.

    In fact it was all the same stuff spouted earlier.

    As EJ has pointed out (again), from his experience and knowledge of Companies House processes etc  there is nothing new or different in the public domain, as yet.

    It may be conjecture but it is more sound than simply repeating  'back of the cab' rumours in the hope that they come true.

     

     

     

  53. easyJambo 8th July 2020 at 17:37

    =================================

    Thanks for the breakdown and timeline.

    It makes sense that they wanted to bring some money into the business. Particularly if they expected to be making large sales to their new customer base, which seems to be transpiring as the pre-orders are apparently sold out. 

    It would also make sense if that new money came from a source which was already in the business and could help not just with investment, but also with infrastructure, contacts and expertise.

    As I said, given Ashley's announcement and the pathetic attempts that Rangers have made at denying his involvement it is hardly a surprise that people are conjecturing. Even if they are putting 2 and 2 together to get 5. 

     

  54. Cluster One 8th July 2020 at 17:24

    Nothing would make me happier than see Sevco go down the toilet but I just hate it when folks grasp at straws.

    For those with long memories we have seen countless stories such as when Barcabhoy said there was something 'nuclear' going to happen. Still waiting!!

    Phil Mac was on the ball when the old club died but we have had eight years of 'developing stories' that have generally amounted to nothing other than to reinforce what we know given the position of the annual accounts published each year. That being, both old and new clubs like spending more than they bring in.

    The reality is that Sevco will go bust when the simple accountancy catches up with them and (as per SDM) they have no-one left to bleed dry. Either that or they try and reach a position of sustainability but accept the limitations that may have on their ambitions.

    In terms of a financial implosion it could be a sudden unexpected event(this virus), it could major expenditure arising as the result of putting something off (dare I mention roofs repairs) or it could be a creditor finally taking them to court.

    However, everything points to them clearly walking a financial tight rope but still having adequate juggling skills in terms of managing to pay wages, pay taxes keep their facilities running and manage creditors. 

     

  55. wottpi

    In terms of SEVCO financial implosion, what will ‘do them in’ is the desperation to stop 10IAR. 

    They will, I believe, stretch themselves beyond any financial skullduggery hitherto undertaken in their quest to do so. Should CFC achieve the Holy Grail, the state of Govania will hopefully finally crumble. I see no reason to change this opinion which I offered at the start of 2019/20 campaign.

    Away from the financial aspect, desperation has already broken out within their ‘ranks’ – as sympathisers greet about the fixture list (e.g. Darryl Currie, Ally McCoist – please check the start of 9IAR season!), the distinct likelihood of Morelos being ‘on his bike is rarely mentioned, Kris ‘yir finished Leigh’ Boyd reckons they have the player resources to challenge all the way – to name but a few!

    The media frenzy will only increase in proportion to the desperation to see CFC undone (how will they actually achieve this?). The paranoia traditionally associated with Celtic is becoming ever more pronounced amongst allies of SEVCO in the count down. IMHO, they are going round in ever decreasing circles.

    As for me – I will ‘keep the faith’ by placing my trust in Pistol Pete, wee Lenny, the players (whoever they may be), and supporters.

  56. wottpi 8th July 2020 at 18:36
    However, everything points to them clearly walking a financial tight rope but still having adequate juggling skills in terms of managing to pay wages, pay taxes keep their facilities running and manage creditors.
    …………….
    I can’t remember just how much money they have gone through since 2012. Share issues, loans, then loans converted. Directors paying the electricity bills. Loans against security.Director after director trying to juggle the books.everything points to them clearly walking a financial tight rope. That is why when any number of points arise that it looks as if they will go over the edge. Back in 2010 to 2011 few expected them to go bust, but they hung in there deals were done behind closed doors to keep them alive, and they walked the financial tight rope for a few years until failure in europe brung the whole house crashing down around them. One bad decision by whyte in keeping McCoist as manager (he may have had no choice Golden contract and all that) was the catalist of their downfall. Just one bad decision by this board could see the end of this ibrox club. Who knows what may be going on to keep this ibrox club afloat, because there was a lot going on to keep the old ibrox club afloat.

  57. reasonablechap 8th July 2020 at 09:50 Edit

    How things change !

    It now appears that squirrels can change colour and investigate an individual club kit deal on wikipedia when the football authorities are having an omnishambolic summer.

    Peter and Neil would approve. 

     

    According to Neil, the decisions and actions of the SPFL have been vindicated #NaeShame

    Peter has supported him and the SPFL executive all of the way, mainly because Peter got what he wanted from his friends. From the conflated and railroaded push in April all the way to the fixture list that was published on Monday.

    At the GM (via zoom?),we hear that Peter gave a rousing speech against an Independent Inquiry. Peter prefers the status quo, silence, darkness and secrecy. It gives him a better platform to do his thing….Wearing his ECA hat, did Peter put in a word for Neil to get on the UEFA ethics committee? Mibbes aye, mibbes naw but I wouldn’t bet against it. Maybe Peter has a dry sense of humour.

     

    Follow the Money.

    Money is power, Peter has power and wants more money for club and self.

    The rush to calling the Leagues was about various things but for Peter, the single most important aspect was access to CL qualifiers and potential group stage money. The losers would just have to take their medicine.

    The fixture fix wasn’t random. It was about giving Peter what he wanted, the potential opportunity to maximise revenue and home advantage against direct rivals. The losers can go hang, including 30 clubs in the Lower Leagues that will be kicking off the same weekend. At a time when clubs must try to maintain interest and not lose fans, the SPFL should have ensured that as much focus as possible was on getting the lower leagues up and running.

     

    I think that one club has a disproportionate and unhealthy influence within the Scottish football authorities. The rest can take their medicine.

    At least for a moment, please ignore the need that so many on here have, to view everything through what Easyjambo called the Rangers prism and look at the current state of play.

    That request is probably doomed but for those whose default answer to everything is something along the lines of “but TRFC 2012” ,then I’d invite them to look at Peter again and follow the money, Peter isn’t interested in Res12, it’s bad for business.

    ===============

    If it wasn't for "Peter", who denied knowledge of the 5 Way Agreement and more, there would be no "Rangers " playing in Scottish football. 

    Be careful what you wish for.

  58. easyJambo 8th July 2020 at 17:37

    "Re the Castore shareholdings (J.Carter Sporting Club Limited)

    Here is the timeline of what has been notified to Companies House."

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    You will have noticed, eJ, that one of the shareholders in J. Carter Sporting Club Ltd is Tom Singh. 

    Singh is the 'founder', and was until quite recently the owner of New Look , with its 400+ retail outlets, and is up there with the mega-millionaires. 

    He sold New Look to South African Company, Brait, a company which declared its intention some months ago to sell Iceland, Virgin Active and New Look (it owned all three)on the market over the next few years. (It sold Iceland in June of this year, and at present New Look appears to be toiling somewhat.

    Nigel Oddy is currently  CEO of New Look. He was previously CEO of House of Fraser Group(resigned in April 2017)

    House of Fraser is in Ashley's control.

    I make two observations: Tom Singh has a known stake in J Carter , and may very well have an unknown stake that he may wish to back [The Articles of Association of J Carter Sporting club Ltd, in the 'definitions' section ( under TS and AS respectively )seem to give him and Anna Singh some kind of special place?]

    and New Look might be attractive to Ashley with its retail stores all over the place. 

    Nigel Oddy's next move may be back to work for Ashley! 

    I really don't begin to understand all that (relatively small)world of big business, but it's good fun trying to make connections.

    Links 

    http://www.inceconnect.co.za/article/brait-offloads-iceland-to-founder

    https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2019/12/nigel-oddy-new-look-ceo-alistair-mcgeorge-chairman/

    https://www.retail-week.com/fashion/brait-completes-new-look-acquisition-and-installs-new-chairman/5076444.article?authent=1

     

     

  59. StevieBC 8th July 2020 at 12:45 Edit

    John Clark 8th July 2020 at 10:52

    …

    It takes a certain kind of devilish malevolence for people to persist in sustaining and defending manifest and absurd lies over a period of 8 years or so…

    ==============

    Since you mentioned “devilish”, JC.

    My comment is not about TRFC or CFC – but about the Collective that is the senior, Scottish game: the 42 clubs.

    As time goes by, nothing seems to change/improve in terms of governance – but one aspect is becoming painfully clearer every day.

    In 2012 the Collective had a choice: change and improve – or lie.

    The Collective made its choice: the Big Lie was explicitly or implicitly accepted by the 42 clubs.

    In 2012 the Collective decided – in its wisdom – to sell the soul of the Scottish game (to the Devil? ? ).

    A new club was not only fast tracked into the bottom league, but it was also accepted by the Collective as being the same club which was liquidated in shame.

    IIRC, not one club has ever publicly stated or protested otherwise.

    You, me and every other supporter had no say in any of this.

    All we could do was threaten to withhold ST monies and support: this resulted in the new club being forced into the bottom league – rather than either of the top 2 leagues!

    My attitude hasn’t changed since 2012: the Ibrox club should have been kicked out of Scottish football sine die – for sustained, industrial scale cheating over many, many years.

    Instead of using the circumstances of 2012 as a catalyst for change in governance and the game, the Collective decided instead to drag the Scottish game down to the level of a corrupt, cheating, lying club.

    All for money, of course.  Business trumped sport.

    Today the Collective desperately needs supporters’ cash to survive.  Well, the clubs chose to be businesses first and foremost back in 2012.  Businesses go bust and die all the time: pandemic or not.

    Maybe this is a time of reckoning for the Collective: I’m not overly sympathetic towards its fate.

    =============

    Your words in bold, nail on the head.

    The SPL rules of April 2011 which would be based on an earlier set of rules going back to SFA inception in 1998 had this provision

     Relationship between Clubs and the League

    A3.1 In all matters and transactions relating to the League and Company each Club shall behave towards each other Club and the Company with the utmost good faith.

    The LNS Commission Decision does not mention rule A 3.1 or its prior history, but it does cover in detail the various player registration rules  under Section D Players: Registration and eligibility that applied from 2000.

    The matter of non compliance with the good faith rule was not directly addressed and it could not have been as evidence of such, in the form of HMRC correspondence accusing Rangers of fraudulent or negligence, was itself kept from the SPL in April 2012 by Duff and Phelps whose knowledge of the wee tax case DOS ebts was already known in Feb 2011. So an act of bad faith was covered up by another one.

    Check https://res12.uk/part-5/ for the details.

    Did the SFA/SPL know more about the DOS ebts in the early part of 2012? They seem to  have on 17/21st Feb 2012 on the above Timeline, but LNS himself knew later in 2012 as can be read on same Timeline at 12 Sept 2012. 

    The conclusion from that Timeline is inescapable, the LNS Commission was set up to achieve a desired result which was Rangers did nothing dishonest for 10 years, because had LNS  found otherwise it would have been impossible to allow them a place at the Scottish football table.

    However thanks to the 5 Way Agreement and side letter and Celtic's subsequent failure to act on the evidence the SPL did not get in April 2012, provided to Celtic in 2014 (not to mention evidence of fraud in 2011 in Rangers  UEFA licence application, a form of Rangers with no official taint of dishonesty survived on the back of a carefully constructed and subsequently protected myth, especially by Celtic whose supporters would have no commercial concerns to consider but were/are angry that the truth has been buried alive with Celtic standing at the grave side.

     

      

  60. Auldheid

    If it wasn’t for “Peter”, who denied knowledge of the 5 Way Agreement and more, there would be no “Rangers ” playing in Scottish football. 

    Be careful what you wish for.

    ========000========

    So we seem to agree that Peter can’t be trusted.

    Although IMO, your point is flawed in that it’s the PLC at the root. If Peter wasn’t there to carry out the remit, Paul would just take his place.

     

    Peter’s friends at the clusterf**k of an SPFL wish for greater executive powers to deal with potential covid related problems for 2020/21.

    We have seen that during the covid crisis, Peter gets what he wants from his friends. Why should the rest of the clubs trust and grant greater powers to an arrogant yet omnishambolic executive with no self awareness ? #vindication!!
    An organisation with strings attached, that this very week (fixture list), prioritised the needs of one club instead of 30 lower league clubs.

    Ironic really, but the ideal scenario would have been to have held an Independent Inquiry into the SPFL. One way or tuther, this would have helped to draw a line of sorts under the levels of distrust that have arisen due to what happened before, during and after the smelly Good Friday vote fiasco.

    I bring you back to the question of why Eric Drysdale thought the first thing Doncaster would do when the Dundee vote issue arose, was to call Peter?

     

     

  61. Cluster One 8th July 2020 at 22:37

    The 'one bad decision' can be applied to any club.

    Hearts ended up where we are because Budge held onto Levein for too long, then Stendel continued to play our loan goalie from Man Utd for too many matches when everyone and their uncle could see he wasn't up to it. 

    Celtic's strong financial position has been aided by developing a system that has managing to make good choices regards signings that have been sold on for very good money. However a run of poor choices could have seen a  different picture.

    There are plenty of businesses out there operating with losses, Tesla for example,  but do so because 'investors' keep putting money in.

    For what it is worth I think the fall out from the pandemic will effect the amount of free cash the 'investors' have from their own business interests to put into the Ibrox club to make up the balance from the overspending.

    Therefore if they want to avoid being a Gretna, Wigan or whoever, they will need to attract in new money or reduce costs.

    The current unknowns are if income streams like the new strip deal will add monies to the coffers and how much of last seasons Euro income have they burned through already.

    As you mentioned earlier, it is that big choice of going for bust to stop Celtic's 10IAR or looking at longer term sustainability that will need to be made.

    If they do decide to go over the top this season then it will, to my mind, be a big big gamble.

    If King is not able to dictate things, in his apparent and usual reckless manner, then I think they have a better chance of steadying the ship.

     

  62. Auldheid@02:03

    There is one small thing about the commissioning of LNS that is rarely mentioned but in my opinion should never be left out as it underlines what went on. It is clearly stated that when commissioned the remit covered the years that included the DOS but when the report was published the dates of the remit were excluding those years.

    A decision was made to alter the years covered by the inquiry.

    To me this is far more telling than actually ignoring the DOS. At what stage and why was it decided to do this?

  63. While it may not have any particular bearing on the upcoming Arbitration case (partially due to the Belgians apparently taking different approaches for their league 1A and 1B) , for anyone interested  there seems to have been further developments in Belgium.

    As it stands:-

    Netherlands – null & void, no champions declared and no promotion/relegation. Compensation sums paid to teams missing out on promotion and euro spots.

    France – Relegation currently stands as court ordered footballing authorities to look at reconstruction but league came back to say it couldn’t be done. Relegated clubs may still go to back to court. (to seek compensation ???)

    Belgium – Court dealing with competition law said decision to end season and apply relegation was unlawful but then seemed to reverse its decision. However now the Belgian Arbitration Court for Sport have stepped in an muddy the waters again. Note the focus on Sporting Integrity and the potential for teams to avoid relegation,  even down to the last game of the season.

    (Google translation direct from the Waasland-Beveren club website)

    The General Assembly of the Pro League decided on May 15, 2020 to ban Waasland-Beveren to 1B. That was the decision after a stop of the league after 29 days. Waasland-Beveren contested this decision at the Belgian Arbitration Court for Sport (BAS). The BAS now agrees with Waasland-Beveren in the file and annuls the decision.

    The decision of the Pro League to relegate Waasland-Beveren is apparently unreasonable according to the BAS. Club lawyer Tom Rombouts explains: “In an extensive decision of no less than 117 pages, the BAS ruled that the Pro League gave no account, let alone a reasonable account, for the difference in treatment between 1A and 1B. The league in 1A was halted and WB was marked as a relegant, 1B was not halted to allow the promotion promotion’s return leg to be played. ”

    “The BAS goes even further,” clarifies the counsel. “It states that it certainly could not have been ruled out that WB could have managed to get by in a sporty way. The BAS even refers to the last match day of the previous season. In fact, therefore, the BAS says the same as that which was already stated by the BMA, namely that there is an appearance of discrimination in this decision. The BAS also refers to the statements made in the Netherlands and France, which they believe were taken coherently. As a result, the BAS has also overturned the rule change approved by the Supreme Council of the RBFA. ”

    “It is clear that the Pro League has spoken out of turn and wanted to go too fast with its decisions from the past few days,” said Tom Rombouts. “On behalf of the club, our delegate at the meeting proposed to postpone the meeting until after the decision of the BAS, but the Pro League did not want to know about this.”

  64. wottpi 9th July 2020 at 09:23

    …

    As it stands:- Netherlands – null & void, no champions declared and no promotion/relegation. Compensation sums paid to teams missing out on promotion and euro spots.

    …

    =============

    No intention of going over the “null & void” argument for the clubs again – but from a paying customer perspective, would they not be due compensation / refunds for league tickets purchased?

    Trying to think of a similar-ish scenario, I thought of the Mike Tyson v. Buster Douglas world title fight back in 1990 – when Tyson lost his first professional fight.

    He was the undisputed, world champion with the 3 world championship belts. He lost the fight – and lost his titles.

    However, what if, at the end of that fight the M.C. announced that in fact, Tyson hadn’t lost his titles because there had been a decision taken – during the fight – to NOT make this a world title fight?

    (OK, I’m making assumptions here to make a point.)

    You paid premium money for a ticket – in good faith – to watch the fight live or on Pay TV as advertised: a world title fight.
    You probably wouldn’t be too pleased, feel a bit cheated – and mibbees want your money back?

    Going back to the footy: “null & void” suggests – IMO – that Dutch supporters paid good money to watch league games, but it turns out later that they were not league games at all – but meaningless games, perhaps like preseason friendlies?

    Additionally, ticket prices for league games can be significantly higher than for friendly matches.

    Mibbees the ticket small print prevents supporters from claiming compensation or refunds for a “null & void” league? (I have no idea.)

    But, if clubs can receive compensation in a “null & void” scenario,

    then, surely the paying customers of voided league games should receive compensation as well?

    Confused.com indecision

  65. Mickey Edward's

    On the date change:

    The answer is contained in my post regarding Duff and Phelps not providing the SFA with the HMRC correspondence.

    The date chosen 23 Nov 2000 was the date of the earliest side letter Duff and Phelps provided to SPL for Andre Flo. Given it related to his DOS ebt that seems contradictory but in  fact Flo after leaving Rangers got a payment under the big tax case scheme which took it into the same category as  the majority LNS was to cover but his wages on first signing were via DOS ebt.

    Based on side letter dates being what determined the range of the Commission then De Boers side letter of 30 August 2000 should have been the start of the range  covered. De Boer moved to the BTC ebt payment arrangement in 2003.

    There is a document stating the the start of the range was determined by the earliest side letter the SPL were given.

    The SPL did ask for details of ALL ebts with side letters and associated correspondence. That would include the De Boer one which was included in a bundle of correspondence from HMRC dated Feb 23 2011 just after D&P took over as Administrators so it's not as if they were unsighted on the WTC ebts as the Timeline shows.

    Whether deliberate or an oversight matters less than the ommission skewed the ToRs of  the LNS Commission to a less serious breach of rules.

    The SPL were informed of this in 2014 as were Celtic. The SPL eventually passed the matter to SFA who waited for the Supreme Court decision but when it was made they rejected SPFL attempts to revisit LNS but interestingly suggested SPL take the testimony of SDM at CWs trial re advantage of ebts to LNS  but that was never taken up by SPFL or Celtic who also had the HMRC correspondence since 2014.

    The illusion of balance created by separation of SFA as governors and SPFL as the governed is simply an illusion to mask the reality that they work hand in hand to keep the business of football continuing.

  66. Reasonable Chap

    I'd welcome any lesson learning enquiry that began looking at events from 2000.

    That is where acting in good faith to member clubs got lost.

  67. StevieBC 9th July 2020 at 11:22

    ===================================

    From whom though.

    Who would be responsible for paying this compensation.

  68. H, from the clubs who sold the tickets?

    It's all hypothetical of course,

    but I don't quite grasp why clubs should get any compensation from any source for "null & void" – and especially when there is no consideration for the paying punters.

    Just seems inconsistent, IMO. 

  69. StevieBC 9th July 2020 at 13:20

    I would have thought the ‘contract’ on buying a ticket or season ticket is that you are paying an entry fee to watch a game or a specified number / type of games (e.g league fixtures on a season book but not cup or euro games)

    If a club’s game or games are cancelled then you, get entry to a rescheduled game (or similar), a refund or some type of compensation.

    The ‘contract’ is unlikely to extend to the point of guaranteeing  to determine the end result of the game or the competition the game relates to.

    As Homunculus implies there is no real contract between fans and the SPFL, so who are you going to go after?

    Compensation to the TV companies for not fulfilling a season, as per those contracts, is however a different matter and that’s why they are getting a payout for an incomplete season.

  70. StevieBC 9th July 2020 at 13:20

    =================================

    That seems a bit unfair on the clubs, they sold the tickets and have provided the service the customer paid for.

    It's hardly their fault that the meaning of the games was retrospectively changed. 

    I know most in Scotland, have quite rightly offered a refund on games not actually played. I don't see what more they can realistically be expected to do.

     

  71. Steve

    Going back to the footy: “null & void” suggests – IMO – that Dutch supporters paid good money to watch league games, but it turns out later that they were not league games at all – but meaningless games, perhaps like preseason friendlies?

    Additionally, ticket prices for league games can be significantly higher than for friendly matches.

    Mibbees the ticket small print prevents supporters from claiming compensation or refunds for a “null & void” league? (I have no idea.)

    But, if clubs can receive compensation in a “null & void” scenario,

    then, surely the paying customers of voided league games should receive compensation as well?

    =======================

    Spectators paid money with expectation of watching a league game and came home after watching a league game. Nothing remotely pre-season friendly about them.

    Compensation was paid to certain teams because of performance/results in those league games. This obviously means that league games did count for something.

    The question of compensation to fans was/is more relevant to the games that weren’t played * and generally, supporters have financially supported their clubs and haven’t been difficult to deal with.

     

    In other news, I noticed the Daily Record went with the following headline today…

    “SPFL facing crisis rerun as Peter Lawwell perception problem sees clubs line up against new power proposals”

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-facing-crisis-rerun-peter-22325261

    Surprisingly, it was under the Keith Jackson byline. Since Good Friday, he has/had been batting on behalf of the SPFL, his summer source. 

  72. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53346709

    Dundee Utd, Raith & Cove ask SPFL clubs to help pay legal costs

    Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers have asked Scottish Premiership clubs to pledge £5,000 each towards their costs as they defend legal action taken by Hearts and Partick Thistle.

    Championship clubs have been asked to pledge £2,000 each, with League One and League Two sides asked for £1,000.

    The legal action by Hearts and Thistle, which is going to arbitration, could result in United, Raith and Cove having their promotions overturned.

    United say the trio have spent £50,000.

    The club believes costs are expected to rise to around £150,000 in the next week when the independent arbitration panel meets to decide if Hearts' and Thistle's claim on being reinstated to the leagues or awarded damages of £10m is heard.

    ==================================================

    I can understand why they are doing it, it just seems like a strange one to me, verging on a civil war with clubs being asked to take sides.

  73. Homunculus

    I can understand why they are doing it, it just seems like a strange one to me, verging on a civil war with clubs being asked to take sides.

    ============

    You say “..verging on a civil war..”……. Peter’s friend, Neil, calls it vindication.

    It would be interesting to tally up all of the fairly predictable costs incurred by the SPFL/clubs on the back of the railroading of a conflated resolution through, back in April.

    This of course, wouldn’t include the substantial negative goodwill (bad blood) created, that will continue affecting the game, for some time to come.

    For Doncaster (the teflon Don?) to survive in his 388K job, he’s going to need powerful friends.

    #OmnishambolicVindication

  74. You may have noticed that I’m a regular user of the word, omnishambles.

    Its origin was the BBC comedy, The Thick of It and the Scottish government advisor, Malcom Tucker (Peter Capaldi), delivered the line with suitable Scottish venom.

    However, within Scottish professional football, I really think the word has found a new home.

    Imagine for a moment,…as a replacement for Only an Excuse,…BBC Scotland commission a 45 minute comedy with a similar idea to The Thick of it, but based on Scottish fitbaw administration throughout this Spring/Summer. Locations, the 6th floor at Hampden, club offices, newspapers, (pubs?) fan conversations , etc. 

    Peter (not Capaldi), could even play a Malcolm Tuckeresq role but he would mostly have to hide behind curtains or stay in the shadow. 

     

     

  75. Homunculus 9th July 2020 at 16:05

    Yes it is all a bit strange. Especially when you consider the SPFL are effectively fighting the same fight to maintain the outcome of the resolution and also avoid paying compensation.

