Leaving aside for the moment the Shadenfreude-laden giggling as first Celtic, and then Rangers departed the Champions League this season, it is worthwhile taking time to think on the reality of Scotland’s latter-day bit-part status in the game.
There are Celtic fans who try to rationalise it by pointing out that for them, the Stein years were a wonderful exception and not the norm. That however does not explain the European status of Rangers, Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, Dundee, Dundee United, Kilmarnock and Dunfermline in a period of roughly a quarter of a century from the beginning of European competition.
From the fifties to the eighties, Scottish clubs were feared and respected in Europe. Since then, only Martin O’Neil’s Celtic and Walter Smith’s Rangers have made an impression on the European scene.
So what has happened? Many blame the distraction of new technology, taking potential Johnstones and Baxters away from pursuing the soccer dream. I’m not convinced of that myself. They have game consoles and PCs in England and Italy and Germany as well. They also have them in Scandinavian countries where daylight hours and suitable weather are in even less abundance than in Scotland – and of course clubs from Scandinavian countries were both responsible for Celtic and Rangers fates this season.
Failure then breeds failure. Losing out one year means more (and earlier) qualifiers down the line. In this regard, you have to wonder at the claims of how “brilliantly” Celtic have been run over the last decade, when the club went into Euro qualifiers again and again unprepared in terms of personnel, even to the extent of using makeshift central defenders in several campaigns. Our clubs know its all coming, but year on year, we get caught on the hop by the timing of those early ties. Planning? Don’t make me laugh.
We are also faced with the reality that fans of clubs who are not in contention for a ECL group place, are usually fervently hoping that the quest ends in failure. Not because there is a deep hatred of either or both Celtic and Rangers, but because a Champions League place for a Scottish team gives the successful side an immeasurable financial advantage over the rest. Of course that attitude is understandable when you look at the reality for our clubs if one of their number makes it to the group stages.
Scottish football clubs rely heavily on gate income for survival because their media deals struck with broadcasters are so much poorer than in countries of similar size. ECL money – even if the successful side fails to score a goal or get a point on the board – is like all your Christmasses have come at once.
It is well known that the income gap between Celtic & Rangers and the rest is huge. The income gap between a Scottish Champions League team and the rest is even more massive. Yet if a Dutch, or Portuguese or Danish or Swedish side get a place in the group stages, the impact is not so great. Why? Because they have football administrators who can sell the game effectively, getting value for their product from the media.
This is the one area where our administrators have failed consistently and miserably.
The current football model where home teams keep their own gate money, and in some cases even have their own media contracts, is designed to (with the notable exception of England) create a few bigger fishes in a number of smaller ponds. It ultimately ends with the pantomime (which has not yet gone away) of the European Super League.
I wish I could say I had a solution to all this, but my instinct is to say that in the absence of a solution we should forget about Europe and its riches. Instead, lets return to a sport driven model of the game where there is a more equitable share of revenues. Forget the tuppence ha’penny TV contracts and give football back to the fans, live on a Saturday (Covid permitting). In time, the level of competition would increase, as would the quality of the product. The talk to the TV folk when they want to pay the going rate.
It might help if there was some kind of levy (listening indy supporters?) imposed on subscription service providers like Sky. £25m versus £1.5 billion is a much smaller fraction than that of Scottish subscribers to the Sky platform for example.
There is little we in Scotland can do to prevent the globalisation and Mafia-isation of the game internationally, but those things we CAN control, like turning inward to improve our game instead of, like Stella Dallas in the eponymous classic movie, standing in the rain looking through the window at the banquet elsewhere.
Of course it won’t happen.
Malmo were the catalyst for the disintegration of rangers (mark 1)
and now, £30m (minus whatever they make in the Europa Thing) down, which, knowing them they have budgeted for, could Malmo be the catalyst for the disintegration of mark 2.
Discuss
HS
Higgy’s Shoes 10th August 2021 At 23:28
‘..could Malmo be the catalyst for the disintegration of mark 2.’
%%%%%%%
Come now, sir, I beseech you: be careful of your language! (in humour]
TRFC is not any continuation , any ‘mark 2’ modification of a pre-existent body!
No, it was/is a new creation, illegitimately sired by a rotten ‘football governance ‘ body of which every one of the then and subsequent members deserves nothing but contempt for their cowardice and dereliction of duty.
I cry in despair: let the truth be told. Just let the actual truth, pure and simple, be acknowledged
And then we can all get on.
Ah well…….That’s Volvo and Saab added tae the conflict of interests list.
JC
mark 1 – mark 2
I wasn’t implying any continuation
just couldn’t come up with anything else at this time of night to describe a difference.
Lazy?… guilty
But my point is still cogent…for those in the financial know…what kind of hole is this going to create.
HS
Corrupt Official 11th Agust 2021–00.10
Can we add meatballs to that list along with lovely blonde swedish girls
‘Rangers’ were shedding millions every year even with Europa League money. Achieving the Champions League cash pot would have eliminated that need. It will be interesting to see what happens now. The final cog in the chain of throwing money at them has come off. Karma for those in the media who think that a football club being run within its means is something to be mocked, not admired.
Upthehoops 11th August 2021 At 10:12
1 0 Rate This
‘Rangers’ were shedding millions every year even with Europa League money. Achieving the Champions League cash pot would have eliminated that need. It will be interesting to see what happens now.
Dunno what happens now UTH, but there are bound to be several “Investors” who said, “Gimme a phone on Wednesday”, not taking any calls today.
Upthehoops 11th August 10.12.
It will be similar to the model Celtic have successfully adopted in recent years.
Stewart Robertson at Rangers last agm.
“We know that in time a key part of our business model means that we have to facilitate an increase in income by trading players,” he said. “We have to really focus on that over the next 12 months. We know for the business model of the club we need to start moving one or two players a year.”
Once again puts last nights disappointing result into perspective.
Kemar Roofe sends heartfelt thanks to hospital staff after his son is treated for chest infection
RANGERS striker Kemar Roofe has sent a heartfelt message of thanks to NHS staff at one Glasgow hospital after his newborn son was treated for a chest infection.
The Gers star posted an update about newborn Cassius’s current health situation on Instagram, telling followers that his young son had been suffering from bronchiolitis and a chest infection.
Cassius had been admitted to The Royal Hospital for Children, located beside the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Govan, to be treated.
Kemar withdrew from the game between Rangers and Dundee United last weekend, with the club telling supporters on social media that his young child had been admitted to hospital.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CSZpz1YA216/?utm_source=ig_embed
Kemar sent his thanks to the staff on Ward 2C who helped to get Cassius back to full health after a five-night stay in the Govan Hospital.
He said: “Thank you for all the messages wishing my striker a speedy recovery from bronchiolitis and a chest infection.
“Five tough nights at Royal Hospital for Children but the nurses and doctors on ward 2c were amazing.”
BP
Your final sentence says it all really.
The lack of vision from the clubs happy to continue with the status quo, allied to those entrusted in driving the sport forward lacking the skillset or wherewithal to do so will remain in place for the foreseeable future.
The dearth of anything remotely innovative is both depressing and predictable at the same time.
As an example, the subject of summer football usually raises it’s head at this time in the season, usually after the majority of our clubs are eliminated from European competition before the schools return. The benefits for this, imo, vastly outweigh any negatives but sadly we will never know how successful or otherwise this may be.
Having looked back at previous blogs i realise that Gordon Smith is not the most popular person in the eyes of many but his vision on how the game could improve gave me some hope, at least for a short time but alas to no avail.
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/gordon-smith-resignation-archaic-sfa-no-place-anyone-vision-2459341
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58179312
On the subject of this blog I would suggest the introduction of the Bosnian rule was a major factor in our decline
This allowed a certain club to offer a plethora of English stars to come across the border and begin a ‘arms race’ between the clubs with only the Old Firm able to sustain it and many others nearly going to the wall trying to keep up. Also their buying up of budding Scottish players to have them sitting on the bench to the detriment of their careers and the Scottish game
This created the duopoly of nine in a rows which strangled the game. In addition this gave these teams more power and influence regarding distribution of monies, and more importantly for one of the clubs excessive influence in both the SFA and also Refereering. Which still exists to this day. No more ‘governing clubs without fear or favor’
It is no coincidence that our national teams performance has also dropped as a result
No one is going to sponsor the Scottish game seriously when it obvious to a blind man that the game here is bent both in governance and refereering
Finally what both teams have failed to realise is that lack of proper competition, meaning that you can’t expect to win everything every year, makes their teams weaker. As you are not being pushed hard then when it comes to Europe they get a surprise that even minnow teams give them tough game
My tuppenceworth –
summer football (one of the reasons the Skandis can sell their product at a premium)
grass pitches in the top two divisions
less emphasis on physique and more on basic ball skills and technique
more equitable distribution of monies
maximise the size of the pitches – get the players fitter and more mobile
professional referees , with open recruitment
Government to restart football in schools , providing personnel and finance
I know that there are lots of plastic pitches in Scandinavia , but I’m thinking about my experience of our football .
Albertz11 11th August 2021 At 19:12
‘..The dearth of anything remotely innovative..’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Can I first say that I am not disagreeing with the general thrust of your post when I say that not all ‘innovative’ ideas are necessarily good ideas.
Possibly the most damaging ‘innovation’ in Scottish football was the abandonment of ‘gate-sharing’.
The subject was raised on this blog some time ago, I remember, but I don’t think there was ever any post from anyone who had particular knowledge of how and why that innovation came about and was accepted?
I myself haven’t a scooby as to why that idea was ever accepted.
Was it ever explained, by whichever governance body had the power to introduce the notion, why the home club should keep all the gate money?
Was it ever explained why the clubs accepted the notion?
I hope there may be some poster who can provide some historical analysis.
More emphasis needs to be put on home grown players coming through the youth systems rather than the lazy option of writing a cheque . If the SFA want a strong National side then they have to invest in the roots of the game . I would suggest a bonus to clubs who play players who are eligible to play for Scotland , I realise that for some clubs the cash wouldn’t be enough to tempt them to change their ways but lower league teams in particular could benefit .
I’m certainly not advocating a closed shop for non Scots players as many have been a massive boost but to see clubs with just 2 or 3 Scots in the starting 11 maybe explains why we have been missing from WCs and Euros for far too long.
John Clark 11th August 22.21.
not all ‘innovative’ ideas are necessarily good ideas.
True, but would at least show they were thinking “outside the box” for a change.
Regarding “gate sharing”, not sure if 100% accurate but may be of interest.
In 1980, Scottish football was enjoying a bit of serious competition for the league title.
Sir Alex Ferguson’s Aberdeen were strutting their stuff, regularly putting the Old Firm to the sword.
In the same period, Dundee United also offered a strong challenge to the Big Two.
However, the seeds of the destruction of competition in the Scottish Premiership were already in the ground.
It all started with the Rangers Development Fund.
This Fund was for years feed from the proceeds of weekly Prize Draws, with the tickets bought by Rangers supporters.
For years, no one at Rangers knew what to do with the monies that were being built up in the Development Fund.
There was much frustration at Ibrox, especially when Celtic were winning everything. Many would have wanted to spend the Fund on buying players – but the conditions of the Fund meant it could only be used for ground improvements.
By the end of the 1970’s, there were £ Millions in the Fund. In fact, enough to rebuild the Rangers stadium.
So that’s what happened. By 1981, Rangers built three new grandstands. Suddenly, they had a modern all-seater, 44,000 capacity stadium.
It has to be remembered that, when the plans for the new Ibrox were being drawn up, Rangers were going through a fallow period in terms of winning the league. They had won the 1977/78 title but by 1980, Celtic and Aberdeen ruled the roost. Rangers were “also rans”.
Pre 1980, the “wee teams” in Scottish football enjoyed a financial boost when they visited the Rangers and Celtic. Why? Because they received 50% of the gate receipts at Ibrox and Parkhead.
Rangers decided the way to change their fortunes was to hang on to all the gate receipts at their sparkling new stadium. So that’s what they proposed, backed by Celtic, who clearly saw the benefit of strengthening the hold the Old Firm had over Scottish football.
How the Glasgow giants got the other clubs to agree is beyond my understanding – but agree they did, in sufficient numbers to force the change through in 1980.
Within five years, competition was obliterated in Scottish football. The retained gate monies fuelled the domination of the Old Firm.
It took Celtic 18 years to copy Rangers “new stadium” wheeze. Perhaps not surprising therefore that Rangers won the league in ten of the eleven seasons between 1986/87 and 1996/97.
The advent of the European Champions League in 1992 cemented the financial domination of the Old Firm. Only Rangers and Celtic ever qualified for this economic bonanza.
So there you have it. The “also rans” voted for their own economic downfall in 1980.
Daft?
CRAZY!
And just for interest, can I say that I had tuned in to the Charles Green v The Chief Constable case at 10.00 a.m.
The phone line was live, but nothing happened until ,after about five minutes, Lord Tyre’s clerk said that there would be a delay of perhaps 10 minutes.
Well, it was actually 10.50 before the Court was in session!
After a few minutes, Lord Tyre had to interrupt to say that he was hearing that Counsel for the Chief Constable was having technical problems , and Counsel for Green [ Mr Borland?] came in to confirm that he was hearing that Counsel [Mr Moynihan]for the Lord Advocate had not heard anything of what he had said.
Lord Tyre at 10.57 decided that they should go into ‘practice mode’ until the techy problem was resolved.
It was resolved at 11.05, and Counsel for Green began at the beginning.
You will understand that I am not being critical, but trying to express my [ okay, auld geezer’s! ] appreciation of the technology that allows court cases to be heard remotely, and seen by those involved , although not yet by the ‘man in the street’ who can only listen on the phone line, as opposed to being able to wander in off the street and sit in any courtroom and see the proceedings.