    You can’t help but wonder if this just adds to the Hearts/Partick case by providing evidence (if indeed other clubs are found to be contributing to the fund) of the majority being  overly keen to take actions that disbenefit the minority. Hardly seems to be acting in good faith to fellow members as required by the SPFL rules.

    As discussed the whole situation has come down to who was where by fate at the time of the shut-down. For 0.0036 and 0.037 of a point it could be QoS and Falkirk opposing each other.

    I’ve always seen the clubs affected by the resolution and counter petition as being innocent casualties to a poor decision by the SPFL board when other more balanced solutions were surely available.

    At least the initial matter will hopefully be resolved soon but regardless of the result I can’t see that removing the bad feeling that is now within the game.

    If they don’t get their skates on the Lord Clark’s offer of making court time available may come to fruition!!

    On a lighter side two Arabs are trying to raise money for the legal costs by proposing a walk between Tannadice and Tynecastle. They were originally going to travel north to south but quickly realised they may not get a warm welcome on their arrival in Gorgie. They have now decided to travel south to north but while they say they will be starting at Tynecastle I can’t see them taking any risks. 

    South Queensferry anybody?

  76. wottpi 9th July 2020 at 17:34

    Indeed.

    There would just be something wrong in the rest of Scottish football pledging money to one "side" against the other. They would effectively be funding the SPFL as well, however they already are in reality. Any money paid in legal fees by the SPFL comes from the clubs already.

    An equal pledge to both sides would at least be more acceptable in my view. Though if I'm honest I see very little uptake as it stands. I think most club boards would not want to be seen to be taking sides, even if they could afford it.

    I think it's a non starter, but I can understand them trying. I suppose their argument will be "fund as and you help prevent losing £10m" 

  77. A bit OT but we were talking the other day about speculation over the years of the new club at ibrox going to the wall and how different things come to light and different people speculate on it happening.
    Was looking for something and found this on my way.
    1st November 2013
    Dave King: administration is distinct possibility at Rangers if shareholder factions can’t reach compromise.
    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13129788.dave-king-administration-is-distinct-possibility-at-rangers-if-shareholder-factions-cant-reach-compromise/
    ……….
    It is not only celtic bloggers who speculate on it and believe now and again that it could happen.

  78. wottpi 9th July 2020 at 17:34

    “I’ve always seen the clubs affected by the resolution and counter petition as being innocent casualties to a poor decision by the SPFL board when other more balanced solutions were surely available”

    “”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    In 2012, of course, the SPFL Board was involved not in the  making of merely ‘poor ‘or ‘imbalanced’ decisions : they were a signature party  to the creation of  a sporting lie even more monstrous than the lies told to Scottish Football for a decade or so by RFC of 1872.

    And not one club ( with the exception of the perennially to be honoured Turnbull Hutton’s Raith Rovers) raised an objection in public ( although I know of one other chairman who deeply felt as Hutton felt). 

    That has to be kept in mind.

    [Neither did the SMSM – and their offence is even more deserving of contempt because their  acquiescence in ‘official’  untruth spits in the eye of those journalists who report the truth-even if it literally kill them]

     

     

  79. Cluster One 9th July 2020 at 22:55

    '…It is not only celtic bloggers who speculate .'

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    Not at all OT, Cluster One, and actually quite nostalgically entertaining, retrospectively, when one thinks of the contempt of Court Takeover  Panel charges of more recent times…and the worthlessness of some people in charge of RFC of 1872 or of TRFC of 2012.

    And a wee 'two cheeks of the same arse' nod:

    "King also stressed that he did not believe that Peter Lawwell, the Celtic chief executive who sits on the PGB, would unduly influence the decision.'

    Honest to God!

    How it all comes back;

    the dirty wee story  of corruption in Scottish Football, that absolves SDM of his cheating, and allows a new creation of a club to go to the money market on the  false claim that it is a much older, quite different club.

    What price Sport? What price the financial market?

    What price the Financial Conduct Authority?

    ( from which I have not had a reply to my recent email. Surprise, surprise! broken heart}

     

     

  80. As one would have expected Hearts / Partick Thistle have released their own statement.

    https://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/article/joint-club-statement-1-2-3

    As a matter of urgency, we would like to clarify our position in relation to the role being played by Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers in our case against the SPFL.

    Those clubs were named in the Petition, along with Stranraer, because they are the clubs most likely to be impacted by a decision in our favour. We are not, and have never been, in direct dispute with them.

    The SPFL is opposing our Petition and will do so at the forthcoming arbitration.  Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers were not therefore required to litigate or arbitrate against us.  However, they chose to do so. 

    For the avoidance of doubt, we accept that was a choice they were fully entitled to make, no doubt having been fully advised of the risks and costs.  We absolutely know and understand that was not a decision to be taken lightly.

    This is not about two Clubs, Hearts and Partick Thistle, battling against other member Clubs. This is about these two Clubs battling against the organisation, which is meant to look after all of our interests, and holding them accountable for their prejudicial actions. We would contend that any Club in our position would be taking similar action.

    However, encouraging clubs to fund anyone’s costs in this process could create further division. We consider such an approach to be at odds with the fundamental requirement of the SPFL rules that the SPFL and each Club shall behave towards each other with the utmost good faith.  We cannot therefore let that pass without comment.

  81. I can understand why this statement has been released however it is a bit of a reach to say

    "We are not, and have never been, in direct dispute with them."

    I doubt the other clubs think that, as you are trying to get their promotion reversed.

    It is also a it naive to say.

    "Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers were not therefore required to litigate or arbitrate against us.  However, they chose to do so."

    Of course they did, should they just sit back and let their fate be decided in a process they have no say in. To paraphrase the statement itself

    "I would contend that any Club in their position would be taking similar action."

    Again, I can fully understand why they would want to release something, in response to yesterday's statement. However that just seems a bit disingenuous to me. 

     

     

  82. Homunculus;

    "…This is about these two Clubs battling against the organisation, which is meant to look after all of our interests, and holding them accountable for their prejudicial actions…"

    =======

    That's just taking the p!ss out of any reasonable, Scottish football supporter – IMHO.

  83. Barring not having the financial wherewithall to pay the lawyers,  please name any SPFL club who folks think wouldn't have mounted a challenge to the SPFL if being relegated with 8 games to play and a sporting chance of catching the teams above them.

    I would doubt any reasonable supporter of a professional Scottish football club in that position would expect their board to accept such a situation without challenge. Especially knowing the track record of the organisation that created the situation in the first place.

  84. This isn’t about Hearts and Thistle versus Dundee Utd, Raith and Cove.

    It never was even if some would like it to look that way.

    Its about a game that is totally strangleheld by self interest to the point that it is incapable of managing itself in normal times let alone a time of pandemic crisis.

    Not for the first time some really dumb decisions have been taken and we are living with the consequences intended and otherwise.

    Instead of revisiting them and doing what is right the game is wasting money on finding expensive solutions in courts and quasi courtrooms.

    All because our game is bereft of leadership.

     

    The slide to civil war was inevitable and foreseen on this site months ago and none of this should be new to any of us.

    Arbitration will not bring the closure that Neil and Co seek in the same way that Lord Nimmo Smith is still festering years later.

     

  85. Finloch 10th July 2020 at 12:53

    Not for the first time some really dumb decisions have been taken.

    Instead of revisiting them the game is wasting money on finding expensive solutions in courts and quasi courtrooms.

    All because our game is bereft of leadership.

    ==============================================

    In this instance the leadership tried to get the only possible solution passed, reconstruction.

    The clubs, who had the final decision, would not accept it.

  86. wottpi 10th July 2020 at 12:49

    As I have said I have no issue with the club trying to protect it's position.

    If the roles were reversed however, do you think Hearts would want representation at Court or at the arbitration process.

    Of course they are in direct conflict, they are trying to get Dundee United's promotion cancelled. Of course Dundee United want to defend their position. In the spirit of your own question, who wouldn't. 

  87. Theses 2 clubs – along with the other 40 clubs – have the governing bodies they all fully deserve.

    Corrupt and incompetent.

    It's a bit disingenuous for any club to complain about the competence or prejudices of either the SPFL or SFA today.

    The clubs have kept Doncaster in position for 10+ years.

    The clubs ALL stood back and watched Petrie become SFA President – and unchallenged too!

    I'm not having a specific go at HMFC or PTFC who are doing what's right for them –  but they can't pick and choose when to call out the SPFL.  All 42 clubs are compromised, IMO.

  88. Homunculus 10th July 2020 at 13:07

    I don't think Hearts and PT have any problem with Dundee Utd, Raith and Cove taking the decisions have to have representation at the CoS and now Arbitration.

    As you say Hearts would probably have wanted to say their tuppence worth if they had been in the reverse situation.

    However the key point in the Hearts / Partick statement is as follows:

    However, encouraging clubs to fund anyone’s costs in this process could create further division. We consider such an approach to be at odds with the fundamental requirement of the SPFL rules that the SPFL and each Club shall behave towards each other with the utmost good faith.  We cannot therefore let that pass without comment.

    This should be about Hearts / Partick v the SPFL and its board. End of.

    Nothing wrong it saying enough damage has been done already without going into full meltdown.

    Remember that the resolution was a conscious decision (apparently the only one)  taken by the SPFL board. Their QC advised there were risks of the matter going to court in the future. The main reason a vote was taken (on their QC's advice) was to try and lessen the impact, in the event of the matter coming to cour,t by attempting to show some form of democratic process.

    The group of three clubs are already represented through the SPFL board and the agreed appointments of folks like Doncaster & McKenzie. The SPFL do not really need any further support from the three individual clubs directly involved and then 'financial support' of outliers.

    From what was discussed in the CoS I can't see what else the three  clubs (and perhaps other who are minded to contribute to the legal fees)  are going to bring to the table.

    Is it perhaps ironic that the three clubs and now possibly others don't seem to trust the SPFL to be able to see their own decisions make it through this process?

  89. Homunculus 10th July 2020 at 12:57

    Finloch 10th July 2020 at 12:53

    Not for the first time some really dumb decisions have been taken.

    Instead of revisiting them the game is wasting money on finding expensive solutions in courts and quasi courtrooms.

    All because our game is bereft of leadership.

    ==============================================

    In this instance the leadership tried to get the only possible solution passed, reconstruction.

    The clubs, who had the final decision, would not accept it.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    Can't won't and wouldn't disagree but the indicative vote nonsense came at the end of a very tortuous and pantomimical process.

    I revert to the bereft leadership issues comment.

    Posted missing when most needed.

    Still needed.

    Still needed desperately.

  90. On today's BBC Sportsound Podcast Brian McLaughlin reporting the SPFL board members are, at meetings between clubs, encouraging others to donate to the Dundee Utd, Raith and Cove legal fees.

    Of course they are trying to argue that they are making such requests while wearing their club hat, not that of their SPFL board position!!!

    Very murky.

    Listen in from around 20.00 mins.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08kd5km

  91. Finloch 10th July 2020 at 15:22

    I revert to the bereft leadership issues comment.

    Posted missing when most needed.

    Still needed.

    Still needed desperately.

    ===========================

    And so it continues.

    I’ve just listened to today’s Sportsound podcast and heard Brian McLaughlin state that he is aware of some SPFL Board members encouraging clubs to contribute to the DU/RR/CR legal funds. Obviously that encouragement comes from those individuals in their capacities with their own clubs, rather than their roles with the governing body.

    Good faith?  Hmmmm!

    It is a ridiculous and unseemly situation, where the game is so bereft of leadership.  

    I honestly couldn’t care less how the arbitration plays out, such is my disillusionment with what has happened. Scottish football is broken and will remain so without radical surgery. Sadly it is unlikely happen because of the self interest and egos involved. 

    At least I can look forward to watching some grass roots football once again in the not too distant future.

  92. EJ the SS Good Faith sailed long ago and was presumed lost.

     

    I think the SPFL should be paying the extra fees for both sides of this fight. 

    None of the clubs have done anything wrong.

     

  93. I can't understand the confusion.

    Two clubs going to court to fight a democratic decision made with an overwhelming majority. The two clubs ask the courts to penalise three others who achieved what they probably would have anyway and then say "it's not aimed at you.". Why mention them in the petition then?  To prevent them being disadvantaged the only thing the three can do is to spend money that they cannot afford to ensure the democratic vote is upheld. It's lose-lose for them.

    If it isn't a direct attack on the other clubs then why not petition with a request to the courts that leaves no-one disadvantaged.

    The petition requested that these three clubs were punished for something outwith their control and then the petitioners squeal when others feel that support is warranted.

    Get a grip.

  94. I have to admit I’m struggling with the argument here. I know we have a common dislike for Doncaster and even the SPFL but the contortions evident on here to make a case for Hearts/PT are getting a bit ridiculous when we get to who should say what and who pays for what. Hearts/PT, being two of forty two equal shareholders of the SPFL are taking the SPFL to court and three clubs have been specifically named and advised (?) that they may not get promoted should Hearts/PT win. The SPFL are rebuffing the action, paying for legal representation and seeking to gain any advantage they can get. As are the three teams threatened with demotion from their promotion who are also seeking help to fund legal representation for proceedings they had no part in instigating other than generally voting resolutions as the other 39 also did. They are duty bound And morally correct to vigorously defend the action. 

     

  95. wottpi 10th July 2020 at 13:37

    ==============================

    You have no faith in the SPFL doing the right thing.

    Why should Dundee United.

    Sorry but Hearts trying to say this is nothing between them and Dundee United and that Dundee United have no need to spend money on legal representation is just insulting other people's intelligence.

    Of course they do, Hearts in my opinion would do exactly the same thing.

    "This should be about Hearts / Partick v the SPFL and its board. End of."

    Wrong. Fact.

  96. Why is it some people are keen to jump in half way through a fight,  as if the start never existed.

    The SPFL made a conscious decision to take forward a plan of action that did most harm to three teams when there was still 8 games to be played in the season.

    As Tom English says, when you punch someone in the face, don't be surprised when they punch you back.

    The resolution was arrived at without any transparency and a vote was rushed through in a cack-handed manner.

    As discussed, if the SPFL board were so sure of what they were doing and it was in the rules they would have simply ended the season and told everyone to move on.

    They undertook a vote mainly because their QC advice said it would potentially off-set any challenge under the Companies Act to the resolution they were proposing.

    Therefore they knew they faced potential challenges to what they were proposing, regardless of the result of any 'democratic' vote.

    The SPFL cannot then be surprised when that legal challenge came.  

    Its not as if this is somehow unique to Scotland. Teams in France and Belgium have done exactly the same thing in asking for things to be halted and reviewed. Are they somehow spoil sports not worthy of consideration.

    At least in the Netherlands the issue  an unfair situation appears to have been recognised and compensation paid out for the consequences of their null & void decision. 

    The question is did the SPFL take every step possible to avoid the situation arising from their resolution and could they have handled the matter differently.

    Were there alternatives that may have spread the load across all clubs as opposed to having three take a big hit?

    This is one of the issues that will be tested in arbitration.

    Maybe it will come to light that this was indeed the best and only solution to dealing with unprecedented circumstances brought about by the Covid-19 situation.

    However,  it must be tested given the disquiet voiced not only by Hearts and Partick but also the other clubs who, in the clear light of day and with time for reflection on the events of Good Friday,  believed an independent inquiry was needed.

    When you have a third of your membership effectively not trusting the board,  something is clearly wrong with an organisation. 

     

     

  97. I’m not defending the SPFL in general terms but there is no logic in conflating Hearts/PTs’ legal action with a desire to reorganise the SPFL constitutionally or in terms of personnel. There exists means to vote through changes. If such a change was voted through by a two thirds majority it would be merely water cooler talk to place the one third who voted otherwise on some sort of civil rights pedestal. Hearts/PT are taking action against the SPFL after losing out on voted resolutions. For all I know they may have a smoking gun that shows it was unconstitutional or illegal so we wait to see but let’s not pretend it’s some moral campaign against the evil organisation to which they belong and have been active members since (and well before of course) it’s inception. It’s not, they are taking action because they lost the vote they wanted. What next? Who will go to court next because they don’t get the outcome that they want in a vote? Will we be foursquare behind them? I won’t. 
     

  98.    There appears to be a certain unhappiness from some about clubs asking for a group funding to defend their position, but would the same folk be unhappy if Mr Anderson were to offer to fund it? 

         But that would mean he was funding both sides of the non-argument then, right?. 

    Sevco started this "Weaken the SPFL", rammy, but were ridiculed into oblivion with the dossier of farce. Hearts, hurt, but think they can make a better fist of it using Mr Nice guy's money..   

        It's veiled in material so flimsy peas could be spat through it.  Celtic, Aberdeen and Ross County, who didn't want his money, have sussed it…….Probably several others who didn't want it, but needed it, are aware too.   

         Anyone who can't see this sideshow is nothing more than the SFA trying to weaken the SPFL hasn't been paying attention. There has been a power struggle going on long enough FFS. 

        The divisions were called early due to C-19, and the natural consequence of that are promotions and relegations……That's it !……That is all that happened here.

         Scotland is an easy wee place to understand. When the SMSM are trying to get you to think one thing, just think the other…….Then you will be on the good guy's side. (or at least the lesser of two evils) 

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU

  99. At the premature close of play, no club had been officially relegated or promoted.

    Considering the existential context involved, to somehow compare what is being forced on HMFC and PT to what is being awarded to DU/RR and CR is apples and tangerines.

    The frequent headline claims of a vote passed by an overwhelming majority are IMO, misleading but generally accepted and used as rational to justify a stance. The whole thing hinged on one vote and it smells to high heaven (pivotal to arbitration).

    The rational behind and the surrounding events, before, during and after the Good Friday vote are to be further examined (in a secret arbitration hearing). This is where the SPFL executive have been found badly wanting, at best.

    Many clubs refused the Reconstruction option and we are more or less, where you’d expect or was reasonably predictable, even when the SPFL were coming up with their conflated resolution….. That’s what the leadership cooked up for us.

     

    Leadership !!  You have to laugh or you would cry.

    Why do you think Peter is happy with such leadership and doesn’t want any Independent Inquiry into the SPFL ?

    Back in the swinging sixties, Sandie Shaw made a few bob with her chart topping song, “Puppet on a String”….. Neil ‘Vindicated’ Doncaster made 388,000 pounds sterling for 12 months of apparently doing what he is told by member club(s).

    The establishment PLC dominates Scottish fitbaw in more ways than one.

  100. WRT Boris Johnson's recent finger pointing at the care homes…

    It seems that a lot of people are not too impressed with Johnson's handling of the pandemic, and there are further claims of opportunism and corruption / cronyism.

    Yet, perhaps painfully aware of the increasing awareness amongst the population, he shamelessly pointed the finger elsewhere: a pathetic deflection, a squirrel, if you like.

    Rather than self-reflect, and acknowledge your wrongdoings you simply blame others.

    It's rookie level PR management.

    And risible.  crying

  101. wottpi 10th July 2020 at 17:17
    When you have a third of your membership effectively not trusting the board, something is clearly wrong with an organisation.
    ……………
    The members would have known since 2012 not to trust the board, some would have known before that. But all were happy to go along with the board as long as their own boat was not rocked. When Trust dies,mistrust blossoms.That is what we have been left with in scottish football.

  102. The economic imperative dominates decision-making and for decades has trumped sporting integrity. Those with the most money tend to lobby and influence power, so as to make more money and get ever more influence/power….

    The balance between business and sport gets more perverse as the years go by…It’s PLC first, football club second.

    It goes back to the 80’s and Thatcher introducing neoliberal economics, which has become a rambling repeat tornado that consumes most of what is in it’s path and sends it upwards.

    In the 80’s, Aberdeen and Dundee Utd won various League Championships, then sharing game revenue changed to home clubs keeping home gates.

    Little by little (boiling a frog), the distribution of wealth has changed dramatically in society over 4 decades. No different in football.

    If you really want to address the fundamentals, first it’s radical political/economic change that is needed. Then for that to filter down.

    However, it’s a very big ask. 

  103. Cluster One 10th July 2020 at 18:57

    =================================

    Indeed, not trusting the SFA in particular is hardly new. They aptly demonstrated that they were not trustworthy years ago. 

    However let's remember, play the ball not the man. In this instance the SPFL, but also bear in mind that the 42 member clubs are the SPFL, not the executive board. If the clubs don't agree with what they do then they should get rid of them. They are elected members or employees. 

    In relation to the vote to finalise the league, leading the the cessation of the three lower divisions, then the consultation with regards finalising the top division, then lobbying for reconstruction the SPFL have done things for the best, as supported by the majority of the member clubs (on a vote).

    The one they lost (not even going to a vote), reconstruction, is down to the members. Some of whom said they would never support it if it was a temporary measure. 

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-reconstruction-lifeline-neil-doncaster-22172720

    In a letter to clubs the chief executive indicated "there is no reasonable prospect of clubs approving a temporary reconstruction solution".

    However, the SPFL chief executive said the consultation process had proved "there is sufficient support for a permanent 14-10-10-10 Divisional structure to merit this second stage of consultation".

    That would see Hearts spared relegation from the Premiership, with Inverness joining them and Dundee United in the top flight for next season.

    ==========================================

    I know this is getting boring, but reconstruction was the only thing to prevent where we are, the SPFL board tried to get it passed and the clubs rejected it.

  104. In my inbox earlier this evening, for any interest anyone may have,

    "Lausanne, 10 July 2020 – The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) will announce the decision taken in the arbitration procedure between Manchester City Football Club and the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) on Monday, 13 July 2020. A media release will be published on the CAS website (www.tas-cas.org) at 10:30am"

    This refers, I think, to this case

    [City were handed a two-season Champions League ban and ordered to pay a €30million fine after being found guilty of breaches of Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations and UEFA Club Licencing rules by the governing body's Club Financial Control Body (CFCB).]

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/football/cas-release-statement-as-man-city-vs-uefa-hearing-ends/ar-BB15iCC6

    It's useful to keep in mind that the 'Arbitration Tribunal' which will decide on the HoM/PT petition is every bit as focussed on Law as any Court. 

    As eJ explained a wee while ago, this kind of 'Arbitration' has nothing to do with 'mediation' or guys in the middle trying to get other guys to come to agreement!

    The Tribunal will have to decide whether or not the Board of the SPFL were in breach of the Companies Act 2006 , and might well have to decide whether the SFA Article 99 is itself unlawful in that  it purports to have the right to deny the right of access to the Courts without its permission,  and threatens clubs who dare to go to Court without permission  with unconscionably severe penalties . 

    In the wider context , that second point is of great public interest . Should society allow a citizen or a business  to sign away his or its rights of  access to the Courts under threat of severe punishment from the party with whom he is in legal dispute if he or it dares do so without the permission of that party?

    ( and that makes me think of things like the 5-Way Agreement.

    How valid and binding in Law is a secret agreement that a new football club should be treated by the SFA and SPL and marketed in every respect except in respect of  tax and other debts as being the identical football club that went into Liquidation? )

     

     

  105. My instinct says it’s the secrecy.

    Most of the people I have spoken with agree.

    We all live in Scotland where our government is open to the public and where government committees are on the public record.
    The fourth estate is all over everything they do.
    Likewise our courts are generally open to the public and to the media to report on what is happening within.

    There is nothing in this dispute that should be kept secret from the real stakeholders in the game, the fans.
    No Closed Door Festering Secrets in Scottish Football
    ………………
    Reading again the blog above reminded me that the whole scottish football structure is built on secrets.
    The secret 5 way agreement.
    The charles Green Craig whyte investigation remains secret.
    Undisclosed transfer fees, kept a secret.
    SFA chiefs’ in secret gambling ban for addict players in new move to tackle epidemic.
    Football agents who make secret side deals with clubs without the players’ knowledge risk losing all their profits and any agency fees paid, London’s Court of Appeal ruled yesterday.
    Rangers controversy: Club accused of misleading SFA on secret deals 2 March 2012.
    Refs Crisis: SFA and rebels hold secret last ditch talks

    THE SFA were locked in crisis talks with Scotland’s rebel refs last night after their plan to bring in European strike breakers was scuppered.
    Scottish clubs in talks over a secret document proposing a radical revamp of the SFA by the 2020/21 season.20 Feb 2018.
    Refs Crisis: SFA and rebels hold secret last ditch talks .
    The discovery that a dossier of two-year’s of statistics on sectarianism at football matches would not be made public was revealed at the weekend by Mr McArthur and the anti-sectarianism charity Nil By Mouth.
    SFA boss Stewart Regan ordered secret briefings for Rangers owner Charles Green.

    So many secrets, that if half of them ever came out, how could you ever start again.

  106. Forgot about this one.
    Campbell Ogilvie.
    That is a matter between myself and the trust Dec 4, 2012

  107. Cluster One 11th July 2020 at 18:17

    '..Forgot about this one…'

    """""""""""""""""""

    Don't worry about it, Cluster One: I'm sure he won't be unhappy to be forgotten about!

  108. From Mr. Smith's blog:

    '…We all live in Scotland where our government is open to the public and where government committees are on the public record.
    The fourth estate is all over everything they do…'

    I find that naivety disconcerting.

    I won't write any more as I fear that becoming too 'political' would lead to the 'ban-hammer' being utilised. 

  109. Jingso.Jimsie 12th July 2020 at 11:44

    From Mr. Smith's blog:

    '…We all live in Scotland where our government is open to the public and where government committees are on the public record.
    The fourth estate is all over everything they do…'

    I find that naivety disconcerting.

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    To be fair, though, there has never been a time when the whole of the SMSM has ben united as one   in letting an issue as disgusting as the cheating of SDM's RFC cheating and the disgraceful abandonment of Sporting Integrity by the Football Authorities go so free of hard investigation and reporting. 

    It was as though the liquidation of RFC of 1872 had not happened once they got wind ( as they certainly must have)of the certainty that the SFA/SPL and SFL would accommodate CG to the absurd extent of allowing a brand new club to claim to be RFC.

  110. Ken it’s the ‘Scottish’ football monitor but I feel the passing of a football great should not go unrecognised .I remember the euphoria of Italia 90 and USA 94.He was a member of a great Leeds team of the late sixties and early seventies and I had the pleasure of watching that team on many an occassion. He was as straightforward in real life as his teams were on the park.They played to their strengths and he once commented that his teams actually pioneered the ‘pressing’ game.He is loved and revered in Ireland as a man who understood the national pysche ( hardly surprising given his upbringing in the North East of England).He championed the miners strike when his more illustrious brother courted the establishment.He was a genuine man of the people and the epithet when we will see his like again is justly fitting..even though he did win the world cup in 1966. Rest easy Wor Jack.

    • Gunnerb
      Big Jack epitomised all that is good in football. Special family too. Jack, his brother Bobby, and uncle Jackie (Milburn), are all footballing legends and great role models.
      A sad loss to football and our life in general

  111. Big Pink 12th July 2020 at 18:29
    ……….
    The kind of Guy you could listen too all day talking about football. Should have been on the TV doing more football Analysis after games. And you look at what we get in Scotland.

  112. As an aside.

    Q. How do you spend £250,000 on the restoration or alteration of a building (or a retail premises) without having to consult with the local authorities:

    'The Rangers Megastore at Ibrox is set to undergo a £250k transformation as part of the club's new partnership with Castore'. (Daily Record – 17th May 2020)

    I've had a cursory glance on Glasgow City Council's Planning and Building Warrant Applications (online) and can't find any such application for such an alteration; however, I'll happily stand corrected.

    Unlike the MSSM, as to question where the money is being spent, this intrigues me. One quarter of a million pounds, spent in the midst of a fiscally crippling pandemic – and not one soul bothers to research nor query it. After all, an application to erect a 'freestanding, revolving screen' outside Celtic Park was picked up immediately upon application. 

    I'll move on and digress…..

    On 1st July, within a matter of hours (22:56hrs) of Sports Direct announcing an exclusive agreement to sell the new Castore kit, Gary Ralston (Daily Record)  released a piece denouncing Ashley's involvement. It's still availabe should you wish.

    As I read through the article I became aware of it's repetitious rhetoric. A 500 word article denouncing 'the deal' contained 19 references to 'Rangers'. This reminded me of Trump. eg:

    One of the primary ways in which Trump persuades his audience is through repetition. 

    By comparison, the MSSM refer to Celtic in most headlines as 'The Hoops'. Conversely, they stick to 'Rangers' in every circumstance. 

    It's true. I've done the math. It's a tactic.

    But then, I could be paranoid!

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  113. stifflersmom 12th July 2020 at 23:48

    As an aside.

    Q. How do you spend £250,000 on the restoration or alteration of a building (or a retail premises) without having to consult with the local authorities:

    'The Rangers Megastore at Ibrox is set to undergo a £250k transformation as part of the club's new partnership with Castore'. (Daily Record – 17th May 2020)

    I've had a cursory glance on Glasgow City Council's Planning and Building Warrant Applications (online) and can't find any such application for such an alteration; however, I'll happily stand corrected.

    Unlike the MSSM, as to question where the money is being spent, this intrigues me. One quarter of a million pounds, spent in the midst of a fiscally crippling pandemic – and not one soul bothers to research nor query it. After all, an application to erect a 'freestanding, revolving screen' outside Celtic Park was picked up immediately upon application. 

    I'll move on and digress…..

    On 1st July, within a matter of hours (22:56hrs) of Sports Direct announcing an exclusive agreement to sell the new Castore kit, Gary Ralston (Daily Record)  released a piece denouncing Ashley's involvement. It's still availabe should you wish.

    As I read through the article I became aware of it's repetitious rhetoric. A 500 word article denouncing 'the deal' contained 19 references to 'Rangers'. This reminded me of Trump. eg:

    One of the primary ways in which Trump persuades his audience is through repetition. 

    By comparison, the MSSM refer to Celtic in most headlines as 'The Hoops'. Conversely, they stick to 'Rangers' in every circumstance. 

    It's true. I've done the math. It's a tactic.

    But then, I could be paranoid!

     

    =============================================

     

    It doesn't make you wrong though.

  114. stifflersmom 12th July 2020 at 23:48

    '.One of the primary ways in which Trump persuades his audience is through repetition. '

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    He reminds us of Adolph, and his evil little propagandist, Goebbels: whose mantra was 'make the lie big enough and repeat it often enough, and people will believe it, no matter how absurd.'

    On an infinitely  lesser scale of course [ there are no mass murderers on the boards of football governance] we do, really, have to remember that there are bad evil sods out there and that those of them who manage to control/subvert the 'Media' can metaphorically  get away with mass murder!

    There are liars out there in Scottish football 'Governance'

    And in the SMSM

     

     

  115. stifflersmom 12th July 2020 at 23:48

    As an aside.

    Q. How do you spend £250,000 on the restoration or alteration of a building (or a retail premises) without having to consult with the local authorities:

    …

    ==========

    £250K does buy you a lot of orange paint…?  enlightened

  116. For context. Journalism, political piece or shame?

    By Gary Ralston@Daily Record. (Rangers International Football Club Shareholder).

    Rangers blast back at Sports Direct kit claim as jaw-dropping 50k sales figure nears.

    The sportswear company claimed in a social media post that they would be selling the club's new Castore kit exclusively.

    Rangers are on course to sell more than 50,000 Castore shirts as they denied any double dealing with Sports Direct.

    The Ibrox club are furious after Mike Ashley’s company claimed they had an ‘exclusive’ agreement to sell their new look kit from August 1.

    Rangers revealed they will open their new look retail store at Ibrox Stadium on the same day, effectively cutting across Ashley’s sales pitch.

    Rangers released a statement on Wednesday night putting the controversial sportswear tycoon in his place over claims to his Castore links.

    It came at the end of a day in which first day sales of replica shirts were heading for more than 40,000.

    Rangers announced their new kit deal with Castore, worth a reported £25 million, with the fledgling sportswear company in May.

    It was founded five years ago by brothers Tom and Phil Beahon and has since won financial backing from a string of high profile investors, including Andy Murray.

    Disquiet among Rangers fans was raised by a social media post in which Sports Direct claimed they would be selling shirts ‘exclusively’ in their stores from August 1.

    A Rangers statement said: “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.”

    The Rangers megastore will be renamed and rebranded early next month after Castore agreed to fund a £250,000 refit.

    The statement added: “Rangers and Castore are delighted to confirm the new Ibrox retail store will officially open on August 1, which will be operated by Castore as the club’s official retail partner.

    “It complemented 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 match days will be supported with further pop up stores within the stadium.”

    The Beahon brothers have stressed previously they have no business relationship with Sports Direct or Ashley, whose company have been subject to boycotts by Ibrox fans for punitive retail contracts.

    Castore revealed recently that sales had undergone a significant uplift, despite the Covid-19 crisis, after they announced their formal agreement with Rangers.

    One Ibrox insider said: “Up to 50,000 shirts were made available on the first day and many sizes have already sold out.

    “It’s an amazing response from supporters and orders are expected to continue at great volume in the coming days.”

  117. stifflersmom 12th July 2020 at 23:48

    As an aside.

    Q. How do you spend £250,000 on the restoration or alteration of a building

    ===================================

       Give the contract to a pal?.

  118. Unsurprising to see the intrepid investigative research into Rangers has now reached the level of going after journalists for repeatedly calling a football team by it’s name, leading onto a comparison with the Nazi’s. 

    At least the the irony of JC talking about repetition, provides a little comedy for a Monday morning.

  119. If I recall correctly, the SPFL will hold their AGM a week from today, on the 20th.

    Seems as if this might actually clash with the arbitration process. The SPFL executive would idealy want a positive result in the bag before the 20th. Can they wander down the 6th floor and ask the SFA to expedite the process?

    Another more straightforward question.
    Do you think a motion should be put forward to sack Doncaster ?

  120. A motion to sack Doncaster?  Why not? I’m sure that any of the 42 shareholders could put together a motion with valid backup (as opposed to a toys out of the pram type dossier) get the support required and get the motion tabled for a vote all as per constitutional rights they’ve all signed up to.

     

  121. The people are out in force .

    Reminds me of an old saying.

    There are none so thick as those that will not see….or something like that.

  122. I’ve just been on the SFA site to look for information on the Arbitration Tribunal that is required to be set up, as per Lord Clark’s judgement on 03.07.20, for the HoMFC/PTFC vs. DUFC/RRFC/CRFC/SPFL acronym fustercluck.

    Surprise, surprise: there’s not been a word about it since 06.07.20, a week ago. Wasn’t time of the essence in this matter? The season starts in nineteen days. 

    ::

    In other news, CAS overturns Man City’s two year European ban & reduces the fine to 10m Euros…

  124. reasonablechap 13th July 2020 at 08:02

    "..going after journalists for repeatedly calling a football team by it’s name, leading onto a comparison with the Nazi’s. '

    """"""""""""""""""""""""

    It is necessary for honest folk to 'go after journalists and others who  repeat the fiction that TRFC is RFC of 1872 as often as they repeat and propagandise that fiction.

    And it is vastly amusing to see how they cannot as it were look honest folk in the eye, and try to explain why they think that somehow RFC of 1872 was not liquidated or how a club newly created in 2012 can be entitled to claim titles and honours for competitions that were gained by a now defunct 140 year old club and to market themselves as being so entitled!

    Journalists are not necessarily stupid, unintelligent men and women. The fact that they deliberately choose to propagate an untruth is unforgiveable. Those of them who are stupid may not be culpable (but should lose their jobs as being useless tossers)

    Those who are not stupid are something else entirely :betrayers (in the cause of a rotten football club or two!) of journalistic integrity and of those brave journalists whom they have seen dying in the cause of truth.

  125. Absolutely, JC!

    And justice will prevail.

    When these Scottish papers have closed their doors for the final time,

    will these 'ex-journalists' STILL insist that Rangers FC didn't die?

    Probably not, if they're not getting paid for it…

  126. A penultimate post.

    As a recap, the issues involved in the upcoming arbitration are that the SPFL believe they were required to conflate the distribution of remaining prize monies with final league positions and thus a resolution was put forward to deal with this unprecedented situation.

    It would appear that to reach that stage the following options were considered

    Voiding the Season – Rejected because no basis on how to split monies to club. Issues regards nominating clubs for Euro competition. Potential for refunds being requested both from SPFL and individual clubs for an unfinished season. Unfair to all clubs. (All that being said the Dutch seem to have managed some of these issues by nominating next season Euro representatives and paying compensation to those missing out on promotion of Euro slots)

    Awarding 1-1 draws for remaining games – Rejected as not all teams had played same number of games and therefore the process is entirely arbitrary. (And by implication unfair.)

    Using Modelling to determine results of remaining games – Rejected as it would be roundly criticized by Clubs, media and fans. (The implication being that you cannot accurately predict the outcome of a sporting competition as it is what happens on the park that matters).

    Rewind season to point where all teams had played same number of games – Rejected as being unfair as games that had been played would be disregarded. Therefore, advantageous to some but detrimental to others.(In other words unfair)

    Making current league tables final. – SPFL noted the Highland League declared Brora champions but due to no real issue with distributing fee payments and having no relegation, this limited the unfairness produced from adopting this methodology. Specific mention of this option being unfair to Rangers and St Johnstone as they had played one less game than others in the Premiership.

    Points per Game – Advantage is that every game played has mattered in some way. Clubs disadvantaged (other than those being relegated) = Hibs and St Johnstone swap a place (around £130k), Dunfermline and Arbroath around (£27k) swap a place. SPFL believe this is the fairest method of calling the league. However, in the discussion there was no specific mention of the unusual situation of 3 clubs being relegated with 8 games to play.

    As I understand it the Hearts /Partick argument is that member clubs were not given all the required information to make informed decisions on the resolution. One particular strand is that there was no need to conflate the distribution of monies with final league positions. I believe it is being argued that you could have distributed monies via advance payments or the likes.

    The implication being that, once you have resolved the prize money matter, the SPFL could have separately considered the best way to resolve final positions and conflate that with how best to proceed in finding a solution where there was no excessive harm done and that in the future (such as via reconstruction) at least promotions and relegation would be resolved through sporting endeavour.

    That would have also given time to fully consider matters, such as the issues surrounding TV contracts, what were all the options for trying to play out the season and/or the timescales were for re-starting the new season etc.

    In the overall process to date, how to deal with the fall out from the resolution , i.e. league reconstruction, was only offered as something that was going to be looked at, if and once the resolution was passed. (The implication here being that either directly from the SPFL board or through requests from some teams the issue of ‘unfairness’ was identified and highlighted well before the Good Friday Vote and the meetings beforehand)

    The option chosen for the resolution resulted in three clubs being disadvantaged by being relegated with 8/9 games to play. Clubs up the top of divisions and in line for play off spots were also denied the possibility of playing for promotion while those down the bottom avoided the possibility of relegation.

    While it is being recognised there are other clubs who are being disadvantaged, relegation with 8/9 games to play is claimed, by the petitioners,  to be excessively unfair and the vote by the majority to do so was prejudicial to the minority three.

    The further strand of the Hearts / Partick petition is simply that the Dundee Vote should have stood and the and as such the resolution failed on 10 April 2020.

    I have no idea how this will go.

    I think the petitioners have a better shot at discrediting the whole process that arrived at the resolution and the handling of the vote.

    That being said the SPFL may well be on solid ground for a range of issues that are not, as yet, in the public domain. The disclosure of documents, as requested by the petitioners, will hopefully help resolve that one way or another

    I’m not overly convinced the Dundee vote argument will hold, given the 28 day rule. However, the Arbitration panel may take a bigger picture view of how that particular piece of the jigsaw fits into the whole debacle given the supposed urgency to move matters along.

    If the Resolution stands then I think it is best to acknowledge that it is game over and move on from that particular episode.

    However, if the petitioners get any kind of result and/or the published decision is found to be overly critical of the SPFL processes ( e.g. poor but not unlawful) then we may yet see some pressure from within the game to have the manner in which the SPFL operates reviewed.

    If there is a major victory for the petitioners then, as the opposite way that with prize money in the bank teams weren’t going to be overly focused on reconstruction or other solutions, the request for no promotion or relegation or the potential for hefty compensation then will focus a lot of minds.

  127. As the blog post mentioned, the biggest drawback about the arbitration process is the lack of transparency.

    I mentioned earlier today that the AGM of the SPFL is a week today. If a motion was put forward to send the Teflon Don(caster) on his way, could something that came out at the arbitration hearing be used against him or even discussed at the AGM?

     

    I won't reply directly to the individual posts about going after journalists and others who dare to call a football team by it's name as I'm sure the posters will be busy writing to so many people and organisations. That said, it'd be interesting to know if Peter Lawwell was one of those who didn't reply and how JC classified him (using his own chosen options) "useless tosser" or "betrayer" kiss

      

  128. I have been wondering why RC has such a problem with Peter Lawell, and I think I may have indirectly found (at least part of ) the answer here:-

    “Live rent free in one’s head”…

    Of a person – to be a source of antipathy or exasperation to one to the extent of  becoming a continual subject of agitated thoughts.

    Best treatment for this manifestation of APD ?

    Let go … and let Peter (do his own thing).

    He disnae know you exist.

     

  129. Can I just clear something up here, does this arbitration actually have anything to do with the SFA, other than the fact that their rules state that in situations such as this the arbitration process is the route to go, rather than Court.

    Hence the Judge stating that he would not be dealing with this, that it should go to arbitration.

    Is the process now that both sides chose one arbitrator, those two then pick a third to be chairman and the process is carried out. Those arbitrators cannot just be anyone the parties want, they have to be qualified to do the job. 

    So unlike the Nimmo Smith farce, the SFA will not be controlling proceedings and setting the agenda. The parties will put their respective cases to the arbitration panel, who will rule on the petition. 

    Have I got any or all of that wrong. 

  130. reasonablechap 13th July 2020 at 16:54

    Come now , don't be hiding your light under a bushel – you know if PL replied or not , don't you ? You are forever telling us how and what Peter Lawell thinks ,and how he organises events to benefit his club to the detriment of all others . Or is it all just your opinion masquerading as fact ? (again ?).

  131. Homunculus 13th July 2020 at 21:11

    ‘.Have I got any or all of that wrong. ‘

    “”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    No, I think you are spot on. 

    I think, though, that while arbitrators chosen must be qualified for the task, neither party is obliged to choose from the list of qualified persons that the SFA has. Each party is free to choose someone not on that list (provided that the person is appropriately qualified.) and the two reps chosen are free to agree on the third member, again not obliged to draw from the SFA list.

    I think the Scottish Arbitration Rules in the schedule to the Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010 trump anything the SFA may sy or suggest about using people on their list. 

    So, overall, the Arbitration Panel is not under the SFA’s control.

  132. John Clark 13th July 2020 at 21:32

    =========================================

    Thanks, so nothing like the "independent process" set up by the SFA and chaired by LNS. With them setting the agenda and picking who ruled on it, and indeed what "witnesses" were available to that panel.

    I wouldn't imagine the petitioners would want to pick anyone from a list of candidates held by the SFA under the circumstances. 

  133. Homunculus 13th July 2020 at 21:11

    I thought that the two parties chose , from an approved list , one person each to advance their case . These two then appoint an arbitrator from the same list to hear their respective cases and to give a binding decision . Same boat as you , though .

  134. My post of 21.32 above refers.

    I meant to say that while SFA Article 99 purports to ‘disapply’ some of the Scottish Arbitration rules , it certainly does not require that the Tribunal Chair be selected from the SFA list.

    The question of whether the parties can choose their own rep from qualified people who are not on the ‘list’ is maybe less easily answered, and I may have got that wrong.

    But given that anyone who has been approached by the SFA and asked to join their list is by definition selected by the SFA who
    will pay them is clearly compromised by the mere fact that their appointment is being made by the body that will pay them for their efforts!

    In my view, that would be a very unsatisfactory and unacceptable set of circumstances that would render the impartiality and objectivity of a tribunal questionable. 

     

     

  135. stifflersmom 13th July 2020 at 01:05

    For context. Journalism, political piece or shame?

    By Gary Ralston@Daily Record. (Rangers International Football Club Shareholder).
    ………………
    Do you have a link to this article?
    ……
    The sportswear company claimed in a social media post that they would be selling the club’s new Castore kit exclusively.
    …
    Rangers are on course to sell more than 50,000 Castore shirts as they denied any double dealing with Sports Direct.
    …
    Rangers released a statement on Wednesday night putting the controversial sportswear tycoon in his place over claims to his Castore links.
    …
    Disquiet among Rangers fans was raised by a social media post in which Sports Direct claimed they would be selling shirts ‘exclusively’ in their stores from August 1.
    …
    The Beahon brothers have stressed previously they have no business relationship with Sports Direct or Ashley, whose company have been subject to boycotts by Ibrox fans for punitive retail contracts.
    …………..
    Let me see if i get this right.
    Ashley has said he will be selling the ibrox kit.
    The ibrox club denied any double dealing with Sports Direct.
    The Beahon brothers have stressed previously they have no business relationship with Sports Direct or Ashley,
    …If Ashley starts selling ibrox kits on Aug 1, Just who has gave Ashley the go ahead to sell kits, if the ibrox club have denied any double dealing with Sports Direct.And The Beahon brothers have stressed previously they have no business relationship with Sports Direct or Ashley,
    If Ashley starts selling strips, someone has to have signed an agreement with him.

  136. StevieBC 13th July 2020 at 13:32

    Absolutely, JC!

    And justice will prevail.

    When these Scottish papers have closed their doors for the final time,

    will these ‘ex-journalists’ STILL insist that Rangers FC didn’t die?

    Probably not, if they’re not getting paid for it…
    …………….
    will these ‘ex-journalists’ STILL insist that their paper did not die if they close their doors for the final time?

  137. Cluster One 13th July 2020 at 22:38

    '..will these ‘ex-journalists’ STILL insist that their paper did not die if they close their doors for the final time?'

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    On the same general point, Cluster One, I think it was announced a day or two ago that the regions of the BBC ( Wales, N.I. and Scotland) are to make together something like 450 redundancies. Scotland's share of that is probably larger than the other two combined. 

    One can only hope that the number of Liquidation deniers who are presently given 'propagandising 'time on BBC Scotland and BBC radio Scotland sports programmes will be reduced more extensively than in other areas of the BBC,  and that that number will include some of the editorial and managerial staff who for eight years have shut down discussion of the 'Big Lie'. 

    They will get no sympathy from me. 

     

     

  138. RC – 13/07 – 08:02

    Unsurprising to see the intrepid investigative research into Rangers has now reached the level of going after journalists for repeatedly calling a football team by it’s name….

    Naw. You’ve got it the wrong way round. The journalists are supposed to ‘investigate’ and report. 

    I ‘picked’ on Ralston’s piece becasue it stank. It was a press release, akin to something dictated over the phone and hurriedly scribbled and remoulded – in the sense of a tyre being given a new tread.

    Read it again, if necessary, read it very slowly. At no point does the article consider whether there is any truth in the claim that SD has exclusive rights to sell the jersey. 

    In the grand old scheme of things his recycled press release barely registers in comparison to some of the pish he’s pushed – but I don’t mean to single him out. He done a gallant job of singling himself out, albeit aided and abetted.

    But while I’m here. A review of Ralston’s last 44 DR articles, 23 of his headlines contain the word ‘Rangers’. Contrast that with 2, of those same 44 articles, with stated references to Celtic.

    If you can point me to one sentence or reference within his ‘press release’ questioning whether there was (is) any truth in the SD claim they had exclusive rights to sell the Castore jersey – I’ll happily concede.

    Like a blind man looking in a black room for a black cat, it just isn’t there.

     

  140. stifflersmom 13th July 2020 at 23:32

    '.I 'picked' on Ralston's piece becasue it stank. It was a press release, akin to something dictated over the phone and hurriedly scribbled and remoulded – in the sense of a tyre being given a new tread.'

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    Question: If I am a journalist, and get handed a 'press release' from any business's PR person, do I get paid by my newspaper per column inch of that 'press release'  that I manage get into print in the newspaper as well as by the PR person's business? 

    In recent years the concept of the 'advertorial' has emerged.

    You know the kind of thing: a newspaper report, written exactly in the style of a pukka newspaper factual report but which has the word , in tiny wee print, 'advertorial' somewhere on the page?

    Hugely expressive of the lying, cheating nature of a 'Press' that is but a tool of deception happily resorted to by those who would deceive us by using the 'power of the Press' to 'authenticate' their message.

    In so many ways  have we to be distrustful of our newspapers generally, and of our 'sports' reporting by those newspapers!

     

  141. John Clark 14th July 2020 at 00:03

    Question: If I am a journalist, and get handed a 'press release' from any business's PR person, do I get paid by my newspaper per column inch of that 'press release'  that I manage get into print in the newspaper as well as by the PR person's business?

    Well considered JC. I'm mindful that your question was rhetorical, but here's my opinion. 

    Nowadays it's difficult to monetize a story, mainly because there's never much of a story nor 'exclusive' to be had. The tinternet put paid to that. What's not difficult to grasp is the need to be continually fed a story to survive, for so long as the story is printed. So you keep going to the trough that feeds. 