I imagine that that will soon be possible and perhaps become the norm.
John Clark 11th August 22.21
not all ‘innovative’ ideas are necessarily good ideas.
True. Although it would demonstrate they are capable of thinking “outside the box”.
Regarding “gate sharing”, not sure if 100% accurate but may be of interest.
In 1980, Scottish football was enjoying a bit of serious competition for the league title.
Sir Alex Ferguson’s Aberdeen were strutting their stuff, regularly putting the Old Firm to the sword.
In the same period, Dundee United also offered a strong challenge to the Big Two.
However, the seeds of the destruction of competition in the Scottish Premiership were already in the ground.
It all started with the Rangers Development Fund.
This Fund was for years feed from the proceeds of weekly Prize Draws, with the tickets bought by Rangers supporters.
For years, no one at Rangers knew what to do with the monies that were being built up in the Development Fund.
There was much frustration at Ibrox, especially when Celtic were winning everything. Many would have wanted to spend the Fund on buying players – but the conditions of the Fund meant it could only be used for ground improvements.
By the end of the 1970’s, there were £ Millions in the Fund. In fact, enough to rebuild the Rangers stadium.
So that’s what happened. By 1981, Rangers built three new grandstands. Suddenly, they had a modern all-seater, 44,000 capacity stadium.
It has to be remembered that, when the plans for the new Ibrox were being drawn up, Rangers were going through a fallow period in terms of winning the league. They had won the 1977/78 title but by 1980, Celtic and Aberdeen ruled the roost. Rangers were “also rans”.
Pre 1980, the “wee teams” in Scottish football enjoyed a financial boost when they visited the Rangers and Celtic. Why? Because they received 50% of the gate receipts at Ibrox and Parkhead.
Rangers decided the way to change their fortunes was to hang on to all the gate receipts at their sparkling new stadium. So that’s what they proposed, backed by Celtic, who clearly saw the benefit of strengthening the hold the Old Firm had over Scottish football.
How the Glasgow giants got the other clubs to agree is beyond my understanding – but agree they did, in sufficient numbers to force the change through in 1980.
Within five years, competition was obliterated in Scottish football. The retained gate monies fuelled the domination of the Old Firm.
It took Celtic 18 years to copy Rangers “new stadium” wheeze. Perhaps not surprising therefore that Rangers won the league in ten of the eleven seasons between 1986/87 and 1996/97.
The advent of the European Champions League in 1992 cemented the financial domination of the Old Firm. Only Rangers and Celtic ever qualified for this economic bonanza.
So there you have it. The “also rans” voted for their own economic downfall in 1980.
Daft?
CRAZY!
JC
Further to my previous post an example of how wealth distribution worked in College Football in the USA.
REPORT: FOOTBALL TICKET REVENUE SHARING COST UW MORE THAN $950,000 IN 2012;
SPORTS
TODD D. MILEWSKI , The Capital Times , tmilewski@madison.com
When it comes to football gate revenues, the Big Ten Conference takes from the rich to give to the poor.
Under a long-held revenue sharing plan, more than $6.6 million went from the Big Ten’s top seven gate-revenue-producing schools – the University of Wisconsin included – to the bottom five in the 2012 season, according to an analysis by The Gazette of Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
The Wisconsin athletic department contributed more than $950,000 to that transfer in a system that The Gazette found was unique among major college football conferences.
Here’s how it works:
Big Ten teams share 35 percent of the net gate receipts, after sales tax, from conference home games, up to $1 million per game and at minimum $300,000 per game.
Each school has four conference home games per season, meaning the most any would pay in is $4 million. Five schools reached that level in 2012: Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio State and Penn State.
The money from that pool gets split 12 ways and returned evenly to the schools.
In 2012, the total of gate receipts for the league’s 48 games was $36,458,053.71, or $3,038,171.14 per school.
Those five schools that paid in $4 million each ended up with a net loss of $961,828.86. Wisconsin paid in a little less – three of its four home games reached the $1 million cap but the home game against Illinois did not – so its loss was a little less as well.
It ended up being $957,854.22 out of the Badgers’ budget. Randy Marnocha, the UW associate athletic director for business operations, told a meeting of the UW Athletic Board’s finance, facilities and operations committee earlier this month that the department had budgeted to lose $800,000 last year in that revenue sharing agreement.
Michigan State also had a net loss ($862,933.66), while five schools had a revenue gain from the program:
Indiana, $1,722,143.29
Illinois, $1,312,175.70
Northwestern, $1,271,654.13
Minnesota, $1,266,143.74
Purdue, $1,057,815.29
Football gate receipts aren’t the only kind of money shared by Big Ten schools. Each year, they get a payout from the conference on media revenues, including those from the Big Ten Network.
Marnocha told the finance committee that in the 2012-13 school year, the athletic department brought in over $16 million from Big Ten media revenue.
Conference officials said the football ticket revenue sharing idea goes to the heart of the Big Ten philosophy.
“It’s very important philosophically because it was the first real commitment on the financial end, that our schools recognized that great things can be achieved by the collective good to share revenue in a way that’s beneficial to all,” Big Ten deputy commissioner Brad Traviolia told The Gazette. “It’s important to continue.
“It’s worked well for us. It’s a trust and a camaraderie among our institutions that’s been developed over a century. It’s part of who we are.”
October 31, 2013
Menace 11th August 21.47
The Bosman ruling didn’t come into effect until 1995 after a case involving The Belgian Football Association v Jean-Marc Bosman, a player at RFC Liege.
Rangers began signing English international players in 1986 (Butcher, Woods, Roberts) followed in the next few years by Stevens, Francis, Wilkins, Steven and Hateley.
As you can see the Bosman ruling played no part in the signing policy adopted by the club. A quick check of attendance figures at the time would show that the majority clubs attracted capacity crowds to their stadiums when Rangers visited.
Where i would agree with you is that a lack of competition isn’t good for the game in general but how that is addressed in future years is way beyond me.
Apologies for the (almost) duplicate posts.
First one disappeared only to reappear at a later date.
Albertz11 11th August 2021 At 23:50
I could be wrong, but I thought it was the mid 70’s when Scottish clubs stopped sharing gate receipts? Also, when gate receipts were shared, some clubs such as Falkirk and Kilmarnock were part-time, whereas they are now full time. It was not unusual to have part time clubs in the top league, so gate receipt sharing (at least then), was not the silver bullet it is currently presented as.
Here is the nub of it now though. People now envisage half of the many guaranteed millions Celtic and Rangers rake in via season ticket money these days going to other clubs. I doubt if every fan of those two clubs would be willing to part with money every season to finance other clubs. Some fans of clubs like Aberdeen, Hibs and Hearts may well feel the same. Personally I would never be willing to do it. Others will see it differently and that’s fine.
Gate sharing was abolished in 1981.
Heralding 40 years of improvement in standards across Scottish football at club and international level. ?
Upthehoops 12th August 09.46.
I think it was later than that UTH. Being honest i couldn’t put a specific date or for that matter a year that “gate sharing” was replaced. I do however recall that Jim McLean of Dundee United was vociferous in his opposition to it.
Just seen BPs post.
I’m mildly surprised by how the BBC seems to be getting away with so many blatant references to the deid club.
As in…
Ex-Rangers chief Charles Green wins £6.3m payout.
It IS kinda accurate, but to keep the continuation myth rolling surely it should have “more accurately” been…
Rangers ex-chief Charles Green wins £6.3m payout?
There have been several articles headlined about the Ex-Rangers chief Charles Green.
And also some about “Former Rangers owner White”.
I like to think facts are chiels that winnae ding… but I’m being admittedly optimistic and.. parochial.
Big Pink 12th August 2021 At 10:38
Gate sharing was abolished in 1981.
Heralding 40 years of improvement in standards across Scottish football at club and international level. ?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My view, for what it’s worth, is that the upping of the ante by Rangers in 1986 was the worst thing to happen. All other clubs tried to follow to a lesser extent, and many suffered financial events. While Celtic did not have an event as such, they came damned close to it. However, another problem surely had to be the then Bank of Scotland handing Rangers a blank cheque. There are so many reasons we are where we are, I just don’t see a return to gate sharing being the panacea for it all. I imagine a lot of fans might go back to paying at the gate and being more selective in their games. Celtic and Rangers were not drawing 50-60k crowds at home games in 1981 with 20-30k for most games more reflective.
Rightly or wrongly (and there is no right or wrong anyway), people IMO will not shell out £600+ on a season ticket knowing half of it goes to clubs who only bring a couple of hundred fans to their ground.
upthehoops 12th August 2021 At 12:55
Rightly or wrongly (and there is no right or wrong anyway), people IMO will not shell out £600+ on a season ticket knowing half of it goes to clubs who only bring a couple of hundred fans to their ground.
£££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££
Or in other words, as an Old Firm fan I’m not willing to help finance any improvement in Scottish football because we are fine as we are and have no real interest in creating competition. Diddy clubs with a few hundred fans should be left to rot.
It’s a false assumption. If the entertainment spectacle improved people would want to be there and even if it didn’t they wouldn’t be the best fans in the world if they weren’t there to get right behind their team and cheer them all the way to Hampden.
DB
As you say, there is no right or wrong here: just a cultural attachment to one point of view.
From my perspective, I think it is fair to say that it requires two teams to provide the spectacle. Therefore both sets of performers deserve to be paid. Football is interdependent. I have never understood the position where folk are up in arms about ‘paying for the other team’, and I probably never will. Just my opinion of course, but I think it fails to understand what the game actually is. What is more objectively factual is that the descent into mediocrity began right around then. The arms race started by Murray exacerbated that of course, and almost killed Celtic before ironically killing Rangers themselves.
Wee bit of fertiliser on the whole garden. Not just on my blade of grass.
Bogs Dollox 12th August 2021 At 14:18
If you look back at my posts I said I’m not sure whether season ticket holders of the other more well supported clubs would be up for gate sharing either, and rightly so in my view. Clearly we don’t agree and that’s fine.
I see that our Rangers Tax Case friend has tweeted the Scottish football governing bodies with his concerns about a particular club’s solvency and its ability to complete the season. I very much doubt he is telling them something they are not already well acquainted with but are happily ignoring.
Rangers Tax-Case
@rangerstaxcase
·
3h
@spfl
@scottishfa
Open questions to Messrs Doncaster and Maxwell.
Do you have full confidence that all SPFL Premiership clubs have binding commitments of funding in place to ensure they can complete all 2021/22 fixtures?
What have you done to assess and mitigate such a risks?
Rangers Tax-Case
@rangerstaxcase
·
3h
Can you provide unambiguous guidance-
Is it acceptable for a club to complete the season by trading while insolvent, not remitting taxes, and increasing debt that cannot be repaid?
If this is ok, it is surely important that every club is aware of this fact?
I seriously doubt that there will be any existential crisis at Ibrox in the near to mid term.
Most of us have been surprised at the quantum of the bailouts in the form of soft loans in order to help make the new club competitive.
Individuals making that kind of commitment for those reasons will unlikely cut off the life support if there was a threat to their existence.
I am puzzled and impressed in equal measure at how the board have not only kept the ship afloat, but have given the engine enough revs to win a title whilst still in a financially inferior position (both acutely and chronically). I’d be lost for words if their legacy became “55 and over”
I know logic is not a cornerstone of the new Rangers saga, but that would be a step too wide of the mark.
Big Pink 12th August 2021 At 17:29
I too doubt that this particular iteration will fail but having achieved the stop of ten in a row then perhaps a more realistic approach to finance is the pragmatism that TRFC fans will need to accept. Financial fair play has been neutered by the Covid crisis but it will eventually come back in to play and all clubs will have to look to balancing their books accordingly. News media seems to be attempting to soften up supporters to accept the inevitable but if Celtic can’t shift Eduard at the moment for a realistic fee then what price Morelos?
Albertz11 — 11 August 2021 — 23:54
Your post of revenue sharing by American college football was insightful. It works because there is trust among the teams, solid governance of the league and competitions, and no one team believing it has a divine right to win every year and dictate to the governing board and throw a hissy fit when thing don’t go their way. I’ve long been an advocate that the those running the SFPL and SFA would do well to speak with other leagues in other sports to find out why they are successful in gaining sponsors, pleasing the fan base, and having the ability to plan down the road not in terms of days, weeks, months, but in years.
Ref gate sharing – nobody is complaining when the European gates are shared, so why are they for the league games
Also reminds me about a conversation I had with a Gers mate who argued that ad they had more fans they should get more tickets for a cup game. I reminded him that football was a competition for who had the best team not a competition for who had the most fans
I see the thorny issue of gate-sharing has raised its head again.
Celtic fans have every right to baulk at paying £600 for a season ticket on the basis that half of it would go to other clubs, so long as they give up any pretence of wanting any of ‘the diddies’ to provide a degree of domestic competition. In reality, what those Celtic fans really want is to preserve the status quo.
Presumably, those fans should boycott away matches too, otherwise they’d only be funding the opposition? As far as I’m aware, cup match revenue is still shared. Should fans boycott cup games into the bargain?
In my opinion, the argument that the host deserves to retain the entire proceeds is self-serving tosh that totally ignores the fundamental point that the event wouldn’t take place without an opponent.
Imagine a Muhammad Ali fan rocking up to the ticket office at Madison Square Garden and demanding that none of his hard-earned money should go to Ali’s opponent, Joe Frazier!
I’ve always understood that Scottish football was a mutual collective, a co-operative.