    It's no secret that the trough is far deeper in Govan than it is East of Dennistoun. 🙂 

    eg. Celtic choose to engage less with the MSSM and channel their 'news' through the recognised club outlets. This route is so much more dependable. Don't get me wrong, bait is often thrown and the fish bite. But there tends to be less dirty washing.

    Contrast this with the dung flung over the Govan stands. There's an abiding stench from the laundry down there.

    So, in answer to your rhetorical question. You don't get paid twice. You add a day to your notice period every time you come up with 8 column inches of pish that the shoal swallow.  

     

     

     

     

  142. 'John Clark 14th July 2020 at 00:03

    Question: If I am a journalist, and get handed a 'press release' from any business's PR person, do I get paid by my newspaper per column inch of that 'press release'  that I manage get into print in the newspaper as well as by the PR person's business?' 

    ################################

    One of my guilty pleasures is to read the 'output' of a certain journalist in the 'Lifestyle' area of the Scotsman who appears to do nothing but C'n'P press releases: mostly food- & drink-related. I doubt if she's written more than a couple of hundred words of her own devising in the past year. 

    Are 'freebies' involved? What do you think?

  143. reasonablechap 13th July 2020 at 16:54

    I won’t reply directly to the individual posts about going after journalists and others who dare to call a football team by it’s name as I’m sure the posters will be busy writing to so many people and organisations. That said, it’d be interesting to know if Peter Lawwell was one of those who didn’t reply and how JC classified him (using his own chosen options) “useless tosser” or “betrayer” kiss

    ………………………………………………………………………………..

    Perhaps it would not be deemed so bad if Ralston and his ilk did actually call a football team by its name, that name in this case being The Rangers.

    As you well know, there was a team called Rangers, (Rangers Football Club PLC) who entered liquidation in 2012 and remain there.

    The new club manufactured by the big hands of Charles Green in 2012 were not called Rangers Football Club Limited, they were called The Rangers Football Club Limited. Therefore their correct name is The Rangers.

    Why so-called journalists and other media reporters erroneously call them Rangers is either laziness, stupidity or deliberate deceit. I know which one I believe…. 

  144. paddy malarkey 13th July 2020 at 21:30

    Come now , don’t be hiding your light under a bushel – you know if PL replied or not , don’t you ? You are forever telling us how and what Peter Lawell thinks ,and how he organises events to benefit his club to the detriment of all others . Or is it all just your opinion masquerading as fact ? (again ?).

    ==================

    The first question to be answered is if JC sent one of his letters to Peter. I made the assumption that Peter/the PLC came under the JC classification of “others” but don’t know if he’s been ticked off the long list or is still pending.

    Regarding Peter and what you termed “..organising events to benefit his club..”, I’m almost surprised you seem to be asking for some kind of evidence, as it is very obviously, a big part of his job remit. What is also obvious, is that it wouldn’t necessarily be to the “..detriment of all clubs..”. Will come back to that.

    The real issue is how exactly, the most powerful individual in Scottish fitbaw, at the most powerful club in Scottish fitbaw, goes about exerting influence. Being from what is now very definitely the establishment club, puts him at the axis of decision-making/policy. He will, on behalf of his club be the most influential driver of what is going-on, eg. who did Eric Drysdale (leaked whatsup) think Neil would first talk to once the Dundee vote issue become apparent, yes…”Peter“.

    It is my contention that Peter was very much part of pushing the SPFL to conflate and railroad the infamous resolution. This was a route that would eventually rubber stamp the title award and importantly, secure access to the CL qualifiers and potentialy, tens of millions of pounds. When it comes to that type of money, CEO’s on big bonus packages will do all that is within their grasp to secure, in this case, the opportunity.

    It’d be a bigger ask, to believe that he didn’t get involved with his allies on the SPFL executive to help shape events. 

    As for detriment to other clubs, some are affected more than others and we are yet to see the end result. Hearts and Partick Thistle took it to court/arbitration and Rangers will be keeping an eye on what happens. Why? Because they were disadvantaged aswell. However, HMFC/PT were in a better position to challenge it because they have a stronger case given they have materially lost out compared to Rangers main disadvantage (opportunity to secure CL monies) dependent on what would be future football match results.

     

    Moving on to the top tier fixtures. One team got the best deal and in this case, it was very much to the detriment of the majority of other SPFL clubs.

    Celtic had made noises both directly and indirectly regards what they wanted, they got it.

    The needs of a collective of 30 lower league clubs were ignored.

    Easyjambo wrote the following…..”I’m sure that everyone will be astonished to find that the first Celtic v Rangers fixture has been scheduled for Round 11 of the first round of fixtures.  That of course offers the best opportunity for the game, scheduled for the weekend of 17/18 October, to be played in front of a live (possibly restricted) audience.

    Now, for Celtic, what league game would be their best opportunity of maximising revenues from the sale of tickets, hospitality, merchandising, advertising etc. Isn’t it an amazing coincidence any such game should end up being scheduled to offer Celtic their best opportunity to boost their income after having to deal with a number of games against other Premiership clubs behind closed doors. ”

    Where is Peter ?……..#FollowtheMoney

     

    The main reason Peter Lawwell doesn’t come under more scrutiny on this board is that he doesn’t work from Ibrox and hence can’t be seen when looking through the Rangers Prism. 
     

     

  145. normanbatesmumfc 14th July 2020 at 11:41

    Perhaps it would not be deemed so bad if Ralston and his ilk did actually call a football team by its name, that name in this case being The Rangers.

    As you well know, there was a team called Rangers, (Rangers Football Club PLC) who entered liquidation in 2012 and remain there.

    The new club manufactured by the big hands of Charles Green in 2012 were not called Rangers Football Club Limited, they were called The Rangers Football Club Limited. Therefore their correct name is The Rangers.

    …

     

    Thing is though, the original club was also called The Rangers Football Club, (in it's case it was PLC although it had previously been The Rangers Football Club Limited). The addition of 'The' as a differentiator was nothing more than a Charles Green fiction. He used exactly the same name as that under which the original club was incorporated.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC004276

     

  147. reasonablechap 14th July 2020 at 11:59…… Celtic had made noises both directly and indirectly regards what they wanted, they got it.
    ………………..
    Celtic did push against Title Declaration (April 5, 2020) They wanted that but never got it.
    ………….
    Rangers will be keeping an eye on what happens. Why? Because they were disadvantaged aswell. However, HMFC/PT were in a better position to challenge it because they have a stronger case given they have materially lost out compared to Rangers main disadvantage (opportunity to secure CL monies) dependent on what would be future football match results.
    ……….
    You could also have stated Motherwell were disadvantaged aswell.On what would be future football match results. Finishing second and a missed (opportunity to secure CL monies)

  148. reasonablechap 14th July 2020 at 11:59

    Please don't be surprised by me asking for some kind of evidence – that's how we separate the wheat from the chaff . You do have it ? And you don't know why Eric Drysdale would think anything- just opinion again . 

    You contend that Peter Lawell/CFC exerted pressure but again offer no evidence . I contend they sat back and let others try to find an amicable solution , probably for presentational reasons . I offer no evidence either .

    And here is a c&p from one of the two cheeks fanzines , The Daily Record , that appears to give CFC's viewpoint .

    A source said: “Celtic’s position is very clear. We have always wanted the league season to be completed and that remains our view. If there is any chance of playing the games and finishing the season over the summer then that’s what we would prefer. But we also understand the financial problems are piling up for clubs all across the country the longer this crisis continues. If the season has to be ended early in order to stop clubs from going to the wall then, of course, we would go along with that. It has to be all about the greater good.”

    I support Thistle but don't support their stance on this , and that's got nothing to do with any Svengali , real or imaginary . Peter Lawell isn't making us make an ars* of ourselves .

     

  149. reasonablechap 14th July 2020 at 11:59

    "..The main reason Peter Lawwell doesn’t come under more scrutiny on this board is that he doesn’t work from Ibrox and hence can’t be seen when looking through the Rangers Prism."

    ________________________

    Oh, for heaven's sake! 

    There is no comparison, no possible comparison, between whatever sins of 'influence' 'Peter' may have committed and  the decade of cheating both in sport and in tax matters of SDM and his 'Rangers Football Club' with the assistance of the Football Governance bodies at least to the extent of their failure to examine how it was possible for that club to sign such big name stars who were ready to play for a fraction of the wages they could have commanded!

    I have issues with 'Peter', certainly, but they relate not to any cheating perpetrated by him or by Celtic but to the failure to force the Governance bodies to follow through on the Res 12 and nail the RFC of 1872 and those in 'governance' who were and are happy to let a new club masquerade as RFC of 1872.

    But he's a long way from being as black with sin and deceit as those associated with the 'saga', may they never prosper.

  150. reasonablechap 14th July 2020 at 11:59 ……..Easyjambo wrote the following…..”I’m sure that everyone will be astonished to find that the first Celtic v Rangers fixture has been scheduled for Round 11 of the first round of fixtures. That of course offers the best opportunity for the game, scheduled for the weekend of 17/18 October, to be played in front of a live (possibly restricted) audience.
    ………….
    You picked up on EJs post and may have missed this reply.
    …. Cluster One 8th July 2020 at 10:04

    easyJambo 6th July 2020 at 13:41
    ………..
    Since 2002 there have been, including this year 5 October derby games as a start date.
    8 September start date since 1998. and 4 Aug start date since 2000 and 1 November since 1999.
    But for this season coming and because of the pandemic, if i was a betting person like Albert Kinloch i would have had a bet that the Derby game would not take place in Aug or Sep. May have even had a flutter on no game in Oct.
    If only the bookmakers were open before the fixture list came out, could have booked a holiday to nowhere with the winnings.

  152. Now the blazers have circled the wagons.

    Notice of Complaint | Partick Thistle FC

    Tuesday 14 July 2020

    Alleged Party in Breach: Partick Thistle FC

    Disciplinary Rule allegedly breached: Disciplinary Rule 78 – No member or Associated Person shall take a dispute which is referable to arbitration in terms of Article 99 to a court of law except as expressly permitted by the terms of Article 99. 

    Principal hearing date: Thursday 6 August 2020

    Notice of Complaint | Heart of Midlothian FC

    Tuesday 14 July 2020

    Alleged Party in Breach: Heart of Midlothian FC

    Disciplinary Rule allegedly breached: Disciplinary Rule 78 – No member or Associated Person shall take a dispute which is referable to arbitration in terms of Article 99 to a court of law except as expressly permitted by the terms of Article 99.

    Principal hearing date: Thursday 6 August 2020

    ==========================

    The two clubs have responded with a joint statement as follows:

    We are incredulous to have received a Notice of Complaint from the SFA in the circumstances. 

    It is oppressive of them to require submissions from both clubs by 20 July when we are, in terms of their own articles of association, actively engaged in arbitration.

    As our focus must be squarely on that, we have already requested the SFA to review the timing to allow us to be properly prepared and represented. That is the very least we should expect from the process.

  153. The Hearts / PT joint statement looks as if was penned by a lawyer.

    The use of “oppressive” is very much a legal term. 

    “the traditional conception of oppression in Scots law is any one of a wide variety of situations in which prosecution (or continued prosecution) of an accused will give rise to unfairness.”

  154. Surely it's been known by Hearts and Partick from the start that their decision to go directly to the Court was a risky decision in light of SFA rules? I have picked up knowledge, mainly from SFM contributors, over the last few years so was not surprised. As to the timing would there ever be a right time?

    Like many I am sure I want it to be all over as soon as possible and maybe then I'll get my love for football back. 

  155. easyJambo 14th July 2020 at 16:26

    "..Now the blazers have circled the wagons.."

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    Doncaster sits on the SFA Board as representing the SPFL on that Board.

    What an ugly, incestuous, vindictive , bullying  deceitful ,corrupt 'governance' body the SFA has shown itself to be by this action. 

     

     

  156. Let me get this right.

    The same SFA did nothing that anyone knows about to protect the rights of their members Brora and Kelty when the SPFL decided by themselves not to honour the pyramid.

    The same SFA are now taking sides in an SPFL dispute which was always coming after three of the SFA's members were being pushed into lower divisions and taking severe revenue haircuts and resultant job losses.

    The same SFA whose members Hearts and Thistle are currently following complex SFA guidelines and taking part in the time consuming secret SFA "Arbitration" process.

    The same old SFA.

     

     Scottish football has had better days.

      

  157. paddy malarkey 14th July 2020 at 13:24

    ====================================

    I have not spoken to one football supporter, Celtic or any other team, who did not want the games finished and the league settled that way.

    With regards the European football and prize money. I think if anything what happened put Scottish football at the risk of losing out. The European authorities could have decided that our teams would not be allowed in next season because of the way this was dealt with.

    In my opinion, even if it was only about that, Celtic would have taken their chances on winning the league on the field of play. Rather than UEFA's attitude towards the "smaller" nations. I think some people are forgetting how big the lead was, in both points and goal difference, and the form of the teams at the time. Celtic were totally dominant from January onwards. 

  158. John Clark 14th July 2020 at 18:37

    =============================

    Are you joking.

    The rule is there, the clubs knowingly broke it.

    Everyone knew they were going to be charged for it.

    Did you, or anyone else, expect them not to take this action.

  159. Homunculus 14th July 2020 at 20:12

    Are you joking.

    The rule is there, the clubs knowingly broke it.

    Everyone knew they were going to be charged for it.

    Did you, or anyone else, expect them not to take this action.

    ============================

    Technically, they didn't get the chance to put the issue to the court. They were prevented from doing so by the SPFL motion that it should be "sisted" pending arbitration.

    The bigger issue to me is why now.

    17 June – The petition was presented to CoS.

    20 June – SFA write to Hearts & Partick seeking clarification on why they went down the court route

    1-3 July – Hearing at the CoS re motion to "sist" 

    6 July – SFA announce that the matter has been referred to Arbitration. Included in the announcement was "As this process is entirely independent, the Scottish FA will make no further comment."

    w/c 13 July – Arbitration expected to start some time this week, although some elements may already be in progress, e.g. written submissions, witness statements or other documents may have been submitted to the panel in advance of the oral hearing.

    14 July – SFA issues note of complaint.

    20 July – Deadline for Hearts and Partick to respond to complaint 

    So why issue the note of complaint now, and not a week or two earlier or later?  Is it an attempt to influence the Arbitration panel by portraying Hearts and PT as the serial bad guys? 

    Given that at least two thirds of the "independent" Arbitration panel will drawn from a list of individuals maintained by the SFA, there is at least a perception of a conflict of interest at this stage in the Arbitration process.  That conflict of interest is exacerbated by the dual SPFL/SFA Board roles of ND and club representation on both Boards from Alloa Athletic.  

  160. easyJambo 14th July 2020 at 21:03

     

    Technically, they didn't get the chance to put the issue to the court. They were prevented from doing so by the SPFL motion that it should be "sisted" pending arbitration.

    ==========================================

    Sorry, that is just sophistry. 

    If it was sisted then the Judge made a decision. Even if that decision was that the matter should be dealt with elsewhere. 

    To argue that "Technically, they didn't get the chance to put the issue to the court." is just playing with words.

    Hearts, Partick Thistle and everyone else knew this was going to happen.

    Are people suggesting that the SFA should have watched two member clubs break the rules and not taken action. That is unacceptable, whoever the clubs are. 

  161. Homunculus 14th July 2020 at 21:14

    Sorry, that is just sophistry. 

    Are people suggesting that the SFA should have watched two member clubs break the rules and not taken action. That is unacceptable, whoever the clubs are.

    =================================

    If you read my post fully you would note that my concern was with timing, not whether or not they should face a complaint.

    Do you have a view on the SFA’s comment on 6 July when the matter was referred to arbitration?

    “As this process is entirely independent, the Scottish FA will make no further comment.” 

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but is issuing a “notice of complaint” directly related to the matter being referred to Arbitration not making a “comment”.

  162. easyJambo 14th July 2020 at 21:19

    Do you have a view on the SFA’s comment on 6 July when the matter was referred to arbitration?

    “As this process is entirely independent, the Scottish FA will make no further comment.” 

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but is issuing a “notice of complaint” directly related to the matter being referred to Arbitration not making a “comment”.

    ———————————————————-

    No, it isn't

    It is reacting to the clubs breaching the rules, it is not a comment on the case which is going to arbitration. Basically an attempt to have their relegation reversed, or be paid £10m in compensation as an alternative.

    The petitioners could win their case at arbitration, wholly or in part, and still have breached the rule on taking things directly to a Court. 

  163. There can be no doubt that PT and HMFC breached the SFA's Articles by taking their grievance with the SPFL to the Court of Session.

    In mitigation, the clubs may claim that the nature of the dispute left some dubiety as to whether or not it was a true 'football' matter. That, I believe, was the thrust of the argument that was ultimately rejected by the court.

    If it is determined that the clubs could not have reasonably believed that the dispute was NOT a football matter. i.e. the threat and actual legal action was taken as a mere strategy to force the SPFL to come to some compromise, the panel may well decide that the offence deserves the highest available tarrrif as punishment.

    In my opinion, suspension of membership for both clubs is a very real possibility. 

    Whilst I have some limited sympathy for their plight with regards to relegation, I think that they have been very badly advised in attempting to bypass the arbitration process.

    I do not wish either club ill, but I wouldn't be completely outraged if both sit the coming season out.

  164. HP

    If it is determined that the clubs could not have reasonably believed that the dispute was NOT a football matter. i.e. the threat and actual legal action was taken as a mere strategy to force the SPFL to come to some compromise, the panel may well decide that the offence deserves the highest available tarrrif as punishment.

    In my opinion, suspension of membership for both clubs is a very real possibility.

    ==============

    Given what Lord Clark had to say about it at the time, I think it was without doubt a reasonable legal route or at least extremely difficult to show it had no merit.

    IMO, the timing of this SFA complaint & hearing, associated media briefings (6th floor Hampden source) and "yir oot the game" threats, give the impression of a unified 6th floor pincer movement somewhere between blazer bluff and bullying.

    It all comes back to the forcing of Pandora's box with a a crowbar and I don't think the blazers want the full story to come out.

  165. HP

    I do not wish either club ill, but I wouldn’t be completely outraged if both sit the coming season out.

    ================

    That line doesn’t make sense to me.

    If one doesn’t wish ill on the clubs, one simply wouldn’t consider or contemplate such a draconian punishment.

    It’s almost as if you’ve captured in one sentence the approach to this by many in the game (many clubs, SPFL). Express a public wish for fair and reasonable then privately, be prepared to throw others over a cliff.

    • From my understanding of Lord Clark’s comments, it seems the ‘no litigation’ rule could be held to be illegal if tested.
      It also seems to me that a previous legal challenge to football authorities took place without any reaction by the authorities.
      The rule certainly appears to have been broken in this case, but the management of the situation has again attracted the world class decision making of our football administrators and the result is an escalation of the problem.
      The authorities have already shown themselves to be corrupt, time and time again. I am not prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt now, simply because the ‘no harm’ option was available as was a compensation scheme.

      Worth remembering that nobody cheated in the construction of this shambles.

      • Should also add that in view of Hearts and Thistle and Stranraer having done nothing wrong, they deserve a bit of empathy beyond mere words.
        Self interest is certainly at the root of this, no matter which side of the argument you are on, but self interest is also at the root of our climate crisis, our child poverty crisis, and also nearly every challenge facing us today.

  166. HirsutePursuit 15th July 2020 at 00:53

    '.In mitigation, the clubs may claim that the nature of the dispute left some dubiety as to whether or not it was a true 'football' matter. That, I believe, was the thrust of the argument that was ultimately rejected by the court.'

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    Correct. There was so much nonsense and haste about: the formulation of the 'Written resolution' which ran essentially separate points together to be voted upon as one,

    the urging of a vote by a deadline date far short of the statutory date, 

    the publication of results to date before even the 'requested'date

    and the buggeration factor of the vote that went into quarantine,

    that there were  certainly strong grounds for bringing action against the SPFL board for breaching the Companies Act. 

    Especially, as I believe Lord Clark hinted, there is the suggestion that Article 99  might run counter to the public interest in  so far as to give a private company's Board the right to deny to the company's members access to the Courts without that Board's permission and under threat of unconscionably draconian powers if they do so when the dispute in question might very well be about abuse of process rather than about ' a football' dispute. 

    Basically, society should not allow its citizens to sign away their absolute right to seek redress under law in the event that they have a dispute unless they receive permission from a third party!

     

     

  167. Self interest to the point of self harm.

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………….

    John Clark 15th July 2020 at 08:19

    Especially, as I believe Lord Clark hinted, there is the suggestion that Article 99  might run counter to the public interest in  so far as to give a private company’s Board the right to deny to the company’s members access to the Courts without that Board’s permission and under threat of unconscionably draconian powers if they do so when the dispute in question might very well be about abuse of process rather than about ‘ a football’ dispute. 

    ……………………………………………………
    The SFA move yesterday to adopt what can be seen as an unnecessary bullying tactic that may actually not be legal is interesting and will have long term implications.
    This kind of “rule” is as incongruous as the existing “football debts first” internal rule.

    Everything about the SFA and the SPFL  action though this has been found lacking.

    If I was Brora or Kelty I’d be asking the SFA why they were not worthy of legal action against the SPFL.

     

  168. An interesting piece in today's print edition of 'The Scotsman' by  Iain McMenemy , Chairman of Stenhousemuir FC – " SPFL needs a whole new system not board change".

    McMenemy references the voting structure, and observes: "If you need to carry 90 per cent support for any change then that change will never happen. So nothing goes forward"

    I lift this quote from it " We couldn't even agree on a solution to support our own members during a pandemic"

    And his plea is " If we do one thing, let's address the fundamental issues in our league structure and fix it"

    I suspect that the structure is actually irreparable because of the extent of underlying dishonesty, deceit, double-dealing and disagreement amongst the members of the SPFL and between members and the Board, and the parallel underlying dishonesty , deceit, and double-dealing of the over-arching  'governance body' of Scottish Football , the hugely questionable SFA.

    Rats in a weighted  sack cast into the Clyde are nothing in it, when it comes to panicked self-interest without thought of principle!

  169. We’re still at it! Hearts/PT attempts to reverse the voted position has got nothing to do with the ambition , however fine, to reorganise the SPFL and SFA. They are not on a crusade and their latest “incredulous” stuff is straight out of the statement o’clock circus we’ve been entertained by in recent years. They were 100% aware that SFA action was the outcome of their court approach. 
    For anyone who believes they are fighting the good fight here is some other stuff all clubs sign up to that makes association football remotely possible to operate but could be challenged in court. 
    Edouard goes self employed. Plays for Celtic one week, PSG the next etc. Basic employment rights. 
    Dons sign up a cup tied Liverpool reserve one week before the cup final. Windows? Freedom of movement/restriction of trade and all that. 
    Cove Rangers go to court because the league is reorganised so they don’t get promoted. Oh hold on. 
    All of this may be made ok within SFA rules at some time of course. By voting through resolutions. Hearts/PT are bang out of order. They’ve been poorly advised and I hope they get a minimal fine rather than drag it out. 

  170. I think there is some confusion over the Scottish football arbitration procedure. Although the framework is set out in the SFA's Articles of Association, when utilised, the process is not 'managed' by the SFA. It is completely independent.

    This may provide some useful insight:

    https://shepwedd.com/knowledge/arbitration-scotland-act-2010-0

    Whatever comes out of it, it will not be an LNS predetermined outcome by any stretch of the imagination.

    The contractual agreement to resolve disputes by arbitration (instead of litigation via the courts) does not diminish either party's rights or obligations. An arbitration panel can make the same orders (to do or refrain from doing something) or award for damages that could be made by the court. Such decisions are legally enforceable as if made by the court.

    Partick Thistle and Hearts obviously feel aggrieved by their respective demotions.

    Do they have the right to challenge the SPFL resolution that confirmed the manner in which final league positions were determined – and the consequential promotion/relegation outcomes? Yes, of course they do!

    Does the obligation to make that challenge via arbitration provide a reduced chance of justice being served? No, I don't believe so. I don't think the clubs have even suggested that to be the case.

    Have the clubs breached the SFA's Articles? Yes.

    In light of the general purpose of resolving disputes via arbitration (see the enclosed link above), can the clubs make a reasonable case for choosing to ignoring their obligations under the Articles? Not as far as I'm aware. 

    Could the clubs have their SFA memberships suspended for raising proceedings at the Court of Session? Yes. If the SFA panel decide that the clubs (in this specific action) behaved in bad faith.

    The primary question for the panel may be, what did the clubs hope to gain by bypassing arbitration.

    From what I understand, it doesn't appear that the clubs have a particularly strong legal argument for having the SPFL decision overturned. There is no evidence, that I am aware of, that would suggest the board acted outside of its powers. The resolution was passed within the 28 day period allowed. I cannot see why Dundee (or any other club that had originally indicated it was rejecting the resolution) could not change its mind within the statutory time limit. Legally, it appears to me, it was perfectly entitled to do so.

    I don't think the argument of unfair prejudice holds up to proper scrutiny. Unless you are arguing that decision to finish the league season was invalid or the method of determining final places was inherently unfair, what reasonable argument can there be that the team occupying the automatic relegation position is relegated and the team occupying the automatic promotion position is promoted?

    I feel sympathy that teams weren't able to fight out final positions in the usual way, but, unless you are advocating for voiding all league positions, I don't see what arguments even exist for cancelling promotion and relegation.

    Arbitration could (and I am sure will) settle these matters in short order.

    Court action would be a much more protracted affair. Indeed, a real risk to the start date of the new league season would have ensued. It may have been many weeks/months before a full hearing could have begun. Who knows what temporary arrangements would have had to have been put in place?

    Were Partick Thistle and Hearts seeking justice? Or were they seeking to strategically use the court to stymie the start of the new season, risking the TV revenues and disrupting everyone's plans at a particular vulnerable time.

    Can we really say they have done nothing wrong?

     

     

  171. Mibbees it could be this stramash between clubs and Hampden which will help – eventually – to produce the unintended consequences: restructuring of the SFA & the SPFL?

    This arbitration & Notices of Complaint- together with the other shambolic events of Spring/Summer 2020 – could prove to be the catalyst for long overdue change in governance at Hampden.

    …but, there could also be several more years of simmering mistrust, public mud slinging and general ill will across the senior game – before we reach that final tipping point for implementing change…

  172. I think Hearts/PT, having failed to restructure to their benefit, are going for compensation. All the to and fro, from Hearts/PT and the SPFL, is positioning. It’s all about how much. I can’t see the league being reorganised to suit Hearts/PT. if it is we can look forward to multiple arbitration appeals regarding anything that might affect income: re scheduling of games, post Europe weekend fixtures, allocation of referees etc. 
     

  173. HirsutePursuit

    …Have the clubs breached the SFA’s Articles? Yes.

    In light of the general purpose of resolving disputes via arbitration (see the enclosed link above), can the clubs make a reasonable case for choosing to ignoring their obligations under the Articles? Not as far as I’m aware. 

    Could the clubs have their SFA memberships suspended for raising proceedings at the Court of Session? Yes. If the SFA panel decide that the clubs (in this specific action) behaved in bad faith.

    =========================

    Lord Clark

    On the advice of responsible counsel, Hearts and Partick Thistle brought these proceedings in court alleging unfair prejudice on that and several other grounds. 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. In the absence of detailed submissions, I cannot reach any concluded view on that matter. It is something which would require to be addressed in a proper legal debate on this issue.[8]I conclude that the nature and relative complexity of these issues makes it inappropriate that I deal with the question of dismissing the petition at this early stage. I therefore refuse the motion on behalf of Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers to have this petition dismissed.

     

    HirsutePursuit

    The primary question for the panel may be, what did the clubs hope to gain by bypassing arbitration.

    From what I understand, it doesn’t appear that the clubs have a particularly strong legal argument for having the SPFL decision overturned. There is no evidence, that I am aware of, that would suggest the board acted outside of its powers. The resolution was passed within the 28 day period allowed. I cannot see why Dundee (or any other club that had originally indicated it was rejecting the resolution) could not change its mind within the statutory time limit. Legally, it appears to me, it was perfectly entitled to do so.

    ================

    Lord Clark recognised a need for the appropriate documents, etc. to be made available so as to clarify the dubious circumstances around the Good Friday Vote. Would an arbiration panel do or even be able to do so ?

     

    HirsutePursuit

    Court action would be a much more protracted affair. Indeed, a real risk to the start date of the new league season would have ensued. It may have been many weeks/months before a full hearing could have begun. Who knows what temporary arrangements would have had to have been put in place?

    ======================

    Lord Clark

    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

     

    HirsutePursuit

    Were Partick Thistle and Hearts seeking justice? Or were they seeking to strategically use the court to stymie the start of the new season, risking the TV revenues and disrupting everyone’s plans at a particular vulnerable time.

    =====================

    That is quite a leap in thought and alongside the sentence I highlighted this morning *, IMO almost makes it sound as if you have a horse in the race, so to speak.

    *I do not wish either club ill, but I wouldn’t be completely outraged if both sit the coming season out.
    #doublespeak

     

  174. HirsutePursuit 15th July 2020 at 11:36

    I think there is some confusion over the Scottish football arbitration procedure. Although the framework is set out in the SFA’s Articles of Association, when utilised, the process is not ‘managed’ by the SFA. It is completely independent.
    ……………….
    And that panel must stick to the rules for any punishment that may be due in the SFA’s Articles of Association. If they don’t we could end with a similar situation that we had with the ibrox club back in May 2012.
    …

    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.
    The
    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.

  175. I think that Peter Lawell is playing a blinder here . He knows his club can't be seen to challenge decisions for/against his main rivals , but has learned something in governance that he wants exposed to the courts and is using us and Hearts as proxies  to have the courts examine previous agreements .   More than one way to skin a cat . (insert tongue firmly in cheek emoji here ) . 

  176. paddy malarkey 15th July 2020 at 16:06

    ====================================

    Peter Lawwell’s direct counterpart at Rangers is Stewart Robertson.

    Stewart Robertson has been on the board of the SPFL throughout this whole situation. Part of the decision making process.

    As have Alan Burrows (Motherwell), Les Gray (Hamilton Academical), Ross McArthur (Dunfermline Athletic), Graham Peterkin (Ayr United), Ken Ferguson (Brechin City)

    Yet it seems it is Peter Lawwell who has been controlling things, for some people.

    So it’s not the board of the SPFL, or the member clubs, who are the SPFL who did all of this. Put the resolutions forward, voted on them, agreed to finish the season. It is one man.

    Thank goodness he is at my club, running all of Scottish football. 

  177. Just been dipping my toe in and out of here because if Im honest Im totally scunnered with how all this stuff has happened over the course of Covid shut down . The country as a whole has united to stay sane and get through lockdown  but Scottish football has surpassed itself , with how badly they have behaved through this crises .We really are a backwater when it comes to running our game . I , like most people  would love to see the SFA and the SPFL chased out of our game once and for all. But we should remember the clubs sit on their hands and do bugger all about it , they have it in their power too change things but year after year they do the square root of  Feck All . The latest carry on with Hearts and Partick is just crazy . Anne Budge is a total IDIOT . I get lost with the legal stuff etc at times but even I knew that the crazy road she chose to go down was just madness and was always gonna end up in tears . If  I was a Hearts fan I would be shi@@ing myself that this woman is running the club. I hear she has now got Jim Jeffries in now as well . Jeeeezo . Personally I think the easy and most sensible option was a 14 team league but hey it was the clubs that indicated no apetite for it , so what was Budge thinking about with the latest charade . God help the Jambos

  178. While Im here , Regarding Peter Lawell , as a Celtic fan I have many issues with the man , mainly the Res 12 Debacle . But I,ll tell you one thing, if we had people the calbre of Peter Lawell running Scottish football we would be in a far better place

  180. roddybhoy 15th July 2020 at 20:04 

    ….but Scottish football has surpassed itself…

    Nah, surely not. Scottish Football has a few marathons still to run before it surpasses 2012 and all that ensued? I’d proffer that Ann Budge is not a total idiot. Ann never got where she is today ‘without recognising a completely useless machine’ when she sees one. Ann chose to go down that ‘crazy road’ knowing full well that i. The shareholders (in Hearts case the supporters) demanded it. ii. Hearts had more to win than lose and iii. when it all kicked off Ann thought that the ‘Hearts & TRFC Alliance’ was binding and they’d see it all the way through together.

    Alas, if Ann is guilty of anything, it is placing Hearts’ trust in the likes of Douglas Park; but we all know he jumped on his own bus, pressed firmly on the accelerator and drove it back down TRFC’s own ‘crazy road’ as soon as the SPFL released the prize money before he had to pull the plug.

    As for the ‘easy and sensible option’ for a for a 14 Team League, you’ll find that you and that ‘total idiot’ Ann are on the same page. She fought tooth and nail for a 14 team league. If you ‘were’ a Hearts fan with your views on Ann running the club, I’d suggest you get on a different bus.   

     

  181. Homunculus 15th July 2020 at 17:54

    ‘.Thank goodness he is at my club, running all of Scottish football.’

    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    Well, of course ‘Peter’ does not by any stretch of the imagination ‘run’ all of Scottish Football.

    My concern is that he 

    did not stand up for integrity in football governance against the 5-Way Agreement,

    and buggered about on the Res 12 issue , meekly accepting without challenge  the possibility ( to put it no higher) that his club had been stiffed by  RFC with the collusion of  the SFA and cheated out of some millions of pounds,

    and allows the use of the term ‘Old Firm’ for sordid commercial reasons. 

    While not being mired in the real filth that SDM created by his cheating, oor Peter is by no means the clean potato, putting the financial success of his club above principle. 

    There are no goodies in the saga of RFC’s Liquidation: just different degrees of badness.

    And Scottish Football is in terminal decline.

     

     

     

  182. JC –

    …..putting the financial success of his club above principle'

    Befittingly, this prompted a memory of an old saying: 'A man is usually more careful of his money than he is of his principles'.

     

  183. The inability of our SMSM football writers to distinguish between fiction and fact aided and abetted the creation and maintenance of the 'Big Lie'.

    The most recent example is to be found in Alan Pattullo's piece ( about the Veolia tournament) in 'The Scotsman' this morning.

    He writes "The Old Firm concept perished with the bankruptcy of Rangers in 2012 is how the thinking goes. There's no need to go into the whys and wherefores of that argument here"…

    Towards the end of his piece ( which is about the two cheeks -of -the- same-arse syndrome ) he concludes  

    " The Old Firm concept remains strong. It's just that some refuse to refer to it  as the Old Firm- their choice entirely, of course. But whether people like it or not, Rangers and Celtic have been a package since the early 1900s. And they continue to be so."

    The basic flaw in his argument? His failure to recognise that  the 'rangers'of the Old Firm package ceased to exist, and that TRFC is not 'continuity Rangers'.

    Whatever the relationship between Celtic and TRFC may have been  that  relationship ended in 2012 with the death of RFC as a participant in Scottish Football. 

    Intellectual honesty and emotional balance require that people recognise that fact, and refrain from suggesting that one can choose to describe Celtic's 12-year-old 'relationship' with a new TRFC as being a continuation of the relationnshipthat existed between RFC of 1872 and Celtic (of 1877.. continuing).

    There may be marked similarities ( one cheek of an arse looks and behaves pretty much like another ) but it is definitely not the same total arse that existed up till 2012. 

    [Alan Pattullo, p.60 , 'The Scotsman' print edition, 16/07/20]

  184. JC, frustrating as it is, we have to play the long, long game IMO.

    Yes, it’s been 8 years so far, of the SMSM hacks obediently repeating ad nauseam the continuation lie, the ‘Old Firm’ lie, etc. 

    However, what is encouraging is that every time they lie, several readers correct them in the article’s ‘Comments’ section, (if the Comments section is enabled, of course).

    But, give it say 5 or 10 years tops and the likes of Pattullo, Jackson, English, Jack, Spiers, etc. will no longer be reporting on Scottish football – due to retirement or to the demise of their newspaper.

    The Internet Bampots just have to wait a bit longer…  heart 

    [And that’s assuming that Scottish football doesn’t cannibalise itself meantime!]

  185. I haven’t contributed for a while but have been following the conversation. Getting all rather circular folks if I may say. 

    as way of contrast don’t think that the SFA/SPFL have a monopoly on poor administration. The SRU could show them a thing or two. 

    the leagues were voided. This was after two clubs achieved promotion and were awarded the league trophies. Those clubs appealed the decision but the Board has the ultimate authority as conferred in it by the Union byelaws and the articles of the limited company (Scottish Rugby Union ltd are the legal structure that employees staff and undertakes contracts as the Union is a unincorporated association). This was rejected and the decision stood. 

    the two clubs were very upset about the decision and the rejected appeal. The only resolution they could use is to call a Special General Meeting. This requires the support of 20 clubs to trigger said SGM. The petitioners achieved this aim. The difficulty is in arranging this meeting during the current circumstances. The AGM is now to be held virtually but only for transactions. Any debate will be held a a reconvened adjourned meeting. 

    The result of the null and void is that there is no promotion or relegation. No winners or losers. And no prize money will be divied up either. This is very small beer in comparison with Scottish football but the comparison still holds.

    and it looks like season 20/21 could be similar though if any rugby gets played it will be a miracle!

     I get all the coulda, woulda, shoulda discussion needs to move on. Given the knowns – the Scottish Government are the ones who stopped football. It only recently permitted the game to restart in 1 Aug. 
     

    what other outcome was possible than what we have?

  186. John Clark 16th July 2020 at 00:14

    Homunculus 15th July 2020 at 17:54

    ‘.Thank goodness he is at my club, running all of Scottish football.’

    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    Well, of course ‘Peter’ does not by any stretch of the imagination ‘run’ all of Scottish Football.

    ====================================================

    Of course he doesn't. Neither does he run Celtic, he is the Chief Executive, employed by the board, to run the PLC on a day to day basis. He is also there to put the strategies and policies they decide upon in place. To do what they tell him, if he didn't he would get sacked.

    The Celtic board have three committees to deal with important business. Audit, Remunerations and Nominations. Peter Lawwell does not sit on any of them.

    Do people think that Stewart Robertson actually makes the important decisions for Rangers. Or that he just implements the decisions made by the (PLC) board. In my view the perception is that he is a paid employee doing what he is told to do and implementing what he is told to implement.

    My guess is that Rangers have had such high profile owners that people understand they are "in charge". David Murray, Craig Whyte, Charles Green, Dave King (a charming group). People know a bit about the main players behind Celtic, but they tend to stay in the background and let Peter Lawwell be the front man. The high profile figure who people see as "running Celtic".

  187. Homunculus 16th July 2020 at 20:26

    ' Neither does he run Celtic, he is the Chief Executive, employed by the board, to run the PLC on a day to day basis. He is also there to put the strategies and policies they decide upon in place. To do what they tell him, if he didn't he would get sacked.'

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    You're quite right to make that observation, of course.  Any  CEO is but an employee and a spokesman for his Board.

    I know that my issues with 'Peter' are not with him personally as 'Peter Lawwell' but with him as speaking for the Celtic Board/majority shareholder.

    I use 'Peter' as shorthand for 'Celtic' in pretty much the same way we use 'SMSM 'as shorthand for the sports editors and football writers who we believe are failing us ,and not as referencing , say, the political, arts, crime, or farming and fishing  reporters.. and, of course, there are many excellent reporters on and contributors to those areas of journalism in the SMSM.

    My fundamental position in relation to the saga is a simple one:

    a cheating club whose offences for a decade against the Sport merited expulsion was, in a collusive act of secret corruption, NOT expelled for its misdeeds 

    Instead, the most ridiculous statement any person 'sober as a judge'  ever made ( that a sports club having bags of illicit money did not have any sporting advantage over its immediately competitive clubs) was accepted without a blush, and was followed up by the  equally ridiculous Bryson's observation that , in effect, a player who is ineligible to play at the times he plays is not ineligible at those times if that ineligibility is not discovered until after he has played!

    That was pantomime enough, one would have thought.

    However, it was followed by (and I can still hardly believe it) the super-Pantomime of the Liquidation of RFC. This was  duly and properly acknowledged (fair do's) by the loss of its share in the SPL, and consequent loss of membership of the SFA.

    But then the pantomime was staged, which involved the pretence that the Liquidated 'no-longer-shareholder in the SPL' and 'no-longer-member of the SFA' was actually still magically alive as Club 12, out there strutting its 140 year old stuff against Arbroath (was it?) while SevcoScotland tried to become a football club!

    The sheer foolish dishonesty of it all , in the end!

    Initially, men were inclined to be honest; no way was Club 12/SevcoScotland/ TRFC getting admitted into the SPL!

    Or into Div 1  or Div 2 of the SFL!

    Something happened then.

    Suddenly, a good fairy , pantomime fashion ,appeared and waved his wand and, hey presto, admission into Div 3 was granted not to Club 12/ etc, but, magically to RFC of 1872, while that dead club was lying dead in Liquidation.!!! 

    Miracle of miracles, that.

    My first beef with 'Peter' or the Board of Celtic is that Celtic bought into that 'miracle' for sordid commercial reasons and at the cost of losing any moral high ground against lies and cheating in sport

    My second beef relates to the Res 12 issue ( which had its origins before the 5-Way Agreement but about which I was ignorant until well after the Liquidation saga).

    I believe the Celtic Board have behaved disgracefully in refusing to insist on independent investigation into  the possibility that RFC  of 1872 ,with or without the collusion of the SFA's Licensing Committee, lied to UEFA and obtained by that lie a few million quid to which they were in no way entitled. 

    Worse, I believe that 'Peter' ( as representing the Board) misled/ lied to the AGM on the matter. 

    I can temporise, compromise, adjust, adapt, make allowances, see other angles, other ways of looking at things: 

    I cannot accept being lied to ( by anyone, really, no matter the cause or 'reason' for the lie)

     

     

  188. A propos my post of 23.40, can I say that I have since then made some toasted cheese for Mrs C and myself, and only just this minute ago went in to see what the SMSM are saying, and have come across this:

    "Even with (Jurgen) Klopp or (Jose) Mourinho at the helm, Rangers wouldn’t have challenged Celtic, because of the players and finances available."

    M'Luds, John Barnes knows that the money available to a club really gives a sporting advantage, no matter what a superannuated judge may have been told.!broken heart

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/premier-league/john-barnes-makes-jurgen-klopp-rangers-title-claim-as-he-urges-steven-gerrard-to-keep-focus-on-ibrox/ar-BB16P8Hn?ocid=msedgntp

     

  189. It seems as though Peter became a topic of discussion yesterday. I quote two responses below.

    —————– %%%%%—————-

    Thank goodness he is at my club, running all of Scottish football.

    ————————–

    Well, of course ‘Peter’ does not by any stretch of the imagination ‘run’ all of Scottish Football.

    ===================================

     

    Firstly, there seems to be a strong rebuttal of claims that he runs Scottish football. Who made those claims? I can’t remember typing that in my posts where Peter was referenced. But regardless, let’s change from what he isn’t/doesn’t do to something more interesting and constructive, what he is and consider what he does.

     

    My position

    • he works as CEO for the most powerful club in Scotland, Celtic PLC. Over the last decade, they have clearly become the establishment club, so to speak. The renumeration committee award him with a seven figure package of responsibility to act on behalf of the interests of the PLC. Above all, the main interest of the PLC is the bottomline.
    • Peter is the clubs main political interface, negotiator and enforcer. He has been in the job for nearly 17 years and had previously worked at Celtic as Financial Controller in the early 90’s for a relatively short time.
    • Alongside the clout of  representing the most powerful interests in the land, those 17 years have seen Peter make a lot of friends, some of whom enjoy periodic influence and can sometimes help Peter further the interests of the PLC he represents. Peter is reputed to be a strong individual when it comes to politics and negotiations. He attempts to bring his considerable influence to bear on decisions/negotiations that may affect the interests of the PLC.

    – he is the single most powerful and influential man in Scottish football when  it comes to the day to day (often machiavellian) politics and currently enjoys having important friends at the SFA (eg. Mulraney & Maxwell) and SPFL (eg. the executive).

    Peter protects relationships. He vocally supports his friends at the SPFL, at a time when they are knee deep in an omnishambles that smells badly. But as some have already pointed toward, Peter doesn’t do principles. He has in the past enjoyed talking about sporting integrity when it suited but in reality, he doesn’t actually do that either. The PLC interest trumps all and Peter likes to keep his friends on the renumeration committee happy.

     

    He doesn’t sit behind a desk, stroke a fat white cat and control the whole shooting match.

    He has many people where he wants them and when required, attempts to bring his influence to bear on behalf of the PLC interest

    Hence the previous use of ……#FollowtheMoney

    Peter, is by miles, the most powerful and influential lobbyist in our game and this in turn drives many important decisions as we have seen these past few months. Some of which, I’ve already mentioned several times.

     

     

     

  190. Roddy

    Regarding Peter Lawell , as a Celtic fan I have many issues with the man , mainly the Res 12 Debacle . But I,ll tell you one thing, if we had people the calbre of Peter Lawell running Scottish football we would be in a far better place

    ===========================

    That is some twisted logic.

     

  191. Homunculus

    Neither does he run Celtic, he is the Chief Executive, employed by the board, to run the PLC on a day to day basis. He is also there to put the strategies and policies they decide upon in place. To do what they tell him, if he didn't he would get sacked.

    ——————————————————————————

    It should also be noted though that Peter is not only CEO but is a member, and no doubt one of influence, of the PLC main Board that agrees the strategies and policies he then has responsibility to implement. 

  192. Just a slight deviation / minor observation.

    I note that Ryan Kent was sent off yesterday.  I didn't see the game and only saw a photo of him following the red card incident.

    What I did notice is that he had his socks pulled up and over his knees. 

    And it's the height of summer…?

    As a player I think the only time I ever did this was if it was mid-winter, with a morning kick-off – and the red blaes pitch was frozen solid! A futile attempt to preserve the skin on my knees…

    I just don't get it.

    Socks pulled up above your knees is just not a good look, IMO.

    (And not having a go at Kent, as others – even Sergio Ramos – does the same.)

    …and don't get me started on gloves and tights…  crying

  193. StevieBC @ 11.36  — I can give you an insight into this reason for the socks pulled up over the knees – 

      Some people believe it's all to do with the red band being above the knee and the lines of their favourite anti- Fenian song and if you see the individual players who partake of this practice it becomes believable especially in games against Celtic FC – whether this is true or not is open to conjecture and maybe at some point the players who regularly take to the field like this will come out and enlighten us all? 

    As you say it's a bit odd so we're left to speculate 

  194. bordersdon 17th July 2020 at 10:59

    ==================================

    Of course he has influence, he is really good at his job.

    It would be madness to employ him, pay him the money they do, then not take his opinions on board.

    There really isn't anything unusual about a highly paid, very experienced Chief Executive having boardroom influence. 

     

  195. reasonablechap 17th July 2020 at 09:17
    He has many people where he wants them and when required.
    …………….
    Many people also have Peter Lawwell where they want him, and know he is there when required.
    …………….
    Peter, is by miles, the most powerful and influential lobbyist in our game.
    … But still could not get the push against a Title declaration through.

  196. Homunculus 17th July 2020 at 13:57
    …………..
    He is that good at his job, that a few clubs are interested in taking him away from celtic, if he was not so good at his job no one would be looking at him.

  198. https://twitter.com/ClydeSSB/status/1284079922399633411
    @ScottishFA
    chief exec Ian Maxwell is thanking fans for helping to save their clubs during the pandemic.

    Supporters have raised more than £1m for Scottish clubs while also helping community projects during lockdown.
    ……………….
    So he can come out from the depths of the bunker and speak to fans.

  199. Homunculus @ 13.57

    There really isn't anything unusual about a highly paid, very experienced Chief Executive having boardroom influence. 

    ——————————————————————————

    Indeed. I think that was the point I was making and one that I felt was understated in your earlier post (IMO).

  200. Cluster

    He is that good at his job, that a few clubs are interested in taking him away from celtic, if he was not so good at his job no one would be looking at him.

    =================

    I agree !

    If you think about it, that actually supports my first post of this morning.

    The root of the problem has been the neoliberal economic model that Thatcher brought to the UK and the ways in which it has evolved.

    PLC’s have adapted to it, often sail close to/beyond the wind and as far as Celtic PLC’s interests are concerned, Lawwell does a good job.

    However, that doesn’t make things right.

  201. borderson

    Indeed. I think that was the point I was making and one that I felt was understated in your earlier post (IMO).

    ===================

    Your use of “understated” is IMO, understated angry

    I’d humbly suggest that omitted is the word given that Homunculus tends to be careful with his language.

  202. reasonablechap 17th July 2020 at 14:50
    PLC’s have adapted to it, often sail close to/beyond the wind and as far as Celtic PLC’s interests are concerned, Lawwell does a good job.