The SPFL, like its predecessors, exists to look after the interests of all of its members. That’s ALL OF THEM, not just the two with the largest support, who already have a massive financial advantage thanks to the droves of supporters who abandon their home-town clubs to travel to Ibrox and Parkhead, at least in large part thanks to a shameful century-plus history of pseudo-religious, Irish political bollox that should have no place in our game, but which is still tolerated because hatred and division make money.
Gate-sharing ceased around forty years ago at the behest of the Old Firm duo. Not long prior to that, Ibrox and Parkhead commonly hosted crowds as low as 10-20,000 before modernisation and expansion.
It’s strange that there were no concerns about the unfairness of gate-sharing regulations until later, when the capacity at Ibrox increased to nearly 50,000 and Celtic Park exceeded 60,000. Why should it take the foul stench of money for a century-old policy to be deemed unfit for purpose?
Only two clubs (three if you include the deceased) have won the top league title in the past 36 years and there is little chance of that appalling and frankly embarrassing statistic changing any time soon. Those who subscribe to the view that the ending of gate-sharing was purely coincidental to the duopoly’s subsequent stranglehold are truly delusional.
For far too long we’ve had to put up with myopic fans of the big two clubs, full of their own self-importance, thinking everything revolves around them, unaware of the existence of the bigger picture, far less seeing it.
They complain that they’re held back by a lack of domestic competition, while their two clubs do everything in their power to stifle that competition. Supposedly sworn enemies conniving and conspiring together on everything from unpunished industrial-scale cheating through to blind eyes being turned to the unwarranted granting of a UEFA license, via money-spinning glamour friendlies affecting fixture scheduling, right through to liquidation denial.
One of the two had the sheer audacity to claim that developing Celtic and Rangers* colt teams (but only those two, mind, nobody else!) in the lower leagues would be in the interests of the Scottish game as a whole, leading, as it inexorably would, to better quality players in the full national side. They conveniently omitted any rational explanation as to how playing against Edinburgh University or Vale of Leithen was going to improve the quality of the national side one iota, far less transform those involved into international class players.
Throughout my lifetime, I’ve always supported every Scottish club participating in European competition. As recently as last evening, I, as a Hearts fan, genuinely threw my support behind Hibs, Aberdeen and St Johnstone in their respective ties.
For the first time that I can recall, I couldn’t give a flying fork about how Celtic and Rangers* got on, because I realised that only they are capable of reaching the lucrative later stages of European competitions, whose prizes would simply extend the existing financial disparity between them and the rest of us.
I’d wager that most fans of Scotland’s two biggest supported clubs would be very much against the principle of the short-lived European Super League, whose arrogant, selfish, money-driven clubs want to create a closed shop at the elite level of the game. I believe Celtic and Rangers* already operate a closed shop, only further down the food chain from Barca, Madrid and Juventus, thanks to our short-sighted administrators.
Drastic action is required in Scottish football and while I don’t profess to have all the answers, it seems to me that reverting to gate-sharing would only negatively impact the two clubs who need pegging back in order to provide a more level playing field.
We could surely do worse than taking a leaf out of US sports’ book by turning the award of prize-money on its head so that those most in need of it receive help, while those who are more successful receive less.
Counter-intuitively, that may seem like a bizarre way to address a problem, but unless radical ideas are implemented, we’re set for another forty years of tedious league duopoly. Let’s face it – even when one of the two participants died, the only option considered by the incompetents who administer our game was to pretend it never happened, and forlornly hope nobody noticed.
Highlander
Got nothing to say to counter any of your points – although I draw the line at being indifferent to Celtic’s progress in Europe – and agree with almost all of them.
The problem with having a set of conservative directors in boardrooms at almost every club, is that they are highly unlikely to embrace radical ideas, whether those ideas are business models, or football models.
The degree of self-harm that was required to enable the majority of clubs to agree to the abolition of gate sharing is breathtaking – especially in an industry where clubs usually vote for narrow self interest. Perhaps inducements were offered. I wonder how that worked out for everyone then?
The power of the “wee diddy” clubs is still there though. As in 2002 the threat of mass resignation from the SPL would focus very clearly on the reality that without someone to play, even a Real Madrid or a Man U would see spectacular revenue drops.
The voting structures within the leagues alone would be a legal justification for moving on and setting up their own competitions.
The self-harm thing is still very strong though.
Vernallen 13th 01.35
Your “one team” reference makes you sound like Murdoch MacLennan who couldn’t bring himself to refer to my team by name earlier this week.
For the record i don’t think that we (Rangers) believe we have “a divine right to win every year” and if we’re dictating to the governing board then we’re not doing a very good job.
As for speaking to other leagues or sports, that’s a part of what i referred to by being innovative and driving the sport forward, but to borrow BPs line “Of course it won’t happen”.
Albertz11 13th August 2021 At 15:51
I think MacLennan was being cognisant of TRFC’s fans and their victim/martyr complex , and was sparing their feelings .
Why can’t gates be shared in different proportions eg 90/10 % ? There are usually about that number of away fans at most matches .
Paddy Malarkey 13th August 18.11
Seriously doubt that Murdoch MacLennan is cognisant of anything to be honest, as for sparing our feelings, he has made his opinion of Rangers pretty clear in the past has he not?
Gate sharing will not return any time soon, if ever.
Albertz11 13th August 2021 At 19:18
If he’d mentioned you by name , the rest of us would have to put up with the squeals of ” it’s always big , bad , Rangers ” .
And never say never re gate sharing – it wasn’t that long ago that certain clubs were agitating for a share of the away gate due to the number of fans they brought .
When the change to home teams keeping gate receipts was passed crowd averages were much closer than they are now and the top 4 /maybe 5 clubs probably viewed keeping their own gates was a net gain (short term, narrow interest). And the next one or two probably thought they would be able to boost their home gates in the typical optimistic view of football fans everywhere.
So I can see how the decision was approved. However the growth in crowds for Celtic and RFC outstripped every other club – Celtic’s average home crowd doubled in less than 20 years – whereas other clubs have been broadly flat or down.
I am not defending the status quo as I believe the lack of domestic challenge hurts our teams on the international stage.
Undoing that decision now is difficult to see without some sort of directive from UEFA. It would be easier for the authorities to do their bit to level the playing field by looking at prize money distribution – the largesse from CL distorts and corrupts domestic leagues. And SPL and SFA could be more imaginative – for example if you win the league then entry to CL qualification equates to your prize money for winning the league. If you don’t reach group stages then you get prize money for winning the league. If you qualify then you forfeit the league prize money. Similar for Europa League.
Just this minute noticed this in the Rolls of Court:
“LORD TYRE – S Alexander, Clerk
Thursday 19th August
Preliminary Hearing
Between 9.00am and 9.30am
CA71/20 Duff & Phelps Ltd v The Lord Advocate”
No idea really what this is about.
What an ingloriously dirty f.ckin mess RFC of 1872 created all round-
the death of a football club
f-cked up prosecutions,
destruction of the integrity of Scottish football governance,
enormous public expense in damages,
creditors done out of millions……
Honest to God, who could be arsed with the whole rotten lot?
And who among us will believe that ‘Truth’ about it all will ever emerge?
John Clark 13th August 2021 At 23:57
I think the Herald reported that whoever now owns D&P is suing for ‘reputational damage’ & ‘loss of trade’ caused to to that fine, upstanding company by malicious prosecutions of its employees.
I’m sure I saw sums of both £60m & £120m mentioned in the article (possibly published on Wednesday or Thursday this week).
my post of 13th August 2021 At 23:57 refers
I don’t know who Rachel Mackie is but it her name over a piece in today’s ‘The Scotsman’ that ensures I will never read anything she ever reports about anything with any belief in the accuracy of her reporting.
The piece informs us that the Rolls of Court entry I mention in my post is to do with the firm Duff and Phelps claiming damages against the Crown Office for losses cause to it as a result of the ‘malicious prosecutions’ of its employees.
So far so good.
Then the nonsense reporting begins. ” This week” she says,” former chairman Charles Green accepted a settlement out of court”
She repeats parrot-fashion the UNTRUTH that Charles Green was chairman of RFC plc. and appears to be stupid enough not to notice that she contradicts herself when she later says ” David Whitehouse and Paul Clark took over as administrators at Rangers during the well-documented financial collapse and subsequent liquidation of Rangers FC plc in 2012″.
And then illogically adds “The dire situation resulted in the Glasgow giants being demoted to the bottom tier of Scottish Football and the creation of a new parent company”
It is an absolute fact that CG was never chairman of RFC of 1872.
It is an absolute fact that RFC of 1872 lost its existence , through liquidation, as a football club, and was never ‘demoted’.
It is an absolute fact that SevcoScotland/TRFC did not exist prior to 2012.
What an absolutely misleading report, and I fear that Miss Mackie joins the ranks of those in the SMSM who I believe to have done, and who continue to do, a disservice to journalism and who therefore cynically spit in the eye of real journalists who are ready to die to defend, support and report Truth.
God grant that newspapers such as the ‘Scotsman’ that carry stories like this end up joining RFC of 1872 in Liquidation.
Jingso.Jimsie 14th August 2021 At 10:41
‘..I’m sure I saw sums of both £60m & £120m..’
%%%%%%%
Yes, thanks, Jingo.jimsie: I just saw that this morning.
I’d like to see how D&P quantify their losses.
Have they a wee list of clients world-wide who discontinued using their services when Whitehouse and Clark were[ wrongfully] charged, or a wee list of clients who might have been going to use them but said that they wouldn’t?
Mind you, in terms of big civil actions for damages I suppose even £120 million is chicken feed for world-wide legal firms.
If the Crown Office seeks an out-of-court settlement, I suppose we’ll never hear what the figure would be or on what basis it would be arrived at. We’ll all just share the feckin bill as tax-payers.
Just another incidental piece of sh.te dumped on us all by SDM who, in my opinion, was the primary cause of all that went bad at the Rangers of my grandfather’s day and which has been as dead since 2012 as he has been since 1951, God rest him.
Isn’t the higher figure of £120m very similar to the total COPFS budget for a year?
https://twitter.com/rangerstaxcase/status/1426587845326606337
@Corrupt Official- my own view is that we need to get Westminister interested / involved. Not something I would personally want to invoke given our current PM but perhaps sometimes needs must…
Corrupt official 14th August 2021 At 19:40
++++++++++++++
Having written to the First Minister on this matter I received a reply that there will be a public inquiry. Personally I have no faith it will get to the bottom of the matter as too many influential people seem up to their neck in it. We might get the actual truth in 30 years, but many of us won’t be around to hear it. What on earth was the intended end game with this? It’s truly appalling.
Albertz11 11th August 2021 At 19:12
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/gordon-smith-resignation-archaic-sfa-no-place-anyone-vision-2459341
……………………..
This would be the same Gordon smith who said his hands were tied at the ibrox club, all very familiar at deflecting the blame onto someone else.
The real highlight of smith credability was his obscure idea that if the ibrox fans could change some of the words to the Billy boys it might keep UEFA away from the door. How this guy is ever dug out to give an opinion on anything to do with scottish football is beyond rational thinking.
Wokingcelt, UTH, & JC,
I doubt Westminster will involve itself in Scots law, exemplified by HMRC, who had to undergo the due process time wasting deliberations of the Scottish courts before finally getting it to London under UK jurisdiction.
However, considering how high up the tree these parasites creep and their control over so many facets of Scottish society, from the legals to the beat bobbies, to the SMSM and the then First minister pleading for clemency on behalf of a tax dodging knighted scumbag, then the question must be asked, Is a fitba club running the country, or is the country running a fitba club?…….Or is A.N. Other running both to suit it’s own agenda?.
I wish I knew, because knowing where the boadies are buried commands a tidy sum in the hush stakes.
I’ll wager a coal miners piece-box has seen less dirty haun’s than this crimewave.
Cluster One 14th August 23.00
The reason he said that was simply because it’s true and reflected the chaotic manner in which Craig Whyte ran the business. Unavailable to meet face to face, e-mails not responded to, no board meetings held, kept in the dark re- decision making, that’s just a few of the examples i could give.
Re- the Billy Boys.Is that not true? Had the fans changed one verse or to be accurate one word the song wouldn’t be on the banned list alongside many others, on both sides of the Old Firm divide.
Cluster One 14th August 2021 At 23:00
This would be the same Gordon smith who said his hands were tied at the ibrox club, all very familiar at deflecting the blame onto someone else.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
I remember when the Supreme Court ruled that Rangers had operated EBT’s illegally, and the SFA were panicking about old coals being raked over. Even the Celtic Board were stating publicly that an independent investigation was required, and the SPFL Board agreed…the SFA of course didn’t.
So following on Gordon Smith was a guest on Sportsound. He said that at the time Rangers operated (the illegal) EBT’s, that the league was more competitive…he actually said that in an attempt to justify what Rangers did was okay! There are no words to describe.
As for anyone wondering why he still gets media gigs. Surely it is rather obvious…even that one isn’t a secret.
upthehoops 14th August 2021 At 20:19
“.. I received a reply that there will be a public inquiry.. Personally I have no faith it will get to the bottom of the matter as too many influential people seem up to their neck in it’
%%%%%%%%%
Well, with the likes of Murdo Fraser MSP [from whom God preserve us] who cleverly and, in my view, mischievously, suggested in the Press that a serving Judge of the Court of Session has ‘questions to answer’ in so far as he was the Lord Advocate on whose watch the ‘malicious prosecutions’ were brought, the chances of the Scottish Parliament agreeing on the terms of reference of a public inquiry and of finding a Judge prepared to sit as head of such an Inquiry , or for such an Inquiry to be seen as ‘independent’ , are in my opinion , very very slim.
The ‘terms of reference’ are key.
What would the Inquiry be trying to do? Who would be required to give evidence under oath, and as to what?
You know, I feel I could write the final report myself, even now![ Perhaps I shall write it in summary, and send it in a sealed envelope to the blog Administrators, for publication [ at premium rates of course] on the blog a day or two before the official publication of the Inquiry’s report!]
Cynical?
Yes, extremely so.
What I don’t know is whether Westminster has any say in the matter, under the Devolution Settlement?
I suspect that the turd created by SDM’s cheating is probably as much our own wee Scottish legal turd as the ‘turd’ topping the St James Quarter in Edinburgh!
It is Scotland’s own shi.e and Westminster probably does not have either the power or interest enough to wipe our a.se free of it.
Honest to God!
That it should come to this, in a matter of the rotten cheating of a football club having been discovered and not properly and honestly dealt with by the SFA and SPL/SFL!
Dear God, how badly we were served and continue to be served by self-serving, canting, hypocritical barstewards masquerading as members of governance bodies in a Sport.
What worse evils might we expect from , yes, self-serving ,self-protecting barstewards of politicians and a ‘public inquiry’?
We will have to wait and see, won’t we?
Corrupt official
14th August 2021 At 23:13
2 0 Rate This
Wokingcelt, UTH, & JC,
I doubt Westminster will involve itself in Scots law, exemplified by HMRC, who had to undergo the due process time wasting deliberations of the Scottish courts before finally getting it to London under UK jurisdiction.
…………
CO
There were 4 stages to the ebt process:
1st Tier Tribunal
Upper Tier Tribunal
Court of Session (Inner House)
UK Supreme Court
The only time in came within the ‘jurisdiction’ of the Scottish courts was at the Court of Session.
The 1st and Upper decisions were broadly in line with previous cases – framing the case law – primarily through tribunals and Appeal Court hearings held in England.
Probably noteworthy that this Scottish court was the first occasion any court in the UK had cut through the legalese and come to the correct decision with regard to ebts. Even at the UK Supreme Court it was the Scottish members who seemed to be most critical of the previous nonsensical case law that had allowed dubiety over the legality of any form of ebt.
I think we will find that, in the upcoming Public Enquiry, legal decisions can only be made according to the evidence and arguments set before the court. HMRC is a department of the UK government and had that responsibility in relation to ebts.
It might be too cynical to think that ebts were a benefit to one part of society that some within the UK government (of whatever hue) wanted to keep onside. It is really a question for HMRC (and the UK government) as to why the arguments that turned around conventional thinking on ebts weren’t put before a court until 2015.
On this matter, the Scottish judiciary, when the relevant evidence and arguments were presented, did what it should have done. It really did.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58222495
HirsutePursuit 15th August 2021 At 08:59
There were 4 stages to the ebt process:
1st Tier Tribunal
Upper Tier Tribunal
Court of Session (Inner House)
UK Supreme Court
The only time in came within the ‘jurisdiction’ of the Scottish courts was at the Court of Session.
Happy to have my anger driven cognitive dissonance put in check there HP.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/5FRMWqxZFGyK4wvIjWefOR?si=XWAX_2uFRx-ws2Jb8pEu9g&dl_branch=1
……………..
Charles Green interview Aug 15, 2021
I note the gleeful tones from Rangers fans in regards to recent wins over perceived inferior competition. What do they say in regards to the wins over bottom of the table Livingstone and a lower division club in Dunferline. Also not much about a home filed loss to 10 man Malmo. Albertz11 my earlier post in regards teams feeling a divine right to win titles was not directed to your Rangers but to both Glasgow teams.
Cluster One 15th August 2021 At 19:38
In print .
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/charles-green-explosive-rangers-rant-24764581
I listened to the entire Charles Green interview last night and it’s an hour of my life that I’ll never get back. Hosts Keys and Gray were like fawning sycophants as Green rambled from subject to subject without actually divulging anything other than “I am Rangers’ saviour.”
It could easily have been produced by Jim Traynor during his Ibrox propaganda years, such was the lack of factual accuracy and lack of a probing question.
At the end, Andy Gray had the audacity to claim that he’d asked all the difficult questions that the Rangers fans wanted to know the answers to, despite failing to raise one solitary challenging matter in the entire interview.
As an example, Green mentioned that he’d bought the assets. Moments later, Gray ‘translated’ that into “when you bought the club out of administration.”
Green admitted that, during a meeting with Reagan and Doncaster, they and the legal people at the SFA and SPL (presumably Rod McKenzie) had warned that the club had to be punished for breaking the rules.
Green was incredulous that anyone should have the temerity to consider punishing the mighty Rangers, who as we all know, don’t do punishments. As history shows, he got his way though, because despite the Supreme Court’s guilty verdict, the spineless football authorities subsequently told us there was no appetite for raking over old coals.
Green even tried to tell us that he failed to negotiate contracts with Adidas and Under Armour because they were too busy with the likes of Liverpool and didn’t have the capacity to look after Rangers too. I’m just surprised he didn’t mention that the proposed tie-up with the Dallas Cowboys collapsed as he was in hospital and missed the crucial email detailing the contract.
Throughout the interview, Green came across as a loud-mouthed buffoon. So too did Keys & Gray.
Highlander 16th August 2021 At 08:29
‘.Throughout the interview, Green came across as a loud-mouthed buffoon.’
%%%%%%%%
Thanks for posting that link Highlander.
I was tickled by these snippets in particular:
” .. So you needed enough cover to deal with these liabilities. But of course the CVA didn’t go ahead and it was a different story. I also had to pay all the old clubs debts and these are things people don’t recognise.
We’re now classed by the Scottish FA and everyone as a new club. But I had to pay all the oldco’s debts. I used to argue, if we’re the oldco that’s fine, we’ll pay all the debts. If we’re newco we’re newco, we haven’t got the debts.”
“What angered me as well was, all these Rangers fanatic players who disappeared to get fat signing on fees because they had freedom of contract, they’ve all come back now”
“…we’ve got all the other problems coming like ‘You’re not going to be able to play in the Premier League, you’re going into non-league football and we might not even give you a license to play..”
He had nothing to worry about on that score, had he, knowing the kind of moral cowards he was dealing with, ready to abandon the very thing they were in office to uphold and preserve- Sporting integrity.
Those who signed the 5-Way Agreement and refused to have the ‘Res 12’ issue independently examined deserve infinitely more contempt than the likes of those who merely sought to make make money by deceit.
Could be another rant coming from Stewart Robertson against the DR as Keith Jackson has, what has to be an unintentional pun, in his article about the problems facing SG. Stating he must feel like he’s dealing with a second hand car salesman may infringe on some of their secret contacts with auto dealers. How does Parks feel about this as he’s in the auto business. Will the DR be again banned from Ibrox unless they cough up the 25,000 user fee for media access. Another week another target to distract from the issues at Ibrox.
Albertz11 14th August 2021 At 23:38
Re- the Billy Boys.Is that not true? Had the fans changed one verse or to be accurate one word the song wouldn’t be on the banned list alongside many others, on both sides of the Old Firm divide.
…………………………….
I should pretend i never read that post, but will give you the benifit of the doubt.
UEFA stated that it is the signature song of a sectarian gang and represented a long-running sectarian divide, regardless of what lyrics were used.
…………………..
https://twitter.com/Zeshankenzo/status/1166425377792823296?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1166425377792823296%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.followfollow.com%2Fforum%2Fthreads%2Fchanging-billy-boys-lyrics-linfield-example.87567%2F
…………………..
You somehow wanted to bring celtic into the argument, but i can never remember celtic fans singing the Billy boys or having an ex SFA member willing to change the lyrics so that they could sing a banned song.
Cluster One 16th August 18.52
Don’t recall any punishment from UEFA when the Kilmarnock supporters sang (more than once) the “Killie Boys” in their most recent European campaign. Any idea as to why that would be?
As you are no doubt aware many other clubs supporters sing a version of the same song but importantly change a couple of words with no repercussions.
I have never heard the Celtic support sing the BB.I have however heard them sing songs that are also on the same “banned list” as the BB.
I do however see little / no benefit in continuing with any debate into whose fans are worse, whether that be singing banned songs or displaying offensive banners that attract fines or worse from UEFA.
Albertz11 16th August 2021 At 20:33
Maybe because “up to our knees in Ayr blood” isn’t deemed sectarian or racist ? And not whitabootery as I honestly don’t know , but what songs have CFC fans been banned from singing ?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58235195
Interesting to read that Barcelona are more than a billion pounds in debt and that the BBC are presently attributing the debt to the club. Strangely, the BBC makes no mention of any operating company, holding company, corporate entity housing the club, or engine-room subsidiary.
The current and past club presidents may be having a major spat about exactly who is to blame for the financial basket-case each has presided over, but they seem united in acknowledging that the debt belongs to their club, not some mythical and expendable operating company.
Paddy Malarkey 17th August 11.50.
Exactly my point Paddy. The offensive language used in the BB could have been replaced by an alternative, which would contain no references that could be considered sectarian or racist. This is what Gordon Smith has said on many occasions.
Songs sung by the Celtic support that mention a Irish terrorist organisation are also banned.
Albertz11 16th August 2021 At 20:33
Don’t recall any punishment from UEFA when the Kilmarnock supporters sang (more than once) the “Killie Boys” in their most recent European campaign. Any idea as to why that would be?
…………………..
There are no sectarian undertones to their song?
…………………..
Rangers FC is also ordered to make a public adderss announcement at every official fixture be it international or domestic stating that any sectarian chanting and any form of the Billy boys is strictly prohibited. UEFA appeals body judgement May 24, 2006.
……………….
Again you try to drag other clubs in to the debate.
…………..
I have never heard the Celtic support sing the BB.I have however heard them sing songs that are also on the same “banned list” as the BB.
……
You confirm the BB is on a banned list, yet are willing to promote the changing of words to try and make it not.
I would post the whole UEFA letter but am unable to and i can’t be bothered to type the whole thing out.
But if you can be bothered i would like to see this list of songs sung by celtic fans that are on UEFAs banned list
paddy malarkey 16th August 2021 At 01:54
…………………
Explosive Rant? should read Green spills a few home truths.
Albertz11 17th August 2021 At 16:13
Eh , not quite . What I’m saying is that UEFA have deemed the Billy Boys , as sung by TRFC fans , to be racist , and that altering the words doesn’t remove this connotation – it is banned and not to be sung . If you have a problem with Killie fans singing their version (which is not banned ) then mibbes bring it to UEFA’s attention ? Or even ask Gordon Smith , who seems to be an authority in these matters . TRFC and CFC (and all other)fans should be hammered for their sectarian/racist/repulsive add ons , but you’ve yet to say which CFC songs are banned .
Paddy Malarkey 17th August 19.53.
The original words to the “Marching Through Georgia” tune, which was sung at Ibrox when i first attended would be my own personal preference to replace the BB.
A goal, a goal we are ready to acclaim
A goal, a goal to win another game
We follow Glasgow Rangers our hearts are strong and true
We are the people who cheer the boys in blue.
No sectarianism, No Racism.
Re – Celtic. Unsure and frankly not interested in what pro-IRA chant they were fined for. Could have been one of many i guess.
Strange urge to bite my tongue and rub ointment into my ribs. It’ll pass I’m sure.
Big Pink 17th August 2021 At 22:34
“…Strange urge to bite my tongue and rub ointment into my ribs.”
%%%%%%%%
On the assumption, BP, that this ‘strange urge’ was triggered by Albertz11’s post of 20.49 [or have I missed something?] I will express my own astonishment [not necessarily ‘disbelief’] that Albertz11 or anyone else ever heard such words sung to the tune of ” while we we were marching through Georgia”.
I’ve no idea what age Albertz11 is , but I’m 78,and never in my puff have I heard his version [actually not quite bad version as an acceptable supporters’ song!] of the lyrics as being those of the song that I ever heard from huge numbers of fans of the original Rangers FC of 1872 foundation, sadly now deceased.
And I don’t think I’ve heard them from the fans of TRFC?
It would be lovely if we were were to hear them ( or a similar ‘innocent’ but genuine supporters’ song) over the tannoy at Ibrox.
Or is that already happening? I haven’t attended a match there since before the EBT scandal broke, and I stand ready to be corrected.
BP & JC
From FF 3 years ago.
Oct 5, 2018
Add bookmark
#4
A goal, a goal we are ready to acclaim
A goal, a goal to win another game
We follow Glasgow Rangers our hearts are strong and true
We are the people who cheer the boys in blue
That’s what my da taught me
A goal, a goal we are ready to acclaim
A goal, a goal to win another game
We follow Glasgow Rangers our hearts are strong and true
We are the people who cheer the boys in blue
That’s what my da taught me
That’s the one from my youth, many years ago.
Oct 5, 2018
Add bookmark
#9
A goal, a goal, we’re ready to acclaim
A goal, a goal, to win another game
and 50,000 voices
will cheer the whole game through
we are the people, who cheer the boys in blue
same as above, different verse.
Not sure how many times you attended Ibrox back in the early 70s but like me if you had you would have heard this song being sung.
I honestly wasn’t aware of an alternative version (BB) until a number of years later when i heard it sung on a supporters bus.
Was going to comment on your sore ribs BP but will bite my tongue.
?
Following on from my previous post of 23.57.
Oct 6, 2018
Add bookmark
#95
This was the first Rangers song I can remember singing with my papa when I was a wee boy.Clear as day.He used to sing this with me.Now Ive got my eight year old and four year old singing it.They both punch the air at the chorus.
We are the people who sing of victory.
We pull our football glories from Kilmarnock to Dundee.
We follow Glasgow Rangers our hearts are strong and true.
We are the people who cheer the boys in blue.
A goal!A goal!We’re ready to acclaim.
A goal!A goal! To win another game.