    However, that doesn’t make things right.
    …………………
    A lot of things are not right in scottish football.

  203. I tried   to take the following absurd comments from one Nikola Katic seriously – but failed miserably!

    “If we had played every game against Celtic last season, we would have been Champions…In the Cup Final we were impossibly good (!) but just couldn’t score” (How does one become impossibly good?)

    Where do you start with that?

    Indisputable FACTS from the three Celtic v SEVCO games:-

    CFC – 2 wins

    SEVCO – 1 win

    The bold boy’s prizes for his profound and totally illogical remarks are courses in English Language, Grammar and Basic Arithmetic.

    Oh – and stay off the ‘Bucky’ Niki!

     

  204. Peter Lawwell seeking to exercise his influence on the Scottish Government?  Is it an appeal on behalf of the whole Scottish Football, or a dressed up appeal on behalf of Celtic plc?

    Should such a statement not be coming from the SPFL or the SFA?

    http://www.celticfc.net/news/18332

    CELTIC have expressed the hope that Scottish football will not be left behind as grounds re-open to supporters around Europe.

    Following the indication of ‘pilot’ games with spectators in the rest of the UK from next month, Celtic believe that the same approach can safely be adopted in Scotland.

    Celtic Chief Executive Peter Lawwell said: “We have discussed the idea of ‘pilot’ games with the Scottish Government and believe it provides a safe, sensible way forward. As a club, we have put enormous thought and effort into making Celtic Park fully compliant with all public health-related requirements while allowing our supporters to return to watching football.

    “It is acknowledged that Scottish football has been exemplary in implementing all the safeguards required of it, first to get back into training and, from August 1st, to playing competitive SPFL matches.

    “We are convinced that this should now be accompanied by a phased return of spectators which would be good, not only for the game of football but also for public health and morale in Scotland more generally.

    “Scottish clubs are much more dependent on matchday revenues than other, larger leagues. That factor should be taken account of, so long as the public health obligations are met, to which we are entirely committed.

    “We also have an obligation to our own supporters to make the case for them to be allowed to watch live football, particularly when they can see the steady progress towards this in other European leagues.

    “Alongside other sporting bodies, Celtic will continue to engage in constructive dialogue with the Scottish Government and look forward to early progress.”

  205. easyJambo 17th July 2020 at 19:00

    '..Should such a statement not be coming from the SPFL or the SFA?'

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    The issuing of such a statement by an individual club is really a powerful  indictment of the petty-minded, pettifogging and hopelessly blinkered and embarrassing incompetence of the governance body of Scottish Football.

    It should not be the place of an individual club to engage with the national and civic authorities as if in a representative capacity on behalf of Scottish Football!

    But it is not surprising that it should happen given that  the SFA Board is  up its own posterior, external orifice invoking its own Articles to try to punish clubs that have been put in great difficulty through no fault of their own instead of concentrating on saving all of Scottish Football .

    Fiddling while Rome burns isn't in it!

     

     

  206. easyJambo 17th July 2020 at 19:00

    Peter Lawwell seeking to exercise his influence on the Scottish Government?  Is it an appeal on behalf of the whole Scottish Football, or a dressed up appeal on behalf of Celtic plc?

    =================================================

    It's on behalf of Celtic.

    If they agreed that Celtic could start getting fans back in, but no-one else could, the club would do it.

    So would every other club.

    None of them would say "No, it's all or nothing, if everyone cant get fans back we won't be doing it".

  207. Well ryan kent got his marching orders last night straight red for apparently raising his hands to an opponent. My questions are will the SFA man up and will he be suspended for the first 2 games at the start of the new season?

     

  208. Regarding fans returning to watch football.

    I’d have thought the SFA (eg. chief medical officer) will have continued to meet and talk with government and other individuals will have lobbied, as far as they can in this very particular situation.

    Regarding Peter and the PLC. They are the establishment club and feel powerful enough to apply public pressure on the government (note the comparisons with other leagues). Peter will also be looking for his PLC to be part of any pilot fixture where fans return to the stadium.

    Comes down to bottomline again but in this case all clubs are in a similar boat.

    =================

    Shug
    Maybe it hasn’t hit Kerrydale yet but the news that the French Football Federation have no jurisdiction over the friendly competition in Lyon. Therefore no reports of anyone sent off in the 360 minutes that both Rangers and Celtic matches will be sent to the SFA ……has been in the media all afternoon.

     

  209. reasonablechap 17th July 2020 at 22:41

    Shug
    Maybe it hasn’t hit Kerrydale yet but the news that the French Football Federation have no jurisdiction over the friendly competition in Lyon. Therefore no reports of anyone sent off in the 360 minutes that both Rangers and Celtic matches will be sent to the SFA ……has been in the media all afternoon.

     

    What’s kerrydale? I have a suspicion it’s a Celtic thing and you think I support Celtic sorry but I don’t. I actually posted that this afternoon btw but for some reason I have to click the post comment button twice not sure if everyone has to do that or if it’s just me. It was still there waiting to post when I came back later so I posted it then sorry if i’m way too late in asking those questions.

    Just noticed as well when I posted then that I’m going back to the page before after posting been a while since it did this.

  210. Don't you think, after Simunovic's red card and consequent ban v St Gallen during last season's friendly that agreements were reached (this close season) whereby yellows and reds would be ignored in the real sense for this year's tourney and be unreported?

    If nothing else, Kent's behaviour has reinforced TRFC's disciplinary problems and the liabilities within heir squad. 

    In my opinion, he's £5m short of the 'best' £12m TRFC have never spent. 

     

  211. The more interesting line in yesterdays media was that the Arbitration process had some kind of procedural hearing yesterday (Friday) and that the main event would begin on Monday.

    I heard whispers that the SPFL hadn’t fully complied with documents that had been requested of them. However, they weren’t from a source that I’d trust, so I’d ask if anyone can provide a more reliable situation report?

    The blog post is spot on in highlighting the regrettable lack of transparency within such an important process for Scottish football.

    It has to be noted that it was the SPFL who wanted to avoid transparency. No surprise there given the smell that emanates from the 6th floor and beyond.

  212. This interesting piece on a Motherwell tour to South America in 1928 was on the BBC site.

    It involved 13 matches and the opposition included a couple of up and coming names in the game, Brazil and Argentina !!
     

    Motherwell: Beating Argentina & bringing football to South America

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53403363

  214. wrt to Leigh Griffiths and his ongoing (mental health) problems.

    It’s clearly not just the physical aspect of his wellbeing, but I (not exactly a lover of all things SEVCO) was struck by Barry Ferguson’s understanding and sympathetic comments on PLZ Soccer about his ‘situation’ – as he, after touching only briefly on the attitude side of Griffiths, was fulsome in his praise for his abilities and wished him all the best. Ferguson displayed a nice touch in that regard.

    However, as for the ignorant Kris Boyd, he’s been like a ‘werewolf peerin o’er a dyke’ – waiting to pounce with some more snide remarks about someone he clearly has no time for. On cue.

    Cashing in though his ‘journalistic’ (!) endeavours on another’s sad plight… and he, patron of/involved with a mental health charity?!

     

     

  215. bect67 18th July 2020 at 10:14

    …

    "I heard whispers that" = Fake noos methinks…

    =========

    I remember that phrase being used in the run up to RFC Administration.

    IIRC, it was late December 2011 and it was either Jingle Jackson or The ET 'sports journalist' who has long since moved abroad (?).

    To paraphrase;

    "I've heard there are whispers in the corridors at Ibrox, that a deal has been done with HMRC for £5M…"

    The Bampots immediately had a right good laugh at that effort.

    It's funny how your memory can retain nonsense details…  broken heart

  217. StevieBC 18th July 2020 at 13:26
    ………
    By the time charles Green was there those whispers had turned into a Nod.
    It’s funny how your memory can retain nonsense details… 😉
    …
    Ps also have to click post comment twice, but it has been doing that long enough for me.

  218. Cluster One 18th July 2020 at 16:57

    ‘..whispers had turned into a Nod.’

    “”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    And then there was that  great ‘Your Call’ with Traynor  defensively falling out with Chick ( I wonder was bully boy Traynor on the t payroll at Ibrox  while hosting ‘Your Call’?)and ridiculing Chick’s insistence on the fact of the nod, and the significance thereof!

  219. dom16

    Re. Events Industry Advisory Group

    On what is called a full list of members dated 12th June (link below) there is one from Scotiish football and yes, he is one of Peter’s good friends. So I guess you could pretty much call it direct representation for the PLC.

    Member: Ian Maxwell, CEO at the SFA

    https://www.visitscotland.org/news/2020/group-leads-events-industry-recovery-plans

    However a few days later Peter joins to give Ian some more direct guidance. Perhaps the puppet wasn’t strong enough to do an important job.

  220. "RANGERS fans desperate to pre-order the team's new Castore home kit currently cannot do so – after House of Fraser removed their listing.

    Light Blues fans were left anxious earlier this month when the retailer – owned by Mike Ashley – was the only place offering the pre-sale online…"

    https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/5826169/rangers-fc-news-castore-strips-house-of-fraser-listing/

    ============

    Oh dear.

    Is Big Mike putting TRFC in its place?

    Interesting.

    Additionally: are those 50K shirt sales orders – and already paid for – going to reach their customers from 1st August…?

  221. reasonablechap 18th July 2020 at 19:33

    ‘..However a few days later Peter joins to give Ian some more direct guidance. Perhaps the puppet wasn’t strong enough to do an important job.’

    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    Where is your authority for that statement, please?

    Membership as at 12.06.20 A full list of members of the Events Industry Advisory Group is as follows:

    https://www.visitscotland.org/news/2020/group-leads-events-industry-recovery-plans

    Peter Duthie

    CEO, SEC  (Chair, Event Industry Advisory Group)

    Bridget McConnell

    CEO, Glasgow Life

    Geoff Ellis

    CEO, DF Concerts

    Tom Clements

    President/ Director, National Outdoor Events Association / Specialized Security

    Julia Amour

    Director, Festivals Edinburgh

    Fergus Linehan

    CEO, Edinburgh International Festival

    Alan Laidlaw

    CEO, Royal Highland Show

    Lesley Beck

    Director, Rare Management (Mountain Bike World Cup)

    Johnnie Cole Hamilton

    Executive Director ‑ Championships, R&A

    Dominic McKay

    COO, Scottish Rugby

    Claire Dow

    Principal Events Officer, Dundee City Council

    Mark Laidlaw

    Director of Operations, SEC

    Calder Sibbald

    Director, Black Light Ltd

    Gayle Findlay

    Chair, Heb Celt Festival

    Ian Maxwell

    CEO, Scottish Football Association

    Nick Waight

    Managing Director, P&J Live

    Paul Bush

    Director of Events, VisitScotland

     

    Then another member was added yesterday, no mention of Peter Lawwell

    Article published 17/07/2020

    ” The 17-member group has now been joined by Marshall Dallas, CEO of the Edinburgh International Convention Centre, who brings further expertise and insight from Business Events to the EIAG.”

    https://www.visitscotland.org/news/2020/event-industry-advisory-group-hold-third-meeting

    It is important to be accurate when making statements of fact and to give one’s sources where possible, unless, of course, one is employed as a sports journalist in the SMSM. 
    For example : statement:Rangers FC of 1872 is in Liquidation -see CH records

    statement of fact: The Rangers FC was founded in 2012 (known formerly as SevcoScotland, formerly Club 12)– See records of the SFA and SPL/SFL[ SPFL] and Companies House

     

  222. reasonablechap 18th July 2020 at 07:31

    " I heard whispers that the SPFL hadn’t fully complied with documents that had been requested of them. However, they weren’t from a source that I’d trust, so I’d ask if anyone can provide a more reliable situation report? "

    Still fishing, brutal when backbone hits belly.

     

  223. bigboab1916 18th July 2020 at 22:15

    Now come on.

    If someone heard "whispers" from someone they don't trust why would they not then spread the "story".

    Or just make stuff up then post it as if it was a fact.

    Are you suggesting they are just trying to get a reaction. 

  224. StevieBC 18th July 2020 at 21:31

    ‘..Is Big Mike putting TRFC in its place?’

    “”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    In the mad world of business contracts who can say, Stevie BC? 

    I think the problem is a manufacturing/supply line problem with whichever factories/producers,in India or wherever ,to which Castore (or J.Carter Sporting club Ltd) gave the manufacturing contracts.

    These may not have been able ( even if they were using quasi slave-labour, which of course I would not suggest for a minute that they were) to produce to specification the desired quantities, or to get them shipped to England by the (contracted?) time. 

    According  to Castore ( and Sir Andy Murray) their designs of sportswear are really quite good. But their quality is at the up-market, almost niche end. [Andy doesn’t buy a 50 or 60 quid tennis shirt!]

    To mass-produce high-end quality  for that kind of retail price is a horse of a different colour. If Castore got it wrong in their specification, or if the manufacturer did, then what? 

    And if Castore went downmarket into ‘cheap’ bog standard football gear, that might damage their ‘elite’ image.

    I don’t know, of course. 

    But there will be folks out there on this blog who will have that kind of clothing design/manufacturing/retail supply and distribution/consumer targeting knowledge. 

    Step forward, those who can enlighten us! 

    In making this post I am not just having a petty wee go at the Ibrox Board , but expressing a genuine interest  in how all of that world works, not ever having been in ‘business’ myself, but having been made increasingly aware of it by listening to the effects of Covid-19 on business generally.

     

  225. Homunculus 18th July 2020 at 22:47

    Now come on.

    If someone heard "whispers" from someone they don't trust why would they not then spread the "story".

    Or just make stuff up then post it as if it was a fact.

    Are you suggesting they are just trying to get a reaction. 

    ==================

    Firstly, not trusting a source can mean different things. It may be because of previous experience of said source or simply the same, being unknown to you with no track record you know of.

    In this case it was unknown and given what social media can be like, my instinct was to be doubtful.

    I clearly expressed my doubt and asked if anyone had heard anything similar. Mainly thinking in easyjambo, who will be keeping a closer eye on what is currently going on than most, rather than being trapped within the Sevco Prism. Of all posters on here, he is the one who brings the most salient facts and objective observations to the table, by quite a distance.

    However, it was Brian McLaughin (BBC) who pretty much convinced me that there was nothing in the rumour/whispers when giving his weekly review of events on Saturday Sportsound. He is a journalist seldom mentioned on here, but IMO he has been fairly comprehensive and fair-minded in his reporting during this omnishambolic period. 

    Instead of the over-riding need on here to go after anything blue, posters might consider the unsatisfactory secret process that gives rise to a vacum of information, where speculation of various types will grow. Something that Andrew Smith touches upon in the actual blog post above.

    This blog often deals in doubtful speculation. It kind of goes with the territory but one kind of speculation is lovingly nutured whilst others tend to be stamped upon and dismissed.

    No-one is always right or has exclusivity on reason. The world, especially social media, might be a better place if we recognised that.

  226. JC

    Where is your authority for that statement, please?

    =========

    It was dom16 who posted a link regarding Peter directly joining the group in it’s efforts.

    The question here isn’t really about the semantics of whether he was officially a member or not (I’ll admit that I had that initial impression). His statement on Friday probably amounts to more than what most members have actually done, at least in applying pressure .

    IMO the main talking points are…

    • how the PLC interest seems to usurp or compete with the broader national interest
    • should a football club apply such direct pressure on the government during a health crisis ?

    º the apparent inconsequentiality of the CEO at the SFA 

    • the relationship between Peter and Ian

  227. I heard that the earth was flat and the moon was made of cheese. 

    However the person that told me was sure the Rangers never died or cheated anyone.

    He believes it was all Peters and the unseen Fenian hands fault.

    Do not listen to the people you are wasting your time.

  228. paraniodbyexperience 19th July 2020 at 10:40

    I heard that the earth was flat …

    =====================================

    I'm starting to think  there may be something in that, the people propounding the idea have a global presence.

    Anyway, people don't need to worry about unsubstantiated claims. When they turn out to be bunkum they can always either indulge in twisted logic, to say that their claim wasn't the main point anyway. So it's everyone else's fault for not understanding. Deflect onto other people having indulged in it themselves (nothing like a good logic fallacy). Or simply delete the initial offending claim.

    No wait, very few people can do that here, so it has to be one of the other two. 

     

  229. The ever-interesting and entertaining Barry Hearn expressed the need ,in these covid times , to approach the problems of holding sports events with hope and optimism and not in  defeatist way, otherwise you end up like Scottish Football!

    Nice one, Barry.

    (Sportsound, a few minutes ago)

     

  230. John Clark 19th July 2020 at 13:03

    The ever-interesting and entertaining Barry Hearn expressed the need ,in these covid times , to approach the problems of holding sports events with hope and optimism and not in  defeatist way, otherwise you end up like Scottish Football!

    Nice one, Barry.

    (Sportsound, a few minutes ago)

    ==========================================

    Scottish football is controlled to a large extent by the policies of the Scottish Government, health is a devolved issue. The Scottish Government appears to be using more cautious policies than the Westminster Government as far as I can see. 

    Scottish football is trying to negotiate with the Scottish Government to allow to get things back to normal as soon as possible. However Scottish football can do nothing without the Governments agreement.

    Comments like Barry Hearn's are not helpful. Decrying someone for actions which are outwith their control is unfair. I am absolutely certain that the clubs want things back to normal asap, their survival depends on that. However the Scottish Government are quite rightly concentrating on saving lives and putting that above economic considerations. I'm not convinced the Westminster Government have the same balance of priorities. 

     

  231. Homunculus 19th July 2020 at 14:03

    ‘..Scottish football is trying to negotiate with the Scottish Government to allow to get things back to normal as soon as possible. However Scottish football can do nothing without the Governments agreement.’

    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    Of course they cannot.

    And of course ‘..Decrying someone for actions which are outwith their control is unfair.”

    My post was a reference back to Hearn’s speech in 2014 to the Scottish Football Association convention, when

    “Hearn said: “If you worked for me you’d be sacked. You have so much good in Scottish football, so many positive things, but you don’t sell yourself. You don’t do enough for yourselves. I’m seeing too much self pity.”

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/30317051

    I was not blaming the SFA for not getting ‘football’ back, because as you say, decisions on that front are not theirs to make. 

    But I do blame them for not reining in the SPFL  in its throwing to the wolves of those clubs that will be relegated/not promoted, instead of helping to find a  way to protect them, as they so easily managed to ‘protect’ by the ‘Big Lie’ the interests of those who founded a new club in 2012!

    And I blame them further for their phoney  hypocritical ‘Articles of Association’ legalism and blatant contempt for ‘due process’ exhibited by their bringing charges under their Articles 78 and 99 against  clubs innocent of any football cheating or grand scale tax cheating while those clubs are at Arbitration under the SFA’s own rules!

     Hearn would be right in his ‘humourous’ contempt for such a body as the SFA!

    SDM’s sports cheating killed the Rangers of my grandfather’s day, and made Scottish football so corrupt at its core as to be virtually incapable of redemption.

    Poncing about now with their Articles of Association , whether by the SFA or by  the SPFL  is not going to help.

    Both bodies are askew with truth and honesty and fair dealing, both of them mired in the murk of the 5-Way Agreement and the Res 12 issue.

    Let no one on those Boards sleep easily tonight or any other night in their miserable future lives.

    I go off to my kip, conscience free!broken heart

     

  232. Old Chinese proverb….
    Some view most events through the Sevco Prism, others go a step further and live in it.

    ===========%%%%%%%%%%============

    I was happy to see Peter get some well deserved media attention at the weekend. He so often lets his friends do things for him that you’d almost forget the large shadow he projects over the Scottish game.

    The good auld Sunday Post even came up with a suitable back page headline…

    “Not so fast, Peter”…..broken heart

    It highlighted the Scottish Clinical Director, Jason Leitch and what it called, the pouring of cold water over the PLC statement released on Friday. 

    https://i.ibb.co/XtKjTjT/Bacj-page-post.png

     

    IMO Peter and the PLC have usurped the collective position of Scottish football on this and naturally, will be putting the PLC interest in front of every other club in the land. I would get an argument that said, if successful, it would economically benefit all clubs, at least in the short-term. However, Celtic would be leading and position themselves first in the queue.

    This then switches focus on what the SFA are doing, or not doing.

    Here is where Peter’s friends come into play. Ian (CEO) and Mike (interim President) very much appear to give the main man the green light to take the lead.

    Peter gets what he wants from both the SFA and the SPFL.

     

    If Barry Hearn was to comment on how Peter and the PLC operated. My guess is that from his commercial way of seeing things, it’d be a thumbs up. I think Peter used to be an accountant, so for every credit there must be a debit entry….that’s where the thumbs down for Scottish football would come in.

    Neoliberal economics has wealth disproportionately flowing to the top. That wealth buys power that further influences decisions to increase wealth, increase gaps, etc., etc. and the rest can go to hell in a handcart. As far as Scottish fitbaw is concerned, the PLC continues to accumulate wealth and power….but when  the worst effects of hell and a handcart really arrive is when Peter (on behalf of PLC) hopes to make his ECA representation at UEFA count…..and leave the rest to make the best of what is left.  

    The elephant in the room for Scottish football is not so much the PLC agenda (Rangers would do similar, but can’t) . It’s what is actually happening in real time, how Peter and the PLC pulls so many strings and what that means for the rest of the game.

  233. Important day for the Scottish game with the Arbitration hearing to continue it’s process.

    However, it appears doubtful that the real stakeholders of the game (us) will be allowed to know much in the way of detail of the day’s play.

    Not good and it will leave a vacum that many will compete to fill. IMO, that competition already began last week with Mr/Ms Hampden Source prominent and arguably, the SFA compliance officer.

  235. Anyone expecting a lot of details from the arbitration process is likely to be disappointed. 

    It is a confidential process, other than the result I wouldn’t expect there to be much else available.

    That is just my understanding, if anyone knows different I am happy to be corrected. 

  236. Not the sort of thing I would normally bring here, however I think it is an important message at this time. At any time really.

    https://www.rangers.co.uk/Article/a-message-from-managing-director-stewart-robertson/2MGSMxIi2GWuSGXXsePlHA

    A MESSAGE FROM MANAGING DIRECTOR STEWART ROBERTSON

    Alfredo Morelos was the victim of racist abuse via social media on Friday evening. This hate crime is now subject of a police investigation.

    This is unacceptable, cannot be tolerated and must be condemned by everyone in Scottish football and society as a whole.

    Furthermore, as a club, we stand firmly behind our players who have taken a knee prior to recent games. This is a strong stance against racism.

    We will work tirelessly to protect our players every single day and will not tolerate the abuse or hatred that some have had to endure in recent days.

    To be clear, if you are unable to support our players, regardless of their background, you are not welcome at Ibrox. Rangers is a club for all.

    ‘Everyone Anyone’, our groundbreaking diversity and inclusion initiative, celebrates its first anniversary on Wednesday. Recent incidents highlight the importance of our campaign which we will continue to drive forward.

     

  237. Homunculus 20th July 2020 at 12:33

    …

    Stewart Robertson…

    "…To be clear, if you are unable to support our players, regardless of their background, you are not welcome at Ibrox. Rangers is a club for all…"

    =======

    IMO, that deserves a: Wow Just Wow!

    And fair play to Robertson, as he is being direct and clear to his own supporters.

    Can't remember ever hearing / reading anything like that emanating from Ibrox before.

  238. As a Rangers fan, I back the statement from the club and would like to see those within our support that can’t back the players stance, walk away. 

    If some/many do, it would IMO, be a significant achievement on the back of the Everyone Anyone initiative. A step forward.

  239. The new SPFL Board

    New SPFL board announced: Steve Brown (St Johnstone) Les Gray (Hamilton), Peter Lawwell (Celtic), Ewen Cameron (Alloa), Ross McArthur, (Dunfermline), Ken Ferguson (Brechin), Gordon Thompson (Clyde), Murdoch MacLennan (chair), Neil Doncaster (CEO) & Karyn McCluskey (independent).

    Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose

  240. eJ,

    rearranging the deck chairs…?

    Would be much more encouraging if the announcement was to disband the SPFL instead.

    I know,  heart

  242. Homunculus 20th July 2020 at 12:33
    A MESSAGE FROM MANAGING DIRECTOR STEWART ROBERTSON
    ………………..
    Singing the Billy Boys was better than invading the Hampden pitch. May 27, 2016
    …
    Start off the statement with a But, but. then later get to the point of the statement that should have been the main focus.

  244. Cluster One 20th July 2020 at 16:39

    ===================================

    To be fair he had to make it in some way palatable to the support.

    The way he has done will hopefully get as many as possible actually listening.