We follow Glasgow Rangers our hearts are strong and true.
We are the people who cheer the boys in blue.
In the interests of being fair and honest there are others posters who say they haven’t heard the above version and have only ever known the BB being sung. As previously stated i remember the inoffensive version being sung during my early years whilst attending games at Ibrox and by relatives at family gatherings.
Albertz11 18th August 2021 At 00:25
The stanzas that you post are redolent of Georgian speech patterns and mores , so I would suggest that they haven’t been heard at Ibrox (which didn’t have 50,00 seats until 1997) since that era . Can’t you accept that the song is banned in it’s entirety , having been banned by Uefa having been judged by them to be racist ? It’s the modern usage that is the problem , not what was sung in the last century .
paddy et al
oor friend (albertz11 aka reasonablechap or RC) is trying to wind everyone else up with his claptrap!
The Larkhall Loyal would be horrified if such a gentle ditty had ever been composed – never mind sung – and immediately disown it!
What – no bitterness, arrogance, hatred, entitlement (to name but a few of the WATP traits)? That’s jist no us!
Whilst the club lobbies and lies, searching for loopholes in every contract it signs, I s’pose it’s understandable that it’s fans will endeavour likewise to find a loophole pathway to singing abhorrent songs.
Sevconian legalese differs considerably from the modern world in what constitutes a loophole. Shouting it loud and often counts, and it’s well kent that muttering WATP under ones breath when putting pen to paper nullifies that signature………Unless it’s wee Craigy’s nom de plume, which will stand alone eternally as a Craig Whyte enduring act.
We cheer for the boys in blue. With the perilous state of their finances would it not be more current to sing we cheer for the boys in red, with apologies to Aberdeen. Big night for Celtic, squeaky bum time on the other side of the city.
I see the ibrox club have started a lottery to help build the museum. The plan was to use some of the last share issue to future proof the club and help build the museum for some kind of celebrations in about ten months time. Can anyone build a museum in ten months?
Just by the by, I’ve been reading an email that came in to my inbox on 4th August, from the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) relating to the murder of a journalist in Malta.
I lift this from it:
“Caruana Galizia was an outspoken investigative journalist and commentator who wrote extensively on corruption in Maltese politics, as well as exposing dodgy business deals and organized crime connections in the small island nation.
She was killed in October 2017 just outside her home when her car was blown up by a remotely-detonated bomb. She had been working on stories that built on revelations contained in the Panama Papers, among others. In her final post on her website, published shortly before her death, Caruana Galizia wrote: “There are crooks everywhere you look now. The situation is desperate.”
The assassination provoked outrage from journalists..”
Caruana, God rest her soul, risked her life in being a proper journalist exposing really, really dirty muck by powerful figures in government.
What we have here in wee Scotland are ‘journalists’ who sell their souls for the sake of a lie in a matter of Sport!
How any of them can look at themselves in the mirror without dying of shame is something of a mystery!
What would they not be prepared to do in a matter that was life-threatening?
Now, I have been criticised before now for referring to things Germanic.
But it is hard for me not to look at the refusal of our journalists to tell the truth about the death of RFC of 1872 as an indication that they share the journalistic cowardice of the German Press ( in general) that clicked its heels, shouted ‘Sieg heil’ and swallowed the really, really Big Lie of Nazism, and would be prepared to propagate any lie to save their skins.
Rangers Football Club of 1872 foundation is in Liquidation, does not exist except as a entity that is in Liquidation.
TRFC is a new creation , as even old Big Hands happily acknowledged!
What’s in it for ‘journalists’ to deny that simple truth?
Cluster One 18th August 2021 At 23:09
I see the ibrox club have started a lottery to help build the museum. The plan was to use some of the last share issue to future proof the club and help build the museum for some kind of celebrations in about ten months time. Can anyone build a museum in ten months?
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I think you’ve misread, Cluster One. It’s a mausoleum, not a museum. ⚰️⚱️??
With regards to the singing of the BB ditty and the versions sung by fans of other clubs, such as Kilmarnock and Dundee; personally I think all songs going on about being up to your knees in someone’s blood are disgusting.
What kind of person is it that dreams these things up in the first place?
With the The Rangers malmo’ed out of the champions league and the associated financial implications, coupled with a revitalised Celtic, I think we are about to witness a season like no other in respect of honest mistakes.
We know selling the “prized assets” will be unpopular with the peepul, hence unless a ridiculously generous offer comes in, it looks like we might be in for another sh1t or bust season from Mark 2 Rangers. One last push from the “soft” investors under the assurance the Masons in Black will see to the Champions League riches next year.
Brothers Beaton, Madden et all…..do your duty!!!
normanbatesmumfc 19th August 16.13
The “revitalised Celtic” you mention have been knocked out of the Champions League qualifiers by a scandinavian team and have won the home leg of a Europa League qualifier, have won one and lost one in the Premier League and progressed to the 1/4 finals of the League Cup where they have a home draw.
Meanwhile Rangers have …………………………………………………..
All about expectations really.
The comments regarding officials aren’t backed up by the facts but then again are another sign that we are back to some kind of normality in Scottish football.
Albertz11 19th August 2021 At 22:14
normanbatesmumfc 19th August 16.13
The “revitalised Celtic” you mention……………………..
Celtic had an abysmal season last year by recent historical standards. Disharmony was rife both internally within the club and externally between the club and fanbase. Results were poor, as was the standard of fare on show. The club captain, manager and CEO all departed within a short time-frame, as did several first team players.
A new CEO and manager have been recruited. A new club captain was promoted from within after rising through the ranks from boys club. Several new signings have been made and are settling in nicely. Younger players are emerging through the ranks from the junior teams, and early indications are that they have taken on board the new manager's intention of playing dynamic attacking football.
Again, early indications and favourable results have seen the disconnect gap between the fanbase and club closing. The new manager appears to have the full support of the board with regard to current recruitment, with apparently further additions being actively sought.
Any fears surrounding the choice of the new captain have been dispelled by his recent performances and leadership qualities coming to fruition.
On-field positions of weakness have been strengthened with the signing of an experienced goal-keeper, and again, early indications are that the new striker may turn out to be somewhat of a sensation in attack. Players it were assumed had their best days behind them are revitalised, and players assumed to have no future ahead of them are out performing expectations.
This can be in no short part down to the motivational, development, and communication skill-sets of the new manager. The terraces are buzzing with excitement.
I think “revitalised” can be considered a fairly apt adjective, and the vocality and new found confidence felt by the fans will testify to that.
No doubt there will be hiccoughs, as progression is made, but the improvements to date are highly visible and pleasing to the eye….In fact it is difficult to think of a more apt description.
As for your insider factual knowledge regarding the honesty and capabilities of Scottish referees, you have me there.
All I know factually, is that none were considered capable enough to whistle at the Euros. It is a fact they get a lot wrong or that wouldn’t be the case.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/7004012/no-scottish-referees-euro-2020-uefa-full-list/
The champions league millions referenced by Normanbatesmumfc is what really riles me. It should be pretty obvious to all that the sums on offer distort the dynamics in domestic leagues – especially so the smaller leagues in Europe. And we all know that money has the potential to corrupt.
I find it somewhat farcical that football authorities (SFA, UEFA, FIFA) have a pretty much zero tolerance approach to players and officials putting on a fixed odds coupon but then tempt the same people to fix things to secure huge cash prizes within the game.
Farcical, yes – but I am too old in the tooth to be surprised.
Albertz11 19th August 2021 At 22:14
Any comment on the choice of chants at Ibrox last night ? First half it was like being at a sash bash , building gallows and Bobby Sands eulogies . The Pope got a mention or two as well . Not a good advert for Everyone Anyone , and broadcast globally .
I see a The Rangers player was sent off at Ibrox last night. I wager anyone the referee was not from Lanarkshire!!!
Normal service will be resumed at the weekend though…
paddy malarkey 20th August 12.12
I was out for a meal with friends so didn’t see the game last night and arrived home just after full time. No idea what was being sung. A quick perusal on SM hasn’t shown up anything as far as i can see.
normanbatesmumfc 20th August 13.23
Stats from 20/21 Penalties F&A , Red & Yellow cards.
https://statbunker.com/competitions/ForPenalty?comp_id=664
https://statbunker.com/competitions/ClubBookings?comp_id=664
Shocking display of favouritism by our officials.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/19524147.ex-lord-advocate-contests-25m-claim-duff-phelps-malicious-rangers-fraud-case/?ref=twtrec
………………….
A FORMER Lord Advocate has questioned the right of a global finance company responsible for running Rangers when it financially imploded to claim misconduct in public office while pursuing a £25m claim over damage to its business over the malicious club fraud case scandal.
Lawyers for the former head of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service James Wolffe are taking issue with the action by US-based Duff and Phelps which comes after it was admitted their employees David Whitehouse and Paul Clark were maliciously prosecuted in their action taken against prosecutors and the police.
………………..
This will be the case JC pointed to the other day in the court Rolls perhaps.
Anybody know why Ryan Kent was wearing a different top from all the other players last night? Couldn’t be that thay hadn’t made one for him as they thought he’d be sold prior to ko ?
Albertz11 20th August 2021 At 14:11
You don’t have to take my word for it , here are some comments from fellow fans on Follow Follow .
Yesterday at 11:12 PM
#10
daven37 said:
Lots of good backing. Usual crowd of moaners.
Could do without the songs referencing the ira or Bobby sands for half the game.
Wish we’d bin the loyalist songbook, first half singing was a dirge.
Second half was tremendous with Rangers songs, a huge difference on RTV…definitely spurred the team on
Like Reactions:WeeJockMcPingPong, Davie2021, CampsieStar and 9 others
Another one bites the dust .
THE RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED
Company number SC425159
THE RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED
Company number SC425159
19 Aug 2021 Satisfaction of charge SC4251590015 in full
View PDF Satisfaction of charge SC4251590015 in full – link opens in a new window – 1 page(1 page)
As competent as ever.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58283351
How can cinch be on the title winning flags for 20/21 when they didn’t sponsor the leagues until the current season?
Cluster One 20th August 2021 At 15:52
‘..This will be the case JC pointed to the other day in the court Rolls perhaps.’
%%%%%%%%%%%%
Yes, it probably was.
I got the access number about 8.30 am , dialled in at 9.02 , got a recorded message that either the number I used was incorrect or the ‘meeting’ hadn’t begun. I held on for a few minutes until the line went dead.
I tried again, having checked the number on the email from the Clerk’s office, got the same response, tried again a few minutes later, and got the same result.
I was bloody annoyed that there was no message saying either that the hearing had been postponed, or dropped, or that the decision to let it be ‘open’ to the public had been reversed or whatever!
From the newspaper account it sounds as if it might have been interesting.
We’ll have to wait and see what comes up in November.
paddy malarkey 20th August 2021 At 20:35
“..19 Aug 2021 Satisfaction of charge SC4251590015 in full
View PDF Satisfaction of charge SC4251590015 in full.’
%%%%%%%%%
The interesting thing here, i think, PM, is that on 05 August 2021 ” all of the property or undertaking has been released from charge number SC4251590015 .
The charge was still shown on that date as being ‘outstanding’
The note on the Form MR05(ef) said this ” Statement that part or the whole of the property charged a) has been released from he charge b) no longer forms part of the Company’s property.
On August 19 whatever other monies due to Close Bros in respect of Edmiston House and the car park must have been paid, before the full charge could be finally ‘satisfied’, so that the Company that now owns the property/ properties doesn’t owe anything to Close Bros in respect of those properties.
But, it would seem, neither does TRFC.
Perhaps some poster with more understanding of these things might throw some light on this? Does Close Bros itself now have a stake in the company that owns the properties, or are they out of it all completely?
Is the developer of the site a major shareholder of the company that owns the site? Does TRFC have a stake in that company?
On 19 August
Albertz11 20th August 2021 At 22:27
As competent as ever.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58283351
How can cinch be on the title winning flags for 20/21 when they didn’t sponsor the leagues until the current season?
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
As I see it, there are only two possible alternatives.
Either cinch had been given prior permission by the football authorities to advertise itself on the flags at the dawning of the new season in which the flags were to be unfurled, or;
The football clubs that are Heart of Midlothian FC and Partick Thistle FC (but not their operating companies) are ethereal, metaphysical entities, capable of travelling backwards and forwards in the space-time continuum, hoovering up lucrative advertising contracts in the process.
The second option may seem a tad more unlikely, or even impossible, to most of us who inhabit the real world, but apparently there are some amongst us who believe that a football club formed in 2012 has already amassed 55 league titles and will celebrate its 150th birthday next year.
To them, believing in fairy-tales is a cinch.
Highlander 21st August 09.04.
Not going to bite.
Third option of course is possible. The SPFL, having fecked up a sponsorship deal by not informing cinch that the Champion club has a prior deal in place that would prevent them fulfilling many of their rights due to a pre-existing contractual obligation.
That of course would require the SPFL to be totally incompetent.
I find it mildly amusing how Rangers* supporters can incessantly lambast the Scottish football authorities for their incompetence, often justifiably, yet cite those same football authorities as faultless paragons of virtue whose word must be taken as gospel on the solitary matter of ‘same club.’ There’s nowt as strange as folk.
The Scottish football authorities, who’ve treated Rangers* abysmally in the eyes of rapeepil, have in reality treated the new Rangers* exceptionally well in the circumstances, treating a newly formed club as if it was its cheating defunct predecessor and informing UEFA, FIFA, the ECA, the ASA, the BBC and probably the AA, RAC and YMCA of that favourable treatment into the bargain.
I make no apologies for posting this informative article from 2016 once more on SFM, an article which summarises the lengths the media went to in order to airbrush inconvenient facts out of the picture and rewrite history surrounding the death of Rangers FC.
https://twohundredpercent.net/scotlands-football-press-history/
Anybody remember that RIFC had offered 27m shares at 25p to raise £6.75m?
In the current Private Eye ‘In The City’ column there’s the following:
“On 16th July, the share offer from RIFC closed. Managed by adviser Tifosy, it aimed to raise £6.75m by selling 27m shares at 25p each. Since when, silence.
Companies House does not recordthe allotment of any new shares. Questions to the club* have gone unanswered.
The indications are that the required £6.75m was not raised. If so, a disappointment to match the Scottish champions’ poor start to the season.”
I’ve just checked & there’s no ‘Statement of capital following an allotment of shares’ since the 4th of June. Oh dear, how sad, too bad.
*As an aside, why ask the club when it’s the holding company that’s issuing the shares? Could & should do better PE!
::
::
[Incidentally, I attempted to post that last evening, but was unable to do so because of some security issues with access…]
Jingo.jimsie 21st August 10.55.
I believe the total raised was just over £5 million, which is not an inconsiderable amount given that Season tickets sold out, MyGers subscriptions topped 30,000, Merchandise sold in record amounts, all this whilst we are going through a global pandemic with all the subsequent that brings.
I personally thought the minimum buy in of £500 was too high all things considered.
Did we ever find out the identities of the TRFC players/employees who tested positive for covid and their contacts, as revealed by Jon Lundstram ? Could these be some of the issues being managed by TRFC that are not in the public domain (M Beale ) ?
paddy malarkey 21st August 2021 At 19:22
”…Could these be some of the issues being managed by TRFC that are not in the public domain ..?”
%%%%%%%
One issue that is in the public domain raises some question about the abilities of those at lbrox to run even a menage!
On 4 August 2021 a ‘retrospective’ planning application was made by TRFC Ltd for work that had ALREADY been begun or completed by 3 August [ nothing terribly exciting, just to “build a structure to house the boiler plant remotely from the pitch, that will connect to the boiler plant pipework to heat the pitch”]
I love the idea of ‘retrospective’ planning application, otherwise known as ‘do the job and then apply for ‘planning permission” in the knowledge that Glasgow City Council will without question retrospectively grant permission , rather than tell you to demolish any such structure! … If, that is, you are a football club claiming falsely ( as any such claim must inevitably be) to be RFC of 1872….
Albertz11 21st August 2021 At 12:21
‘..I personally thought the minimum buy in of £500 was too high all things considered.’
%%%%%%%%%
The question surely has to be: on what basis of research was that minimum buy-in decided?
Given the points you make, Albertz11, about the monies expended already by the general run of ordinary fans the targeted ‘investors’ could not have been those ‘ordinary’ fans who can manage a season ticket, some kit and other merchandise, and perhaps an ’emotional’ shareholding of perhaps 500 shares or so?
On the contrary, I think the RIFC plc board completely misjudged the appeal of its shares in the circles of those who invest as investors in, rather than as supporters of, a football club.
As, I think, did SDM even when his was the real Rangers, and not [ as James Traynor and the rest of the world of football knows] the deeply troubled, ersatz, false version with no record of sporting achievement prior to 2012, which masquerades thanks to a disgraceful abandonment of Integrity by a ‘Governance’ body, as the good old Rangers of 1872 and is presently struggling again to keep the lights on by trying to issue shares to get some capital to meet running costs.
The market is wise to the situation: unless investing in a football club ( anywhere, never mind in Scotland) is handy for reasons unconnected with a club’s footballing success, it’s a very brave/very stupid investor who would invest seriously in hopes and dreams.
There are to be no tens of millions of CL money this season ( for any Scottish team!)
Those clubs which did not presume to budget on the basis that there would be can be relaxed, and treat any lesser amounts of UEFA competitions money as a wee bonus.
And those clubs which do not rely on ‘directors’ loans’ or ‘share issues’ to pay everyday running costs can be quite relaxed.
Their credit is good.
As are their names in the world of sport.
In which connection, let me add my congratulations to Hearts for the tremendous and successful effort to preserve their integrity and history by avoiding Liquidation, and for becoming ( shortly) a fan-owned club.
I can’t help asking, though: why didn’t they just shed their debt by going into Liquidation, and bouncing back, history unaffected, debt-free? As the Rangers of my grandfather’s time did?
Surely, surely, the SPL/SFL/ SFA and their ‘Administrators’ and some guy who had bought some of the assets could have cobbled up a ‘5-way agreement’?
Honest to God! There is no way that that would have happened: if Hearts had not exited Administration but had gone into Liquidation, they would have been treated as a Gretna, or Third Lanark and their ‘history’ would have ended.
Jingso.Jimsie 21st August 2021 At 10:55
“….As an aside, why ask the club when it’s the holding company that’s issuing the shares? Could & should do better PE!”
%%%%%%%%%
Good one, Jingo.Jimsie!
If they are going to write about a ‘Rangers’ they should at least know the whole truth about the club they think they are writing about!
The ‘5-Way Agreement’ is just the kind of potential scam that Private Eye used to love digging into!
It’s interesting that someone mentioned to Private Eye that the shares issue failed. I wonder who and why?
And why did Private Eye run with the story (albeit half-arsedly and ignorantly)?
Why not fire off a letter to Ian Hislop?
John Clark 21st August 23.28
Leaving aside your opinion on the OC/NC topic (i’m sure the transcript of the court case between BDO & D&P will be very interesting) i am still of the opinion that the total raised is more than acceptable.
A couple of questions John.
You infer that Rangers budgeted for CL football and the financial rewards it brings. How do you know this?.
You also infer that the Rangers name is not good “in the world of sport”, Once again i would ask how you know this?
If i am mistaken in your inferences i apologise
‘Albertz11 21st August 2021 At 12:21
I believe the total raised was just over £5 million…’
::
::
Thank you.
May I ask by what means you come to believe that the sum raised was £5m?
I haven’t seen anything in the SMSM about the (relative) success of the share issue.
I’ve looked at Companies House &, five weeks after the closing date of the offer, there appears to be no shares allocated to purchasers.
I’ve looked at the RIFC ‘Investor Information’ page & it appears not to mention this share offer at all. It refers to JP Jenkins as the trading platform (I appreciate that’s different from the new share offering) & doesn’t mention Tifosy at all.
The RIFC page at JP Jenkins isn’t up to date. (There’s no mention of ’55’, for goodness sake!)
The Tifosy Capital & Advisory website has a nice wee picture of a TRFC badge & states that it has worked with the club. If there’s any further information, it’s behind a sign-in.
So, please, where does your information come from?
Jingo.jimsie.
May I ask by what means you come to believe that the sum raised was £5m?
Comes directly from a well known person in Rangers circles is all i will say.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/19529592.sfa-defer-legal-expert-amid-rangers-spfl-row/
……………
he row between Rangers and the Scottish Professional
Football League over the Premiership champions’ refusal to comply with the league’s new sponsors will be settled by the
decision of one high-profile legal expert after both parties agreed to abide by his decision.
Rangers have refused to provide track-side hoardings, man-of-the-match awards or wear branding on their tops for online used car company cinch, claiming that the SPFL’s Rule 17 allows them not to comply with the new five-year £8m deal because they had a pre-existing contract with Ibrox chairman
Douglas Park’s second-hand car dealerships.
With the two parties at loggerheads – and cash-strapped clubs fearing that cinch may walk away from the deal – the matter was handed to the Scottish Football Association as appellant body and they have persuaded them to use the Arbitration Act Scotland to rule on the matter.
The SPFL and Rangers have each been instructed to appoint a legal representative (almost certainly a QC) and, between them, they will agree on the person – a Law Lord or another distinguished figure from the legal profession – to be the chair. They will hear the case put by both sides and, because this is a proper legal process, they will deliver a verdict which is both legal and binding.
It’s understood that the chair has yet to be chosen but there is no time limit as to how long the case can last once he or she is appointed, although the SPFL will be hoping for a swift conclusion in case cinch decide to terminate the agreement. In the meantime, under the conditions of the Arbitration Act, neither side is able to speak publicly about the issues involved.
On their official website, Rangers list their 17 commercial partners, from kit suppliers Castore to official logistics partner SEKO. Douglas Park’s companies are not listed and nor are any other car dealers.
Meanwhile, a report in England claims that the most recent Rangers share issue for supporters, which closed on July 16, has failed to reach its £6.75m target.
……..
Cinch will not be happy to miss out on a Glasgow derby next week.
Jingo.jimsie 22nd August 11.23
“there appears to be no shares allocated to purchasers.”
I can assure you that shares have been allocated.
https://statbunker.com/competitions/ClubBookings?comp_id=664
Shocking display of favouritism by our officials.
Your stats link highlights my point. No red cards against the The Rangers, although 3 (I think) were awarded retrospectively when of course they would have no bearing on the result of the respective games. The Lanarkshire Loyal did their bit.
Their incredible ability to dodge Covid infections, or be in the vicinity of someone positive was also staggering!
And now we learn “Cinchgate” is to be decided by a legal expert and both sides have agreed to abide by the decision. I wonder who this legal expert is and more importantly, what age is his grannie??
John Clark 22nd August 2021 At 00:06
Jingso.Jimsie 21st August 2021 At 10:55
“….As an aside, why ask the club when it’s the holding company that’s issuing the shares? Could & should do better PE!”
%%%%%%%%%
Good one, Jingo.Jimsie!
If they are going to write about a ‘Rangers’ they should at least know the whole truth about the club they think they are writing about!
The ‘5-Way Agreement’ is just the kind of potential scam that Private Eye used to love digging into!
It’s interesting that someone mentioned to Private Eye that the shares issue failed. I wonder who and why?
And why did Private Eye run with the story (albeit half-arsedly and ignorantly)?
Why not fire off a letter to Ian Hislop?
………………………………………………………………..
Hello again Boys and (possibly) Girls,
I haven’t posted for at least a year or two, but I do take in the blog on a relatively frequent basis, especially if there has been something nefarious going on in Scottish Football (i.e. most of the time).
However, I have returned to the keyboard for a particular reason. I note the comments above regarding the item in the last edition of Private Eye outlining the Sevco Begging Bowl fishing expedition, risibly known as the latest Share Offer. I share everybody’s views on the Blog with respect to that item. However, I’m somewhat surprised that nobody has raised an eyebrow at, never mind mentioned, the other article about the Cry for Cash which was in an earlier edition of the Eye.
I would have flagged this up much earlier, but other matters intruded and I have had considerable difficulty in logging on (now sorted by our excellent blog dwellers!)
The article I refer to was in No. 1552 edition of 23rd July. It is in the same column, “In The City” on page 42 (not 94). It is headed, “PLANET FOOTBALL: RA—ERS”.
The first two paras deal with the Share Issue, but the third gives the ‘background’. It reads,
“Rangers International was delisted from the AIM market in 2015 after it failed to appoint a new nominated adviser after a boardroom coup. Twice-disqualified director Craig Whyte sold control of Rangers in 2012, after the original club collapsed into administration.”
And that’s all there is, with no mention of liquidation, sale of assets, new club, tribute(!?) act, etc. I am really surprised at how limited in detail this piece is when you consider some of the more excoriating exposes we have seen in the Eye over many years. I may have to threaten to cancel my subscription. On the other hand, perhaps John Clark may wish to crack heads with ‘Slicker’ or Ian Hislop.
Regards to all
‘Albertz11 22nd August 2021 At 12:00
Comes directly from a well known person in Rangers circles is all i will say.’
::
::
That’s a very carefully-worded answer. ‘A well known person in Rangers circles’ could mean anything: a blogger, Alex Rae, even Andy Cameron – someone like that.
What it doesn’t infer is that it’s an official RIFC/TRFC source, because then you’d have written ‘a source within Ibrox’.
As an aside, I read today on the web that the take-up was less than half your source’s £5m figure. Who should I believe?
::
::
‘Albertz11 22nd August 2021 At 14:05
Jingo.jimsie 22nd August 11.23
“there appears to be no shares allocated to purchasers.”
I can assure you that shares have been allocated.’
::
::
At time of writing (and I’ve just checked again), there are no new shares recorded as being allocated on RIFC’s page on the Companies House website. The last information re allotment of shares is dated the 4th of June. If there were shares allotted & paperwork submitted since the share offer closed in the middle of July the record would indicate the take-up & there would be no need to dance around the amount bought/sold.
jingo.jimsie22nd August 19.50
You are correct that it is not a “source within Ibrox” but it is someone who i would trust 100%
It’s up to you who to trust as i have no idea who has said the take up is £2.5 million but time will tell who’s right i guess. I know who my money would be on.
A friend bought shares and received notification at the beginning of the month that his application was successful and that he was now a Rangers shareholder. Certificate now framed and on his wall.
Albertz11 22nd August 2021 At 08:11
“…You infer that Rangers budgeted for CL football and the financial rewards it brings. How do you know this?.
You also infer that the Rangers name is not good “in the world of sport”, Once again i would ask how you know this?”
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
” Budgeted” was perhaps too specific a word to use, I grant you, and apologise accordingly: no more than your good self(?) do I have access to the actual budgeting processes of TRFC or its parent company- or of how well-managed and overseen the processes are.
I should perhaps have used words like ‘ had high hopes’ [ possibly with some reason, given TRFC’s good season], and, as I was suggesting, miscalculated ,on the basis of that hope, that well-heeled ‘investors’ might come forward in numbers in the belief that a decently extended run in the CL was a possibility, with the prize money that that would bring in.