    It's better than he previous approach. Can you stop doing this because … it might harm the club.

  245. Homunculus 20th July 2020 at 17:58
    ……………
    Baby steps in the right direction, one can only hope.

  246. Surprisingly, that Ibrox statement was issued in the name of the MD, Stewart Robertson.

    Previously, Ibrox statements – especially any controversial statements – typically came from Chairman King himself.

    So, why did the new Chairman Park not get involved?

    Come to think about it: is Park involved with Ibrox operations at all these days…?

    It’s curious indeed that the Chairmanship has passed from one very vocal, influential individual of the Scottish game – to a relatively, quiet as a mouse, impotent individual, [e.g. ‘Dossiergate’]

    Has Chairman Park simply written off his Ibrox ‘investment’ – and now focusing his business prowess at his other, salvageable business interests?

    I think we should be told.  

  247. Regarding the statement from TRFC on racism and abuse of players , what did they expect if this is true ? (from Follow Follow)

    The need for this surely signposts that Stewart should concentrate on what he’s good at, and that isn’t club leadership. Last year when Everyone, Anyone launched we had a piper playing ‘The Billy Boys’ during the media call ffs!

    And on the singing of the Billy Boys during games in France 

    We had halfwits who went to France and thought it was okay to sing the Billy Boys. Despite knowing it’s off limits.

    Who needs enemies ?

     

  248. Extracted from The DR today;

    "Aberdeen's season opener against Rangers has been brought forward five hours at the request of Sky.

    Steven Gerrard 's side will travel to Pittodrie on August 1 for a mouth-watering Premiership opener against the Dons.

    But the fixture, originally pencilled in for a 5.30pm kick-off, has been rescheduled for 12.30pm.

    The SPFL have revealed that Sky requested the match be given an earlier start time…"

    ==========

    The clubs are desperate for supporters' cash, but still treat them with contempt.

    Nothing changes.

  250. reasonablechap19th July 2020 at 07:28

    JC

    Where is your authority for that statement, please?

    =========

    It was dom16 who posted a link regarding Peter directly joining the group in it’s efforts.

    The question here isn’t really about the semantics of whether he was officially a member or not (I’ll admit that I had that initial impression). His statement on Friday probably amounts to more than what most members have actually done, at least in applying pressure .

    IMO the main talking points are…

    • how the PLC interest seems to usurp or compete with the broader national interest
    • should a football club apply such direct pressure on the government during a health crisis ?

    º the apparent inconsequentiality of the CEO at the SFA 

    • the relationship between Peter and Ian

    ========================
    this is getting rather tedious. “Reasonable Chap” seems to be anything but. 

    Would you apply the same vitriol to the SRU? They have been lobbying the Scottish Government for months on letting spectators back into Murrayfield. And in the middle of a pandemic as well!

     

     

  251. dom 16

    I’m of the RC persuasion myself – but different from the one to whom you are referring.

    I’ve already advised folks about his condition – Argumentative Personality Disorder (APD). This does seem to be seriously escalating, to the extent that the next stage of treatment should be applied …

    Nil by feeding/commenting on the content of his posts.

    As an aside though – I think he actually fancies Peter!

     

  252. 'StevieBC 21st July 2020 at 13:27

    Extracted from The DR today;

    "Aberdeen's season opener against Rangers has been brought forward five hours at the request of Sky.

    But the fixture, originally pencilled in for a 5.30pm kick-off, has been rescheduled for 12.30pm.

    The SPFL have revealed that Sky requested the match be given an earlier start time…"

    ==========

    The clubs are desperate for supporters' cash, but still treat them with contempt.

    Nothing changes.'

    ################################

    The fixture will be played behind closed doors. What's the issue with the kick off time?

  253. dom16

    Would you apply the same vitriol to the SRU? They have been lobbying the Scottish Government for months on letting spectators back into Murrayfield. And in the middle of a pandemic as well!

    ======================

    There is nothing vitriolic about my posts. I’d suggest repeated, persistent or consistent would be a more accurate way to describe my line on Peter and his friends. It is an issue that is directly connected to the blogs stated aims.

    However, many on the blog simply don’t want to be distracted from their focus on all things blue, no matter how far away from the blogs stated aims, it may get. 

    Going back to the substance…I understand Peter wanting to do the best for the PLC he represents and the dependable #FollowtheMoney method shows why he would be so keen to hurry the return of fans to Celtic Park. However, these are not normal times and I draw your attention to the talking points below.

     

    – how the PLC interest seems to usurp or compete with the broader national interest

    – should a football club apply such direct pressure on the government during a health crisis ?

    – the apparent inconsequentiality of the ceo at the sfa 

    – the relationship between Peter and Ian

     

    What I am pointing to, is that Peter and the PLC are too powerful within the Scottish game and effectively hold the strings of both the SFA and the SPFL. This means that when matters of import come around (#FollowtheMoney), the PLC will generally be first in the queue to benefit.

    This has come about because of two main reasons

    • the PLC have become THE dominant club, on and off field 
    • Peter has been in the job 17 years and very much has his ducks in place

     

    The wealthy get more wealthy, buy degrees of lobbying power/influence, get more wealthy, become more powerful. The rest can go hang, their interests come after that of the wealthy.

    #FollowtheMoney is as reliable a guide for keeping track of Peter and the PLC as any. The res12er’s should know that by now.

    I recall a number of Celtic fans who were unhappy at their own PLC board when links to the Tories became apparent. IMO, the PLC is now illustrative of the posionous economic system that has evolved in the UK and beyond over the previous 4 decades.

    Winning football matches is one thing but are Celtic fans comfortable with the way Peter and the PLC are operating ?

    Are other clubs happy with letting one club almost always get their way and nibbling on the relative scraps that are left. It seems as if many of those in charge of other clubs accept it, grudgingly or not.

     

  254. According to the SPFL’s favoured conduit (at least it has been during this affair),….  Recordsport understands…that focus will soon return to the Arbitration hearing (my summing up).

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/hearts-partick-thistle-face-relegation-22393972

    By many accounts we’ll get a verdict but without any detail on how and why it was reached.

    That would produce a vacum to fill and one side of this argument (SPFL), have been a lot busier in trying to control media narratives. Since Easter, it was the only way they could react to a crisis of their own shambolic making. No leadership, only spin.

    Anyone heard definitive news on how the SPFL Executive got on with their request to clubs for more power to deal with any potential Covid-19 related problems during season 20/21 ?
     

  255. reasonablechap 22nd July 2020 at 07:21

    '…Are other clubs happy with letting one club almost always get their way and nibbling on the relative scraps that are left. '

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    They were very happy indeed not to expel a club that cheated them all for a decade or so, and are very happy to accommodate a lying club which markets itself as being 140+ years old and falsely claims to be entitled to the honours of that defunct club while accepting no liability for the debts owed to taxpayers and other creditors.

    They can have no criticism of a club which has not cheated them .

     

     

     

  256. JC

    The blog has often used the word whataboutery. Your post at 08:41 this morning is a good example of it.

    Try to get out of that Rangers Prism once in a while and contemplate what is going on today.

    The best all round poster on here (IMO), Easyjambo, got fed up with so much on the blog being viewed through such a prism. In short, whilst you are obviously free to do so, it isn’t a credible way forward when dealing with today.

  257. reasonablechap 22nd July 2020 at 11:07

    ".. it isn’t a credible way forward when dealing with today."

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    When dealing with lies and deception it is always credible , yesterday, today and tomorrow to call out the truth.

    Scottish Football was dirtied and soiled by SDM's RFC; and the stain will remain for as long as the lie that TRFC are that Rangers continues to propagated by our soiled and dirty governance body.

     

  258. Absolutely, JC!

    Although it’s only, (only), football we are talking about here,

    there seems to be some parallels with recent events across the world.

    It seems we should only talk about the ‘positives’, (the money the Ibrox club generates, “most successful club”, since 1872, etc.)…

    BUT, we have to erase from history the negatives, (the player registration cheating, the HMRC cheating, the death of Rangers, etc.).

    Mibbees there needs to be a plaque fitted next to the Ibrox entrance, (Edit: and at Hampden).

    “Those who don’t know their history are doomed to repeat it.”

     

  261. Best one liner on here for yonks Paddy – ah must away an' check the Bears' Den site!

  262. reasonablechap 22nd July 2020 at 07:21
    Are other clubs happy with letting one club almost always get their way and nibbling on the relative scraps that are left. It seems as if many of those in charge of other clubs accept it, grudgingly or not.
    ………………
    Other clubs as you often say(FollowtheMoney)For years that money seemed to generate down from ibrox way.And other clubs were very happy with this. We are often told how the (Glory years) was the best time for scottish football and the money it generated in the game. Some even claim the (Journey) also generated great wealth for the lower divisions, each lower league club each nibbling away on the relative scraps that were handed to them. Now to coin a phrase from LOTR. the all seeing eye points to the East end. They now accept that the money is with Celtic and the money celtic can generate for them. Clubs will always follow the money and for the time being that money emanates from celtics direction.
    If only king did have that wealth to match the bluster, some clubs would have flip flopped very happily by letting whatever club get their way, but for now they will follow the money.

  263. Other clubs as you often say(FollowtheMoney)For years that money seemed to generate down from ibrox way.And other clubs were very happy with this. We are often told how the (Glory years) was the best time for scottish football and the money it generated in the game. Some even claim the (Journey) also generated great wealth for the lower divisions, each lower league club each nibbling away on the relative scraps that were handed to them. Now to coin a phrase from LOTR. the all seeing eye points to the East end. They now accept that the money is with Celtic and the money celtic can generate for them. Clubs will always follow the money and for the time being that money emanates from celtics direction.
    If only king did have that wealth to match the bluster, some clubs would have flip flopped very happily by letting whatever club get their way, but for now they will follow the money.

     

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    Great post Cluster One laugh

    reasonablechap like you I value easyJambo's posts but its the only thing I agree with you about.

  264. Thanks for putting words in my mouth Reasonable Chap. I couldn’t possibly have come up with the selection of words that you supply. That they also make you look much better than vitriol is obvious, in your opinion, coincidental. 

    to use your own phraseology, perhaps time to move beyond the green prism that you are viewing the world from. 

    Im out in responding to your ravings from now on.
     

  265. dom16 22nd July 2020 at 21:25

    ‘..Im out in responding to your ravings from now on.’

    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    No, dom16!

    Keep in mind that  there’s a difference between ‘feeding a troll’ and making every effort to counter the insistent attempts made by perhaps RIFC’s  professional PR people and certainly by its fellow-travellers ( or maybe just one  ‘multi-personality’ individual!) to prevent the light of truth shining on the deceitful ‘sports’ club that claims to be RFC of 1872, and to get us all to ‘move on’.

    Any post that has at its heart support for the Big Lie, and tries to get us all to just dismiss it and let the liars get away with the lie has to be resisted!

    Remember , there is no ‘prism’ distorting the  simple truth.

    It is an objective fact that RFC is in Liquidation.

    It is an objective fact that TRFC did not exist before 2012. 

    And no ‘reasonable chap’ can honestly hope to deny those facts. 

    ( And I’m smiling now at the a.se that one of ‘Her Majesty’s Counsel, learned in the Law’ made of himself when wittering on about ethereal essences, the transmigration of ectoplasm ….No, those weren’t his words, but that’s what he was trying to convey: a dead football club was not dead but ‘lived on ‘ in the minds and hearts .

    I remember ,very clearly, listening to him as I sat on the hard uncomfortable bare wooden bench in one of the old court-rooms in Parliament House, and thinking of my dear old mammy, many years dead, but still ‘alive’  in my heart! And the fact that I did hand in her pension book, because she was, in fact, dead and no longer entitled to war widow’s pension! The old DHSS (which administered War Pensions) would not have carried on paying on the basis that ma mammy was alive in my heart!)

    And any chap who, failing to have truth on his side, resorts to trying to shut down reference to the Big Lie by getting us to ‘move on’ has to be pulled up from time to time, so that fresh readers or intermittent readers of the sfm.scot blog are not by our silence misled into thinking  that the Big Lie at the very heart of  Scottish football has somehow gone away, and that , magically, RFC of 1872 is still alive!)

    RIFC plc/TRFC spokespersons must not ever have the last word!

    For, as representing a club that is a living lie, their word is worthless!

    And , by the Lord Harry, don’t they know it!

    Gnashing of teeth isn’t in it!broken heart

     

  266. Cluster One 22nd July 2020 at 19:59

    ' Clubs will always follow the money and for the time being that money emanates from celtics direction.'

    """

    Indeed, Cluster One, that would seem to be the case at the moment. 

    Of course, Celtic's money is honest money, honestly earned with complete football integrity , nae cheatin' of their fellow clubs for ten years.

    The 'following of the money' in the case of SDM's cheatingly obtained 'money' was reprehensible. For 40 clubs to sign up to a lie for filthy lucre's sake! What a dirty wee episode in sports history!

  267. John Clark 23rd July 2020 at 00:28

    When did "40 clubs" sign up to the lie.

    Rangers, the new club, applied to join the SPL (as was) and were rejected, one club abstained.

    They then applied to join the SFL (as was) and were accepted, on a majority vote, into the lowest division of that league.

    How is that signing up to the lie that it was the same club. A new club applied and were let in by one of the senior leagues. 

    Or are you referring to something else. 

  268. Homunculus 23rd July 2020 at 11:08
    Rangers, the new club, applied to join the SPL (as was) and were rejected, one club abstained.

    They then applied to join the SFL (as was) and were accepted, on a majority vote, into the lowest division of that league.

    How is that signing up to the lie that it was the same club. A new club applied and were let in by one of the senior leagues.

    Or are you referring to something else.
    ………………..
    All very true. And every club, fan, SMSM, sfa, spl, sfl member, person knew it to be true. But telling that truth. And sticking to that truth does not bring the money in. And sticking to that truth brings it’s own problems. Much easier for all involved to stick to the one narrative, even thought it goes against what they knew that, a new club applied and were let in by one of the senior leagues..
    Why none have a backbone to now say and state the truth, i don’t know how they sleep at night.
    Back at the start if you don’t stick to the narrative as told.
    https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1286258218604417024/photo/1

  269. Actually, there is another argument not “to move on” – but instead keep shouting out about the continuation lie until we’re blue 🙂 in the face.

    All the indications are that RIFC/TRFC has not improved on its ‘Going Concern’ position since their last Annual Accounts. 

    We all witnessed how Ibrox was accommodated in 2012: rather than justifiably being expelled from the game, they were shoehorned, eventually, into the SFL.

    IF TRFC goes bust in the near future, any new club must be treated just like any other club.

    No secret agreements, no preferential treatment.

    However, as we still have Petrie and Doncaster involved, why should we expect a more honest outcome…?

     

  270. Homunculus 23rd July 2020 at 11:08

    ".When did "40 clubs" sign up to the lie"

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    They "signed" up ,via their respective league representatives, when they accepted (and continue to accept )an arrangement that allowed CG's new club to claim to be RFC. (  RR under Turnbull Hutton tried to distance itself from acceptance of that arrangement, hence I say 40 clubs rather than 41)

    This was/is such a mockery of sporting truth and  governance integrity as to make them all little better than the likes of CG in the 'moral values' stakes, without even such  excuse/reason  as a pandemic would have provided, since the liquidation of RFC the consequence of the greedy cheating by SDM.

     

  271. John Clark 23rd July 2020 at 13:25

    Homunculus 23rd July 2020 at 11:08

    ".When did "40 clubs" sign up to the lie"

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    They "signed" up ,via their respective league representatives, when they accepted (and continue to accept )an arrangement that allowed CG's new club to claim to be RFC.

    =============================================================

    Sorry, I'm not being obtuse but I really don't know what you mean by this.

    They can claim to be whatever they want. How have 40 other clubs accepted that it is true.

    If it was the same club they would have "stayed" in the SPL (as was). They didn't they applied and were rejected.

    If they had been relegated they would not have had to apply to be in the SFL (as was) they would have simply been in it. The same as any other relegated club.

    The other clubs signed up to them being a new club by that process, not being the same one.  

  272. Homunculus
    23rd July 2020 at 13:57

    ……………

    Collectively, the SPFL has accepted the current iteration of Rangers as the same 'Club'. It states quite clearly on the SPFL website that the 'Club' calling itself Rangers was founded in 1872. 

    All nonsense of course, but no SPFL 'Club', has as far as I know, objected to this assignment since 2012.

    I'm not sure that even Turnbull Hutton was as clear on this point than folklore would have us believe.

    As far as I know, no club has objected to the repeated statements from the SPFL executive (in particular Neil Doncaster) setting out the contorted rationale by which it considers the current 'Club' to have been purchased by Charles Green and his ragtag band.

    The clubs may not believe it to be true or vocalising their support for the SPFL position, however, they have collectively acquiesced to the false narrative.

    To aquiesce may be to accept the lie reluctantly. However there is little doubt in my mind that the clubs have indeed accepted that lie.

  273. Homunculus 23rd July 2020 at 13:57

    '..They can claim to be whatever they want. How have 40 other clubs accepted that it is true.'

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    They have not forced the SFA to publicly declare that TRFC is not RFC of 1872 and therefore is not entitled to claim a history   of sporting success before the year 2012, or to advertise itself for any purpose, sporting or marketing,  as being RFC of 1872.  

    By allowing such deceitful behaviour, the clubs are endorsing a lie propagated by the very governance body of the sport. 

  274. John Clark 23rd July 2020 at 16:30

    Fair enough, that's your opinion.

    I do not agree that not "forcing" the SFA to make such a declaration constitutes signing up to Rangers being the same club as the one in liquidation.

    That's just my opinion though.

  275. John Clark22nd July 2020 at 23:58

    dom16 22nd July 2020 at 21:25

    ‘..Im out in responding to your ravings from now on.’

    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    No, dom16!

    To clarify John. I’m out from responding the Mr RCs comments. I’m not out from the blog. 

    My experience of this blog is that from time to time various contributors visit us to provide some “re education” service. It invariably fails as their true purpose emerges. I fully expect RC to follow the path of Steerpike and his ilk. 

  276. dom16 23rd July 2020 at 17:53

    '..To clarify John. I’m out from responding the Mr RCs comments. I’m not out from the blog.'

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    Roger, dom16.

  278. Dom16

    He/she is just lonely and comes here with opinions because there is nowwhere else that would air them without recourse to s square go challenge .  You're better than that – pity the poor thing as there but for the grace of God etc .smiley

  279. There may be trouble ahead….

    From BBC

    Scottish Premiership clubs have been warned they risk their right to play if Covid-19 testing rules are not met.

    Due to test delays, Rangers' friendly with Motherwell was pushed back two hours while Ross County's match with Hibernian was cancelled. 

    The Scottish government has given approval for the top-flight season to start on 1 August.

    But the Scottish FA/SPFL joint response group has told clubs that permission may be revoked if there is a breach.

    The issue of Covid-19 testing and protocol is scheduled to be discussed at an SPFL board meeting on Friday.

    • St Mirren on lockdown amid positive tests

    "Any failure to adhere to the agreed testing protocol will risk removal by the SG [Scottish government] of the approval for the dispensation given to Premiership clubs compared to the general public in Scotland," said a letter seen by BBC Scotland.

    "Continued positive relations with SG are particularly important as the JRG [Joint Response group] works to progress plans with SG to permit spectators to attend matches."

    Current protocol requires clubs to test players once a week, including a temperature check and a swab of their nose and back of throat. Only when a negative test is recorded can the player be allowed to play.

    The joint response group also stressed to clubs that it is their responsibility to:

    • Arrange testing dates and times
    • To carry out the test no more than seven days/168 hours after the previous test
    • To confirm results with their opponent and the Scottish FA 24 hours in advance of a fixture
    • Ensure only players with a negative test carried out within seven days/168 hours play in a fixture

    A Scottish government spokesman told BBC Scotland: "These tests are not carried out by the Scottish government but by private laboratories contracted by the clubs.

    "We are aware of some issues with delays on test results. Although unfortunate, it is encouraging that clubs have taken the appropriate action in cancelling or postponing matches when the necessary tests haven't been cleared." 

    Meanwhile, Livingston manager Gary Holt says we should expect "bumps in the road" when it comes to testing for Covid-19. 

    He said: "If a game is put back or a game is called off for the right reasons, then you have got to accept it. While we have no fans coming into the ground, I think you can run with it as such. You can say the game is off Saturday, somebody's come back with an invalid test, fine. 

    "Would I be happy at that time? Probably not because I have prepared and the players are hungry to play but I am not going to throw my dummy out the pram or kick and scream for the safety of everybody involved."

    and St Mirren report 7 back room staff test positive. 

  280. bordersdon 23rd July 2020 at 21:11

    Cluster One 21st July 2020 at 15:13
    ……………
    Aug 1st will be interesting, will it be only shirt sales from sports direct? will shirts be on sale anywere else? if there is, could it be a cash and grab movement,kick the can down the road but get the money in now and to hell with any consequences that may come down the line?

  281. Arbitration 'secrecy' in the piddling matter of the business of football is made to look ridiculous when one reads this ( which I've just read) on:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/23/jeffrey-epstein-judge-unseals-ghislaine-maxwell-documents-delays-release.html

    "A federal judge on Thursday unsealed civil court documents related to Ghislaine Maxwell, the British socialite arrested earlier in the month on charges of aiding the sexual abuse of minor girls by the now-dead investor Jeffrey Epstein.

    But Judge Loretta Preska postponed the release of the documents in U.S. District Court in Manhattan by up to one week to give Maxwell’s lawyers time to file an appeal of her decision.

    Preska reportedly said during a hearing that the public’s right to see the documents “far outweighed” Maxwell’s right to avoid being embarrassed by their contents."

    I would say that all of us who even merely as 'members of the public' never mind as those who have over the years helped to fund the Scottish football industry, are going to be affected by the decision made by the Arbitration Tribunal have a right to see the facts relied upon by the Tribunal and the reasons for the 'award' they arrive at. 

    There is a place for privacy in matters that do not bear on the dispute. But  not for secrecy as regards the deliberate acts taken by the governance body of a sport and the reasons put forward for those acts. 

    The Maxwell woman might well be 'embarrassed'. The judge in that case is ready to say "So what?"

    The SPFL board might well be embarrassed if we all heard the evidence…. But so what? If they got things wrong while acting in good faith, fair enough. That can be sorted.

    If they knowingly acted improperly in order to secure their desired objective….let them suffer the consequences. 

    For all its many, many faults the USA has a 'Press' and a Judiciary still ready to have a go at those who try to hide from truth. 

    (for the avoidance of doubt, the Maxwell referred to above is not at all our own SFA Maxwell! The SFA is not a party in the 'Hearts and others v the SPFL '  dispute currently being heard by an Arbitration Tribunal.!)

  282. John Clark 23rd July 2020 at 23:03

    (for the avoidance of doubt, the Maxwell referred to above is not at all our own SFA Maxwell! The SFA is not a party in the 'Hearts and others v the SPFL '  dispute currently being heard by an Arbitration Tribunal.!)

    =================================

    Speaking of whom, if you go back to an interview he (Maxwell) had with BBC Radio 5 Live as the Covid crisis took centre stage in late March, it is self evident that he has no influence over major decisions affecting Scottish Football.

    From the ET on 23 March:

    https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport/18328076.ian-maxwell-says-cancelling-season-not-considered-outlines-determination-fulfil-fixtures/

    IAN MAXWELL, chief executive of the Scottish Football Association, says that cancelling the league season is not being considered as he outlined his desire for the remaining league fixtures to be played.

    The SFA chief cited concerns around the fairness of awarding league titles or relegating clubs before the intended number of games had taken place, as well as a potential loss of income if broadcasting contracts are unfulfilled, as the reasons why he believes the season must be played to its conclusion.

    How or when that can be achieved is unclear, with Maxwell himself dismissing UEFA’s aim of a resumption of action by June as unrealistic, but he maintains that completing the season – whenever that can be done – is still his preference.

    “I don’t think there is a consideration for cancellation,” Maxwell told BBC 5 Live .

    “I think it’s the same concerns that the English Premier League have in terms of broadcast contracts and contractual obligations that will apply to every league across the world.

    “The income is vital regardless of what the headline number is and it’s important we get games finished.

    “Everyone wants to get the games played, the guys who get the winner’s medals at the end of the season want to know they’ve played every match and no-one can come back and say they didn’t deserve it in any way.

    “Clubs who are potentially in relegation spots, if they're going to go down at the end of the season then it’s because they’ve been given every chance to avoid that and it’s something we need to try and work through.” 

    Yet just two weeks later clubs were voting on ending the League season. 