As for the ‘good name’, well, the whole of world football knows of :the failure to exit Administration, the death of RFC of 1872 by Liquidation, the creation of a new footballing entity by CG which had to apply to join a league and seek membership -for the first time- of the SFA, and that TRFC is not at all the solid Rangers FC of 1872 foundation.
It is aware of the ‘contempt of Court’ action brought by the FCA against DK, and it also knows of the hand-to-mouth living on Directors’ loans, the numerous [rash?] Court cases lost, and the observations made by one Judge about the veracity of statements made by a legal adviser of ‘Rangers’ to the Court(!) in the course of one of those actions.
By any reckoning, there is quite a lot there that would suggest that RIFC plc/ TRFC are names that are somewhat tarnished.
And the failure to attract enough investors to a very small ( in relative terms) share issue is perhaps a sign of that?
Haywire 22nd August 2021 At 17:16
“….John Clark may wish to crack heads with ‘Slicker’ or Ian Hislop”
%%%%%%%%
Welcome back, Haywire.
I don’t subscribe to ‘Private Eye’, but I buy the occasional copy.
I think that that little piece ‘“Rangers International was delisted from the AIM market in 2015 after it failed to appoint a new nominated adviser after a boardroom coup. Twice-disqualified director Craig Whyte sold control of Rangers in 2012, after the original club collapsed into administration.” was actually deadly!
Okay, it doesn’t give the fully comprehensive account [ Hislop is, I think, the kind of Englishman who equates ‘Britain’ with ‘England’ and would as readily talk about the ‘Jocks’ as others might talk about ‘Paddies’: that is, he shares the view that anything north of Watford is only of occasional relevance]
It doesn’t have to be comprehensive: its message is loud and clear: ‘was delisted’….’ twice-disqualified director’ ‘original club collapsed into administration’ : phrases such as these are apt to put potential investors on their guard!
The point being that, ‘market-perception-wise’, ‘Truth’ in the abstract doesn’t matter a damn to potential investors !
What they want to know is whether they themselves may be screwed by the particular people they are being asked to invest in!
And mentions of ‘original club collapsed into administration’ , disqualified directors being associated with the club, Administration…would make any potential investor ask himself some questions.
In my opinion.
Where does one start with some of today’s articles.
Ranger fans allegedly abusing new Celtic Japanese star. Was it not so long ago they were up in arms about one of their players being abused. We are assured Rangers will be looking into this incident and maybe Police Scotland. How much is enough in situations like this. Hopefully it will amount to more than a slap on the wrist.
SG to Liverpool down the road according to Souness. One title and no cups in his time at Rangers to date. I’m sure the Liverpool fans are salivating at the possibility of a favorite son following in the steps of some high profile and successful mangers of the club.
Neil McCann says the upcoming game is a “tester” for Celtic. Based on recent results I would think the opposite would be the case. A rebuilt and rejuvenated Celtic team has apparently found their feet while the boys from Ibrox seem to have a hangover from last year’s title and feel all they have to do is show up. Did the referee in today’s game go off script and award a penalty to Ross County.
$5 million for Patterson. The board and SG must be at odds over this. $5 million is a nice piece of change for someone still finding his place in the game, while no offers appear imminent for the stars. Interesting conversations at the highest level I’m sure. That money can go along way in the next little while, especially with the CL money down the tubes. What happens if the EL money does a disappearing act this week as well. Do they end in the next level of EL competitions.
vernallen 22nd August 2021 At 23:18
‘..and maybe Police Scotland.’
%%%%%%%
Oh! maybe that might compromise any findings!!
Honest to God.
What an absolute bast.rd the whole ‘saga’ has been- destroying faith in Scottish Football governance, in Police investigation, in the Crown Office/PFS!
SDM has a lot to answer for!
Not that he has been been held to be in any way accountable!
Adjectives deleted!
Vernallen 22nd August 23.18
Ranger fans allegedly abusing new Celtic Japanese star. Was it not so long ago they were up in arms about one of their players being abused. We are assured Rangers will be looking into this incident
All those concerned should receive a lifetime ban from attending games at Ibrox or anywhere for that matter.
The supporters club in question should lose all rights to apply for tickets for the foreseeable future.
Police Scotland should be knocking on doors tomorrow morning.
Message must be hammered home that any Racist or Sectarian behaviour is not acceptable and will not be tolerated.
Albertz11 22nd August 2021 At 23:56
I know it’s not your job to firefight and you’re brave enough to show face after another fans’ faux pas, but can you also condemn the sectarian and other add ons lustily sung by TRFC fans throughout the first half of the game? Again, you don’t have to take my word for it if you didn’t hear it yourself – there are loads of posts on social media of the idiots glorying in creating bad news for the club. They seem to think it’s OK to do it away from Ibrox . The police will probably have to stop and search supporters buses of all clubs as they are also openly boasting about the drink and drugs culture on the coaches .
Paddy malarkey 23rd August 01.00
I wouldn’t call it brave Paddy but appreciate your comment. Only seen the second half yesterday but have no qualms regarding condemning ANY sectarian or racist singing.
I have already made my feelings clear on a couple of Rangers platforms regarding not only the singing but the general behaviour at some away games, although European nights at Ibrox also seem to attract a similar type of person.
Albertz,
You’ve been taking too much deludamol. Maybe you should take advice from Rabbie Burns
“O wad some Pow’r the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us!”
Another weekend and more racist shame on the The Rangers.
Good to see the Masons in black are still up to speed though as The Rangers defender Balougan delivers a clearing punch from a corner, any top class goalkeeper would have been proud of. Maybe the ref got mixed up by the strip colour and thought he was the goalie!!!
I wonder which brother will get Sunday’s gig???
normanbatesmumfc 23rd August 09.54
Your penalty claim may have had a bit more merit had the referee not already blown for a free kick to Rangers.
The references to MIB are both tiresome & childish.
Celtic fans believe referees favour Rangers
Rangers fans believe referees favour Celtic
All other fans believe referees favour Rangers & Celtic.
normanbatesmumfc 22nd August 14.30
Your stats link highlights my point. No red cards against the The Rangers, although 3 (I think) were awarded retrospectively when of course they would have no bearing on the result of the respective games. The Lanarkshire Loyal did their bit.
……………………………………………..
Can i take it that when Rangers players are red carded and subsequently have them rescinded the same logic applies?
“Can i take it that when Rangers players are red carded and subsequently have them rescinded the same logic applies?”
For that to happen they have to be red-carded in the first instance!!!! Not happening….
==========
Albertz11 23rd August 2021 At 10:41
0 0 Rate This
Your penalty claim may have had a bit more merit had the referee not already blown for a free kick to Rangers.
In the 7th minute of the match and yet
Albertz11 23rd August 2021 At 06:31
0 0 Rate This
Only seen the second half yesterday
tykeboy 23rd August 11.42
In the 7th minute of the match and yet
Albertz11 23rd August 2021 At 06:31
0 0 Rate This
Only seen the second half yesterday
…………………………………………………………….
Watched the Sportscene highlights (22/08) this morning in which the incident in question was shown.
………………………………
normanbatesmumfc 23rd August 11.23
Tell that to both Ryan Jack & Alfredo Morelos.
Albertz11 23rd August 2021 At 10:41
Celtic fans believe referees favour Rangers
Rangers fans believe referees favour Celtic
All other fans believe referees favour Rangers & Celtic.
I’m not so sure. Do any other fan groups have supporters buses named after whistlers? Ironically the same bus being investigated in the Kyogo incident.
https://external-preview.redd.it/I7iHNrp9l0agudraALBinkq6gavtAtfz-KeaQhhYHLA.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=dce96db1f87afcef5a1f0044651c6308552781b2
Corrupt Official 23rd August 13.14.
You do realise that it’s a bit of a p-take similar to the fans who used to have Dallas99 on the back of their shirts or more recently Duffy55.
Mr Beaton does indeed frequent, or used to, the Crown Bar in Bellshill but has also has been known to attend Franklyns Bar, also in Bellshill, which is favoured by Celtic supporters.
Having a relative who lived a couple of miles away i have been in the Crown when JB was in relaxing and found him good company.
Doesn’t excuse him for the worst, without doubt, refereeing performance i’ve ever seen, at Ibrox in August 2017 v Hibernian.
Just to be perfectly clear on the subject, i refer you to my post of 22/08 at 23.56.
Paddy Malarkey.
Anything you can add?
A MAN has been charged after an alleged hate crime at the Championship match between Arbroath and Partick Thistle on Saturday.
Cops have launched an investigation into the alleged incident following a report filed to them involving a 21-year-old during the match at Gayfield Park.
The game finished 3-1 to the home side, with Dick Campbell’s men coming back from a one goal deficit to put the early league pace-setters to the sword.
But the game has been overshadowed by the reported incident in which it is alleged a hate crime took place at the stadium.
A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “We can confirm that officers received a report of an alleged hate crime which took place at Gayfield Park on the afternoon of Saturday, 21 August.
“As a result, a 21-year-old man was arrested and charged in connection with the incident.
“He is expected to appear in court at a later date.”
Neither club will be commenting on the matter while the case is live.
Statement from Rangers regarding bus incidents.
https://www.rangers.co.uk/Article/club-statement-230821/7f6WQdRTXmvH7PMczZv0Hv
Swift and decisive action from the club.
Alberta11 — 23rd August 2021–16:12
Rangers have to be commended for the action taken against the offenders. Now as you have stated earlier maybe the broom that swept this lot out can be put into action again, and, have a rea clear out of this type of fan. No club in any sport needs or desires to be fighting this unnecessary and totally uncalled for behavior. Hopefully Police Scotland will take a similar stance and deliver more than a slap on the wrist to the offending parties.
Albertz11 23rd August 2021 At 14:14
Thats as it should be . Hopefully the same will be happening should any incidents occur on Sunday at Ibrox .
And it appears it was the Parks Group after all .
https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport/19532523.rangers-chairman-halts-scottish-fa-arbitration-case-court-win/?ref=twtrec
And , yes , MIB favour the cheeks
Albertz11 23rd August 2021 At 14:14
This
Some well known troublemakers in away end were escorted from the ground during the game (not for the first time). I’m not sure what exactly they were accused of doing or if it had anything to do with this incident.
EDIT: Have just looked on match thread on P&B and it would appear that this is the incident in question.
Well known troublemakers????
I know the guy involved and he definitely isn’t that, or racist as is being alleged. And hearing from many who were at the game, the guy in question has (again) been racially profiled to pick him out for attention .
And this
We will just need to agree to disagree but I have personally witnessed the same individual behaving in the past on other trips to away matches in a manner that I would consider totally unacceptable.
I have no idea exactly what happened yesterday and it may well be that on this occasion he is completely innocent and did nothing wrong.
Haven’t a clue myself – was unaware until you brought it to my attention . We never win at Arbroath so I never go !
paddy malarkey 23rd August 2021 At 19:31
All very strange this. Parks must have produced evidence to the court confirming a binding sponsorship arrangement with TRFC and if so why not just present that documentation to the bungling SPFL.
Vernallen 23rd August 18.56.
For once, so don’t get used to it, i agree with everything you say.
paddymalarkey 23rd August 19.54.
Thank You. If it’s the same person that’s defending himself online then he does seem to divide opinion among the Thistle support.
gunnerb 23rd August 20.00
TODAY’S court ruling once again underlines ongoing concerns regarding the corporate governance and leadership of the SPFL.
These concerns are shared by many of the SPFL’s member clubs. We have complied with the SPFL’s own rules but today’s court hearing was one that could easily have been avoided if those responsible had adopted a more consensual and less confrontational approach.
The Executive of the SPFL required to carry out effective due diligence before entering into its contract with the new league sponsor. Instead, an inadequate and antagonistic approach appears to have been adopted; one that it is hard to imagine is in the best interests of the SPFL’s member clubs.
@Gunnerb – a strange business indeed especially when there are no obvious conflicting official sponsors of TRFC. I would imagine club boardrooms up and down the SPL will be less than happy.
Would anyone know whether there is a requirement to register sponsors as part of wider UEFA regulations? I recall that Man City were challenged a couple of years back on value attributed to a sponsorship deal on (I think) naming rights for their stadium with assertion that it was over-inflated to get round FFP.
No danger of course of the SCottish football authorities getting an over-inflated deal – over-inflated egos maybe…
Albertz11 23rd August 2021 At 20:28
“TODAY’S court ruling once again underlines ongoing concerns regarding the corporate governance and leadership of the SPFL..” EDIT
Just to be clear ALbertz11. Is this a quote from the aggrieved party Parks, who won an interim interdict or is it from TRFC?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58310362
May affect some players in our leagues .
This sums it up perfectly.
Presumably all of Scotland’s football journalists are currently seeking answers from both the SFA and SPFL, as to why their legal representatives argued against their own rules in the Court of Session, and lost.
gunnerb 23rd August 21.00
Just to be clear ALbertz11. Is this a quote from the aggrieved party Parks, who won an interim interdict or is it from TRFC?
…………………………………………
Club statement.
Gunnerb 23rd August 21.00
POH Statement.
A spokesperson for Park’s of Hamilton said: “We can confirm that Park’s of Hamilton Holdings Ltd has today been successfully granted an interim interdict at the Court of Session in Edinburgh, to prevent the SFA from proceeding with its arbitration process in relation to the sponsorship of the SPFL.
“For the purposes of Park’s interim interdict application, the Court considered that the failure to include Park’s went against the SFA’s own rules. This ruling now prevents the SFA from proceeding with an arbitration process without Park’s of Hamilton being involved.
“We were surprised that both the SFA and SPFL vehemently argued against this petition, despite the fact that their rules clearly state that any arbitration process should feature all interested parties.
“Park’s is proud of its association with the SFA and Scottish football, which dates back over 50 years, so it is with regret that we were forced to take this action.