  283. I am amazed now at the depth of my ignorance in 2011/2012 in so many areas of life!

    I mean, who knew anything about 'administration', 'liquidation' ,'insolvency' ,accountants in bankruptcy' ,the Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010, 'concert parties', and all that stuff! 

    I certainly did not.

    The whole dirty RFC saga has made me aware of my ignorance.

    So, without ( I hope) being too OT, can I say that in my inbox today there is this:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/899920/Monthly_Insolvency_Statistics_June_2020.pdf

    "4. Company Insolvencies in Scotland

    Legislation relating to company insolvency in Scotland is partly devolved. Accountant in Bankruptcy (AIB), Scotland’s Insolvency Service, administers company liquidations and receiverships in Scotland.

    In June 2020 there were 46 company insolvencies in Scotland, a reduction of 32% in comparison to June 2019. This comprised of 21 compulsory liquidations, 19 CVLs and six administrations.

    There were no company voluntary arrangements or receivership appointments.

    Figure 4: Company insolvencies decreased by one-third in June 2020, compared with the same month last year Scotland, June 2019 to June 2020,

    Not seasonally adjusted."

    I very much look forward to exploring the 21  compulsory liquidations for signs of resurrection!broken heart

    In the confident belief that , bar a miracle ( or a deceitful, dishonest Companies House) there will be no resurrection of any of the 21 liquidated companies!

    ( and for the avoidance of doubt, I accept that honest businesses honestly run by decent people can fail try as they might due to factors not in their control)

  284. And from a DR article / Jackson;

    "Rangers are facing a top level SFA probe over fears the club broke coronavirus testing protocol.

    Record Sport understands Hampden top brass suspect as many as nine of Steven Gerrard’s first team squad played in a bounce match against Dundee United without having been given the mandatory all clear by medics.

    SFA stand in president Mike Mulraney was alerted to the developing situation on Wednesday night and it’s believed he has demanded the Ibrox club are asked for a full explanation of the events…"

    ===============

    And the curious point is why the stand-in President was informed – and not the SFA CEO?

    Even if Maxwell is currently on holiday, the seriousness of this breach should necessitate the CEO to be immediately, hands-on… 

  285. easyJambo 23rd July 2020 at 23:56

    "… if you go back to an interview he (Maxwell) had with BBC Radio 5 Live.'

    """""""""""

    I hadn't seen your post, eJ, before I posted at 00.14.

    But the point you make is clearly valid: if the overall governance body of a sport has no power over a subsidiary member body then where the hell are we?

    The worrying thing is that there seems  now to be no generally accepted and supported 'authority'

     

     

     

  286. Sevco fielding untested players?……Obviously all the details unknown at the moment but that is a move that put lives in peril…. Another potential disaster !…..A sine die ban would not be considered harsh if reports are true.. 

  287. The Last Thing Scottish Football Needs Right Now ..
    Is a club with a 5 way agreement that will not stick to rules.

  288. The alleged rule breaking in respect of the Covid-19 testing rules is really serious but what's the likelihood that it's not covered in the rule book and as a result no punishment for clubs concerned will follow?

    The Scottish Government will be able to take action and I have no doubt will have no hesitation in removing permission for the season to start unless ALL clubs get their testing done properly. 

    It seems possible that a club playing out of Ibrox, not for the first time, doesn't appreciate that the rules are for everyone! 

     

  289. To combat flak coming their way, allegedly, The Rangers has this morning announced the immediate launch of a new Ibrox initiative called;

    “Rules are for Everyone Anyone”.

    The Rangers is a club committed to following the rules from any source and encourages everybody else to follow follow the rules as well.

    enlightened

  291. Ex Ludo 24th July 2020 at 10:47

    'think you’ll find that the tests were imperfect and in any case the SFA didn’t know about it at the time. 

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    ha, ha, the good old Bryson defence!broken heart Is he standing by to give evidence? More than any other piece of nonsense attaching to the LNS Inquiry, his took the biscuit. It's a wonder that he did not die with shame at coming out with that. 

    But of course  NS didn't die with shame for his nonsense statement that having lots of (illicit )money with which to buy better players than other teams could afford did not give any sporting advantage.

    I doubt if any retired judge has ever made  a pronouncement so off-beam since  old dotard Denning!

  292. Now it’s the SFA’s turn to shaft the licensed sides in the lower tiers of the pyramid

    https://news.stv.tv/sport/football/proposals-on-table-for-major-revamp-of-scottish-cup?top

    The Scottish FA has put forward proposals for a major revamp of this season’s Scottish Cup, STV can reveal.

    Clubs are being consulted on plans that would see a maximum of 52 entrants – less than half of those currently eligible – competing over seven rounds from Boxing Day.

    Under the present format, 112 clubs can compete – including all 42 SPFL sides, all Highland and Lowland League teams, clubs from the East, South and West of Scotland leagues and invited members.

    Including preliminary rounds, there are usually a total of ten stages that run from August to May.

    However, the coronavirus pandemic has put severe pressure on the fixture calendar, forcing the Scottish Football Association into a drastic rethink of how to stage the historic competition.

    The preferred option would see 42 SPFL clubs being joined by ten other clubs who are capable of fulfilling their fixtures.

    If more than ten clubs are able to take part, lots will be drawn to decide who goes into the competition.

    While the Premiership is scheduled to get under way on August 1, the Championship, League One and League Two won’t return to competitive action until October.

    It’s not known when clubs in the fifth and sixth tiers will compete again.

    Over the years, the Scottish Cup has become synonymous with shock results and fairytale stories.

    Eighteen months ago, junior outfit Auchinleck Talbot earned a glamour tie against Hearts after defeating Championship side Ayr United. Last season, Lowland League side BSC Glasgow reached the fifth round, where they faced Hibs.

    But this season some clubs may not get the opportunity to perform a giant-killing act.

    How would the new-look Scottish Cup work?

    Round One would take place on Boxing Day, just six days after the rescheduled season 2019/20 final League Two clubs would compete at this stage.

    League One clubs would enter in Round Two early in the new year, with all Championship and Premiership clubs joining the competition in Round Three at the end of January.

    Any change to the competition would have to be agreed at a general meeting.

    Clubs who are unable to compete or not selected to take part will receive a payment of £5000 from the governing body, the equivalent of reaching the second round of the current format.

    Other proposals being discussed include a 32-club competition with only Premiership, Championship and League One sides participating, or a 42-club tournament including League Two teams.

    But STV understands the Scottish FA hierarchy favour a 52-club tournament.

    Now why should one licensed club have any more of a right to participate in the Scottish Cup than any other licensed club e.g. why should Brechin get in ahead of Brora, or Elgin ahead of East Kilbride?

  294. I just want to know how the all powerful 'Peter' managed to tamper with the The Rangers testing protocol?

    I think we should be told.  

  295. StevieBC 24th July 2020 at 19:21

    I just want to know how the all powerful 'Peter' managed to tamper with the The Rangers testing protocol?

    I think we should be told.

     

    I would imagine, Stevie, that 'friends of Peter' were involved in some unseen way

     

  296. easyJambo 24th July 2020 at 18:49

    Fans Without Scarves has provided an update on the grant of a UEFA licence to RFC in 2011.

    https://fanswithoutscarves.org/2020/07/24/the-fws-uefa-licensing-2011-12-report/
    ………………..
    Secondly, that Rangers did not follow rules.
    …
    And the New rangers are keeping with the habits of the old rangers.
    ……………………………………
    Without transparency and accountability the SFA is akin to a cartel protecting its own interests rather than the good of the sport. It is not the fair and transparent regulator it presents itself.
    …
    Secrets i read somewhere.

  297.  

    It is reported on BBC Radio Scotland that Doncaster confirmed that the SPFL Board has failed in its attempts to get ‘express powers’ to deal with future problems that might be occasioned by Covid-19 .

    What does that tell us of the depth of distrust and suspicion that the SPFL member clubs have for the Board? 

     

  298. Yesterday saw the old late Friday release of those negative vibes by the SPFL.

    The failure of the Enabling Act was sandwiched between updates on Testing and the Use of 5 subs for 2020/21.

    https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-board-update

    Part of the text below

    Several SPFL Clubs requested that the SPFL Board bring forward a resolution, which would give the Board the express power to manage Covid-19 related disruption during Season 2020/21, without the need to seek Rule amendments approved by Clubs.  Accordingly, a written resolution was circulated to all Clubs, but this did not attract sufficient support to pass.  Following a discussion at this morning’s SPFL Board meeting, the Board have agreed to move forward in line with the clear will of the Clubs.  As a result, the existing Rules will remain in place for Season 2020/21, unless any member decides that it wishes to bring forward their own resolution in this area.

    Neil Doncaster, chief executive of the SPFL said: “As a members’ organisation, it is vital that the Board listen to the voice of our member clubs.”

     

    What does this tell us ?

    – Effectively, the SPFL executive have lost a vote of confidence but carry on regardless.

    • As I said previously, Peter doesn’t stroke a white cat and have absolute power within the Scottish game. He does have a lot of friends, influence and pulls a lot of strings at the SFA and the SPFL. My guess is that he was very much part of putting this resolution on the table but the club vote didn’t go the way he and the PLC would have liked.
    • That it would have been better to have already had an Independent Inquiry on the SPFL executive to either clear them or get rid of them. As it is, we are in limbo and a significant number of clubs don’t trust them. 
    • For 2020/21, this may well lead to major issues and controversies that become more complicated than they should be.

    The Omnishambles has a way to go…………..

    and don’t forget the upcoming judgment on arbitration !!

     

  299. John Clark 09.29

    I trust that you will have fact checked the accuracy of this report from the "truth twisting" BBC Scotland Sports team!

    With all that has happened it is not surprising that members have not allowed express powers to be granted but I fear it may be a mistake. I hope that I am wrong but the risk of problems arising remains high.

    Media reports of sportsmen breeching lockdown/testing protocols have occurred fairly regularly putting colleagues and thereby teams at risk. The bigger problem will come if teams don't follow the protocols! 

  300. Neil Doncaster, chief executive of the SPFL said: “As a members’ organisation, it is vital that the Board listen to the voice of our member clubs.”

    Then take on board the loss of what was effectively a no-confidence vote and leave the building.

    Neil or Mr.Vindicated, you have become central to the issue of distrust. This no-confidence vote compounds the omnishambolic months that led up to it. Season 2020/21 has the potential to be hugely problematic and to have SPFL leadership (!!!), who aren’t trusted by a significant number of member clubs is a recipe for disaster.

    Just GO……..

     

  301. adam812 25th July 2020 at 10:48

    '..I trust that you will have fact checked the accuracy of this report from the "truth twisting" BBC Scotland Sports team!'

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    Ha, ha,Adam812, believe me when I say that I listen to anything uttered on 'football'  by anyone on BBC Radio Scotland with an ear ready to believe that what I hear may be something less than the plain, objective truth!  

    They have not been above  completely shutting down free discussion on the nonsense of  'continuity Rangers' for the last 8 years. God knows ,they would be like putty in the hands of a would-be repressive government.

     

     

  302. It seems that the dark forces at Ibrox are killing a potentially, massive public interest story about covid.

    This morning, I was interested to read Keef Jackson’s follow up article in the DR on his “EXCLUSIVE!” about TRFC failing test procedures.

    Nothing.

    Can’t find anything related to his article posted late on Thursday night, (11.07pm).

    Shirley, an “EXCLUSIVE!” deserves a follow up article(s)?

    Additionally, his article has been ‘lost’ on the DR website: it doesn’t appear chronologically – you have to do a search on the DR site.

    It’s as though the DR is trying to hide the article…

    The article was “Updated” 12 hours after posting – and it is obvious that the original headline has been significantly toned down, with “9 players” omitted and “potentially” added.

     

    So, this morning I looked at The Scottish Sun to get an update.

    There is one article – by Kris Boyd – which does talk about testing.  The focus is mostly on St.Mirren. 

    The only reference to TRFC is this;

    “…And Rangers’ test results all came back negative — eventually — so there was no big problem after all…”

    This just raises several, other questions about the effective control of the virus… which the SMSM won’t ask.

     

    Everything about this club is dishonest and malevolent: a toxic cloud hanging over the Scottish game.

     

  303. The members of the SPFL board were voted in about a week ago. The employees on that board were not removed at the same AGM, they were left in place.

    The members have not supported a resolution proposed by the old board. 

    How could the resolution not being supported possibly be considered a "vote of no confidence" in the board. It's a different board.

  304. Homunculus

    How could the resolution not being supported possibly be considered a "vote of no confidence" in the board. It's a different board.

    ===================

    – Effectively, the SPFL executive have lost a vote of confidence but carry on regardless.

  306. paddy malarkey 25th July 2020 at 14:20

    Exactly it was a vote on a specific resolution, put to the members by the previous board.

    It isn’t even a vote of no confidence in the board who put it to the members, that’s just nonsense.

    There was an AGM under a week ago. The permanent members of the board are still in place, and new representatives from the league have joined them.

    If there was going to be a vote of no confidence in anyone it would have been the previous board, who presided over the vote to finalise the league. 

     

  307. H

    It isn’t even a vote of no confidence in the board who put it to the members, that’s just nonsense.

    =============

    I was referring to the Executive, not club reps on board, including Mr. Vindication. Leadership that is supposed to be worth 388,000 pounds Sterling.

     

    Regardless, for those dismissing my description  of this vote being,.. effectively a vote of no-confidence, answer the following….

    Why did so many clubs vote against the resolution (for it to fail) ?

  308. reasonablechap 25th July 2020 at 16:40

    OK , I'll bite – what's the answer ?

    Why did so many clubs vote against the resolution (for it to fail) ? Did they respond to a silent whistle from Peter , somebody's imaginary friend . Did they decide that it was in their best interest to vote as they did ?

  309. I'm not aware of anyone voting against the resolution.

    I think that, on this occasion, clubs were only required to indicate acceptance of the resolution, rather than accept or reject it.  On expiry of the prescribed 28 day period specified for such resolutions in the Companies Act, the resolution had not received the required level of acceptances, therefore was deemed to have failed.

  310. StevieBC 25th July 2020 at 12:28
    …………..
    “…And Rangers’ test results all came back negative — eventually — so there was no big problem after all…”
    ….
    That makes everything ok then,came back negative — eventually. The game should never have gone ahead if the test results were not there. Who gave the green light for the game to go ahead with no test results back?
    It would be a simple step to ask. “Has everyone been tested? (yes.) Are the test results back? (yes) ok play away.
    …..
    What we had from ibrox could have been.
    It would be a simple step to ask. “Has everyone been tested? (yes.) Are the test results back? (No) ok we can’t play.
    …Either No questions were asked.(That would be the height of stupidity) Or rules were broken.

  311. Cluster One 25th July 2020 at 20:21

    Surely it ultimately has to be the match referee who is responsible for the game going ahead or not.

    Other people may have the opportunity to stop it before him, for example the officials of the team whose results have not been received. Who should presumably then go to him and declare that they were not clear to play.

    Basically people were prepared to risk their own and other people's health, and even lives, for a non competitive game of football to go ahead.

    That is shameful. As is anyone excusing it, as they were negative anyway.

  312. Homunculus 25th July 2020 at 21:04

    Surely it ultimately has to be the match referee who is responsible for the game going ahead or not.

    ============================

    I spoke to one of the match officials who were lined up to officiate at the Hibs v Ross County game last weekend. Hibs had already alerted Ross County (who had reached Perth) about delayed test results before the officials got to the ground. A quick check with the SFA confirmed that the game could not go ahead.

    However Hibs then asked the officials (who were going to have to be paid anyway) if they would ref a bounce game between two Hibs squads. The officials sought to clear that with the SFA, but were told no way. 

  313. easyJambo 25th July 2020 at 21:22

    Thanks for clearing that up.

    It's quite stunning that a game was allowed to go ahead under those circumstances. The SFA have to be hard on this or they are just reinforcing the awful message which has been sent out.

  314. Cluster One 25th July 2020 at 20:21

    StevieBC 25th July 2020 at 12:28

    ….. What we had from ibrox could have been. It would be a simple step to ask. “Has everyone been tested? (yes.) Are the test results back? (No) ok we can’t play. …Either No questions were asked.(That would be the height of stupidity) Or rules were broken.

    =================================================

        The fact that certain Sevco players were ineligible to be named on the team-sheets, let alone take to the field, matters not when there is a secret agreement in place stipulating that they cannot be punished for it. 

       Unfortunately the linesmen did not have such a luxury, but really shouldn't have needed it, as apparently the SFA had purchased their own testing machine.   

         Having said that, clubs were each provided with a 50 grand donation. Testing machines at 35 grand a pop, with only a 20 minute turn around, should have been a compulsory purchase for every club, given that it is the single most vital factor in ensuring games can commence, and continue to be played.

        Even if some clubs opted to go haufers and share, would have been a hauf-decent viable option…..But naw !.  

        Maybe Peter Lawell bought the last two tae scunner them and claim the league by default?. indecision

  315. Homunculus 25th July 2020 at 21:04

    ========

    I've been staying off the forum these past few weeks, basically because I felt I had nothing of value to add. I was tired of circular arguments around the decision to end the season, and the subsequent court case etc. In my view self-interest is every club and fan's primary motive, so I decided to keep out of it – I am as guilty as anyone! 

    However, I was moved to post again over the issue of Rangers late test results and the lack of a sensational scandal being made of it. The fact that the results eventually came back negative is irrelevant. They could just as easily have come back positive and where would that have left things? Why are the SFA doing nothing about this? In answer to my own question it is in my view because of the club involved, who they seem reluctant to take action against for anything. Perhaps the Five Way Agreement covers it, who knows!

    The fact Hearts and Partick have already been cited by the SFA for going to court while zero action was taken against Rangers in 2012 for doing exactly the same proves my point. Yet the media think that's okay. Wow!

     

  316. Logically, it would seem most probable that someone from TRFC “was economical with the truth” about the test results of 9 players before kick-off.

    An ex-Ibrox player has since “indicated” that the results came back ok.

    Why should anyone believe this to be true?

    And has anyone from Ibrox actually apologised to the opposition club – Dundee United – and to the opposition players?

    Some things don’t change.

    Where, exactly, is the outrage from the other 41 clubs… and from their players…?

    Or do they not give a monkey’s about the pandemic now?

    Will the 42 clubs even care about the safety of supporters, whose matchday money they so desperately want? 

    To borrow a song title from a French chanteuse I quite like;

    “F### Them All !”

  317. easyJambo 25th July 2020 at 18:50

    "…the resolution had not received the required level of acceptances, therefore was deemed to have failed."

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    The SFSA has this to say: https://scottishfsa.org/chairmans-blog-24-7-20/

    "..'The clubs however have voted.

    They said NO!'

    They were not willing to give the SPFL board this power.

    Was this a vote of no confidence?

    Many have said that to me.

    So yes, it probably is sort of and informally."

    Even I would have to say that it's going a bit too far to take the non-voting as being the equivalent of a vote on a formal  'no confidence' motion, as I think you rightly point out.

    The experience of the relegation/promotion 'written resolution' ( now before an Arbitration Tribunal) undoubtedly has caused there to be a ( justified) level of suspicion in the ranks of the membership about what the Board might do with any extra powers given to them. 

    No club is  willingly going to give powers to a Board which might in effect be the equivalent of allowing that Board to  pass sentence of death on it!

     

     

  318. upthehoops 25th July 2020 at 22:15

    Homunculus 25th July 2020 at 21:04

          Why are the SFA doing nothing about this? In answer to my own question it is in my view because of the club involved, who they seem reluctant to take action against for anything. Perhaps the Five Way Agreement covers it, who knows!

    ================================================

        I doubt it matters too much whether the 5WA covers it or not. Sevco only have to claim it does and threaten to take it to CAS to pass judgement on. …..SFA pants would quickly turn brown.  

  319. upthehoops 25th July 2020 at 22:15

    ‘.The fact that the results eventually came back negative is irrelevant. ‘

    “”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    And I noted that on ‘off the ball’ today no mention was made (that I heard) of that incident, though I think the St Mirren case was mentioned? (I was jumping about today , what with Mrs C’s hairdressing appointment and what not so may have missed something. Happy as ever to be corrected, of course)

    It is unquestionably the case that TRFC is treated as a protected species by the SMSM, just as SDM was treated as the golden eagle and lynchpin of Scottish Football while he cocked a snook at and marvelled at how easy it was to cheat for a decade every one of his football club counterparts- and me and you!

    When the full story is( as it will be) fully published many people of current ‘good repute’ will be shown up as the liars and cheats and betrayers and temporisers that they have been.

    They may of course be dead and buried by that time, as will I.

     But their children and grandweans  will read about them.

    But even if they live to be in their nineties their dishonourable names will be forever linked with cheatery and deception and breach of faith. 

    And, they know it!

    That’s the killer! They know.

     

     

  320. easyJambo 25th July 2020 at 18:50

    I’m not aware of anyone voting against the resolution.

    I think that, on this occasion, clubs were only required to indicate acceptance of the resolution, rather than accept or reject it.  On expiry of the prescribed 28 day period specified for such resolutions in the Companies Act, the resolution had not received the required level of acceptances, therefore was deemed to have failed.

    =========================

    Thanks for that EJ ! Could I ask where you picked up on this, please ?

    Doing it this way could be seen as a way to mitigate the perception of negative vibes around the levels of confidence that a significant number of clubs have in the SPFL leadership/executive.

    Perception is one thing, reality is another and the main point I was making stands.

    Enough clubs didn’t accept the resolution for it to pass and instead, it failed.

    A significant number of clubs don’t have enough confidence in the SPFL executive/leadership to allow them the extra powers they were asking for.

    You can’t dress it up any other way…….. #NoConfidence

     We start a very unpredictable season next week (arbitration and covid-19 allowing) and the leadership of the league can’t be trusted.

    When you think of what I’d consider a medium to high probability of further significant problems arising from Covid related issues during 2020/21, this is a serious situation, primed to create more omnishambolic nonsense.

     

  321. reasonablechap 26th July 2020 at 09:55

    Thanks for that EJ ! Could I ask where you picked up on this, please ?

    ====================================

    From the Scotsman on Tuesday 21 July.

    https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/signs-distrust-already-new-spfl-board-elected-2919212

    However, with the deadline for voting on handing the SPFL board power to act on all issues related to Covid-19 falling at midnight last night, the result looks set to reflect continued distrust of the board – whoever it consists of.

    A statement confirming the resolution has failed is expected today.

    A 75 per cent majority is required from three different sections: the Premiership; the Championship; and a combined Leagues One and Two vote. Clubs were sent a reminder last week to submit their voting slips by Monday 20 July if they agreed with the resolution. If they did not agree, they did not have to do anything.

    …. And from Thursday 23 July

    https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-board-set-discuss-bid-express-power-covid-19-crisis-2921541

    Clubs had until midnight on Monday to inform the SPFL whether they would support a resolution which would “give your board the authority to make decisions in relation to season 2020-21 in the event Covid-19 causes disruption”, including calling time on the campaign and cancelling play-offs.

    If clubs did not agree with such a resolution, they did not have to provide a response.

    It is believed that the responses provided did not constitute sufficient support to achieve the 75 per cent majority in favour required from each of the Premiership, Championship and combination of Leagues 1 and 2 to pass a resolution.

  322. Thanks EJ !

    Had a look back at a Jackson/DR article from the 8th, updated on the 23rd and it mentions the 75% threshold but doesn’t go into the same detail as The Scotsman.

    It did include the following quote….

    But one top flight chief executive told us: “It’s pretty clear from the discussions we’ve had between Premiership clubs that this plan is not going to have enough support to be passed.

    “While no-one wants to go through all of this pain again – and clubs realise it would be easier to hand over the power to the board – it seems like the right idea but at entirely the wrong time.

    “In some quarters there’s an obvious distrust of the SPFL board because of everything that’s gone on over these last few months. While many clubs would rather not have to contemplate another vote to end the season, they are clearly struggling with the idea of empowering the SPFL board to take that decision for them.

    “When you add into the mix the fact that Celtic are going for 10 In A Row and Peter Lawwell will most probably be voted onto a new look SPFL board, the potential problems are obvious.

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/spfl-facing-crisis-rerun-peter-22325261

  323. Homunculus

    The members failed to support a resolution, they are perfectly entitled to. It’s as simple as that. 

    =============

    Why didn’t they support such an important resolution ?

    1. Not enough confidence/trust in the SPFL leadership/executive
    2. Acceptance vote got caught up in a yet undiscovered quarantine adventure
    3. Forgot to vote
    4. Your go…..

Comments are closed.