“This is a decision we did not take lightly but felt it had to be made as a matter of principle, to protect the rights of club sponsors throughout all levels of the game.”
@Albertz11 – thx for the PoH statement. It begs the question as to why SFA and SPFL did not consider PoH an interested party (no contract shared?). And what evidence was put forward to secure the petition.
Of course the case itself has not been arbitrated yet so more money can be pi££ed up the wall on lawyers fees by both sides.
Kenny McIntyre is a hopeless ‘chair’ of the Sportsound programmes.
Tonight he repeatedly interrupted, and repeatedly allowed English to interrupt, Broadfoot as the latter was trying to explain that the SFA is not a PARTY to the dispute between the SPFL and TRFC and that no ‘victory’ in the actual issue in dispute was won by TRFC.
The Court granted interim interdict because the SFA , in merely arranging an Arbitration Tribunal, did not consider Parks of Hamilton as being an ‘associated person’ and therefore that they had no place in the scheme of things.
An ‘associated person is “any body or person who is involved in Association Football in
Scotland under the auspices of or pursuant to a contract with a member..”
The Court, one assumes, must clearly have been shown evidence that there is a contract between Parks of Hamilton /Parks Group [or whatever] as a legal entity and TRFC Ltd.
But why the reluctance on the part of TRFC to comply earlier with the request to provide the SFA/SPFL with that evidence of pre-existing contract?
Is there some wee peculiarity about the contract that made TRFC unwilling to produce it when asked?
Will the SFA now arrange to have Parks included as a party to dispute? Or will it appeal against the interim interdict ?
If the SPFL simply abandons the attempt to get TRFC to honour the cinch contract, will cinch pull the plug?
Ohhhh , the excitement of a legal case where one regards all the parties as baddies and therefore doesn’t give a tuppenny toss who loses the case!
Hell mend the lot of them
One side in this regrettable scenario has plenty of experience in running up legal fees. If only one side or the other had been a little quicker off the mark it may have/could have been settled in a gentlemanly manner. Who reviews these documents and who was involved in the negotiations. If Rangers felt they were in position of strength why not bring the issue forward, why it seems delay firing the opening round, and causing more hard feelings directed their way. Or do they just enjoy everybody against us.
Vernallen 23rd August 22.59
If Rangers felt they were in position of strength why not bring the issue forward, why it seems delay firing the opening round, and causing more hard feelings directed their way. Or do they just enjoy everybody against us.
……………………………………………………………..
I would refer you to Stewart Robertson’s statement of 04/08.
Robertson has written: “We have been in private dialogue with the SPFL Executive since 8 June on this topic but, given that they have sought to make the issue public, it is appropriate for you to be aware of the circumstances involved.
“When the SPFL Executive put forward the written resolution with regards to the new sponsorship contract, Rangers immediately notified Neil Doncaster that, in line with Rule I7, we would be unable to provide the new sponsor with many of their rights due to a pre-existing contractual obligation.
Given that the issue was raised by Rangers (when there is no need under the rules for Rangers to do so) immediately after the written resolution was raised, why did the SPFL Executive proceed to sign the contract when they knew there was an issue and without further checking with Rangers as to its extent?
Did the SPFL Executive inform cinch prior to the contract being signed that it could not provide all of the rights it was contracting to provide due to SPFL Rule I7?
…………………………………………………………………………
It would appear that Rangers informed the SPFL IMMEDIATELY that they were” unable to provide cinch with many of their rights due to a pre-existing contract”.
Despite being in receipt of this the SPFL proceeded with the deal knowing there was an issue. Were cinch informed of this at the time?
So rather than revert to type and attempt to attach blame to Rangers, why not ask questions as to the competency of the SPFL & SFA in this matter.
As i said in a previous post we had both bodies “vehemently” arguing in the Court Of Session against their own rules and losing.
In the words of the late Donald Rumsfeld “The whole thing is a total clusterf***”.
John Clark
23rd August 2021 At 22:58
0 0 Rate This
……..
Does Parks of Hamilton really fall under the definition of an “associated person”?
“Associated Person means any body or person who is involved in Association Football in Scotland under the auspices of or pursuant to a contract with a member”
Of course, we are told, Parks of Hamilton have a contract with a member (TRFC); however, I think the nub of the matter will resolve around the meaning of “involved in Association Football”.
Remember it is Parks of Hamilton that is claiming the association – not Douglas Park personally.
Does a sponsorship deal mean that if a company buys advertising in the Daily Record it would be accurate to say that it is involved in journalism? (Assuming of course the Daily Record is itself involved in journalistic endeavour)
If a bus company transports kids to school each day, can it be said to be involved in education?
In my opinion, it is highly unlikely a court would consider an ancillary service provider to be “involved” in the core business of its customers.
I suppose, since the nature of the relationship is arguable, the court has taken the view that there is a prima facie case. But, the decision to grant or deny an interim interdict is not taken on the balance of probability, but on the balance of convenience. The course of action will (or should) be whatever causes least harm to both parties until the case is heard in full.
Having been granted its interim interdict, Parks has won only the right to state its case at a full hearing. Nothing more.
Personally, I’d be surprised if the interdict stands for very long. Either this is another case that the authorities are trying to lose against an Ibrox club or a competently argued appeal will result in a recall of the interdict in short order.
Incidentally, I notice that cinch is a subsidiary, and complementary to the core business, of British Car Auctions
It is odd that advertising of cinch is deemed unacceptable to the Ibrox club when adverts for Central Car Auctions are regularly seen in the stadium.
…just sayin’
Albertz11 23rd August 2021 At 16:12
Statement from Rangers regarding bus incidents.
https://www.rangers.co.uk/Article/club-statement-230821/7f6WQdRTXmvH7PMczZv0Hv
“The individuals involved have been identified and will be banned indefinitely from all Rangers games.
Furthermore, the RSC of which they were members and travelled with to the game, have been banned from receiving tickets for future fixtures.”
Swift and decisive action from the club.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Swift and decisive you say, however I have a couple of issues;
Firstly, the statement is very much lacking in detail. Who have been identified? When will they be banned? Which supporters club? No names suggests to me they are sheltering these idiots from the shaming they deserve. Also The Rangers are far from bastions of truth so without names how do we know the individuals concerned will not be at future games?
Secondly, and despicably, there is not one word of apology offered to Kyogo. It’s a sad indictment of the club/company, they cannot bring themselves to apologise for their supporter’s behavior and show the abused some sympathy.
Some things never change…..
Now that Ibrox has identified the low-life racists responsible, it will be a gross dereliction of duty for Police Scotland not to demand the names and addresses. Sevco have taken probably the only action available to them, and have trousered a bus-load of season books for re-sale to boot.
However, this is a criminal matter, and therefore the responsibility of the police to apprehend and present the culprits to the courts for judgement.
John Clark 22nd August 2021 At 23:16
Haywire 22nd August 2021 At 17:16
“….John Clark may wish to crack heads with ‘Slicker’ or Ian Hislop”
%%%%%%%%
Welcome back, Haywire.
I don’t subscribe to ‘Private Eye’, but I buy the occasional copy.
I think that that little piece ‘“Rangers International was delisted from the AIM market in 2015 after it failed to appoint a new nominated adviser after a boardroom coup. Twice-disqualified director Craig Whyte sold control of Rangers in 2012, after the original club collapsed into administration.” was actually deadly!
Okay, it doesn’t give the fully comprehensive account [ Hislop is, I think, the kind of Englishman who equates ‘Britain’ with ‘England’ and would as readily talk about the ‘Jocks’ as others might talk about ‘Paddies’: that is, he shares the view that anything north of Watford is only of occasional relevance]
…………………………………………………………………………..
Hello again John,
I think that you are being a bit tough on Ian Hislop, especially since, despite his accent, he is not English! He had a Scots Father and Grandfather. To make things even more complicated, he was born in Swansea. Whatever, he could certainly have played for Scotland, but I suspect that his singular lack of interest in any sport would make that scenario pretty unlikely.
I should also mention that, based on a number of documentaries he has written and presented over the years, he definitely takes more than an interest in matters well north of the M25.
Regarding the article in the ‘Eye’, I appreciate what you say in relation to the negative effect on the Share Issue, but the inference is, yet again, that Whyte sold the club to Green and, as a result, the good ship R——rs missed the iceberg, did not go aground in the Suez Canal and sailed on into calmer waters.
normanbatesmumfc 24th August 10.56
Firstly, the statement is very much lacking in detail. Who have been identified? When will they be banned? Which supporters club? No names suggests to me they are sheltering these idiots from the shaming they deserve.
…………………………………………………………………………………….
Have you considered that Police Scotland may want to interview those concerned, which may result in criminal charges being brought?
I believe the bans take place with immediate effect.
The supporters club has been identified on Social Media but was incorrectly named on this site (CO 23/08 13.14)
Statement from the Westwood RSC East Kilbride.
Even though I didn’t travel to Dingwall last Sunday as the senior committee member I thought I had to make a statement about the unsavoury video that was filmed on our supporters bus and put on social media. What was on that video is totally unacceptable and everyone that was involved have been handed lifetime bans and will not be allowed to travel on the bus again. Our club was founded in 1966 and I personally have been involved with it for over 40yrs and have always prided ourselves for being a family club and have a large membership of all ages and I can assure you that the views and actions of the lads in the video are not those of myself or the members of WRSC. We have accepted the decision R.F.C and will work with them going forward and reiterate to everyone there is no place for this behaviour not just in football but in Society as a whole, although I can’t condone the vile abuse one of our female members and a young boy received after their phone number was accidentally posted online
On a personal note I’d like to thank all the people who know me and the good members of my club for their kind words of support it’s very much appreciated
David Cook Treasurer WRSC
Not the greatest statement if i am being honest.
I would agree with you that Rangers should have apologised to the player concerned publicly. ( Maybe they did so privately)
In the interests of being balanced i am unaware if Rangers players/employees (Nacho Novo & Jimmy Bell) have received apologies for the vile sectarian chants directed at them previously.
Can anyone tell me how many UEFA fines this is for Celtic?. Genuine question.
https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport/19534218.celtic-st-johnstone-hit-uefa-fines-partial-stand-closure/
Albertz11, given your function on here of defending anything bad Rangers* are reported as doing, do you have a view at all on why they have made an issue of the Cinch deal apparently conflicting with Parks’ alleged sponsorship? I’m thinking particularly of their shirt sponsorship deal with 32 Red when the SPFL was sponsored by Ladbrokes – another apparent conflict of interest which did not raise their hackles? Any thoughts as to why this one matters? Thanks.
https://www.rangers.co.uk/Article/club-statement-240821/1kDDUU2uVg8I6zNAGBjtMW
paddy malarkey 24th August 21.20
No surprise as it was only a matter of time before someone was affected. This is going to be a recurring theme this season i fear.
Haywire 24th August 2021 At 15:49
‘..I think that you are being a bit tough on Ian Hislop..’
++++++++++
Haywire, thanks for that interesting info on Hislop: I had no idea of his ‘ancestry’, and should perhaps not have, and wish I had not, made facile assumptions!
I feel a letter to him coming on, in which I can put him absolutely in possession of the Truth about the ‘saga’ and the big black lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872.
I can readily believe that Hislop , as someone who has no interest in even the ‘gentlemanly sports’ , has no grasp of what happened after SDM’s/CW’s Rangers of 1872 went into Administration and simply assumes that it’s the same club that is again finding it difficult to raise capital via a share issue.
I believe that while ‘football’ in itself may be of little interest to him, the doings/misdoings of ‘governance bodies’ in sport and the questionable marketing of a newly created football club as being 140 years old and the most successful club in the world ,would be of interest to any editor of ‘Private Eye’.
And certainly, any editor would want to have a word with one of his reporters who fudged ( whether out of ignorance or perversity) the ‘Truth’ about a business falsely claiming to be what it patently is not and could not possibly be.
Yes, I shall certainly think of communicating with Hislop!
Albertz11 — 24th August 00:44
I find it hard to believe that Rangers representatives went into a meeting regarding the cinch proposal without any prior knowledge. If they prior had knowledge would it not have been prudent to bring some form of proof of their conflicted contract. That seems to be the route most businesses would follow, or, is this another case of Rangers trying to throw a wrench into what is obviously a poorly function administrative body. As you state plenty of blame to go around. However reasonable professional groups normally try and resolve issues behind closed doors, not in the media or blogsphere.
Vernallen 25th August 01.29
What meeting are you referring to?
……………………………………………………….
However reasonable professional groups normally try and resolve issues behind closed doors, not in the media or blogsphere.
……………………………………………………………….
“We have been in private dialogue with the SPFL Executive since 8 June on this topic but, given that they have sought to make the issue public
…………………………………………………………………………..
PMG has a post today indicating there are fairly stringent guidelines in regard to Covid for visitors to the country. Could these guidelines and the consequences lead to a number of Ranger players missing the trip along with the manager. Leaving your number one and two keepers at home seems very strange. Of course they were extremely confident these two games would be nothing more than glorified training matches, just a tad more intense.
I’m not saying that I will send it, but I’m minded to do so, when I look at it tomorrow and perhaps edit/re-write, but I have drafted this letter to the editor of ‘Private Eye’.
“Dear Mr Hislop,
In the ‘In The City’ column of the current issue of “Private Eye” there is a short piece referring to Rangers International Football Club plc’s latest attempt to raise some money by a share issue.
The piece has this: “On 16th July, the share offer from RIFC closed. Managed by adviser Tifosy, it aimed to raise £6.75m by selling 27m shares at 25p each. Since when, silence ”
So far, so accurate: and thus a great improvement on the ‘half-truths’ and wholly misleading crap written in the article headed “ Planet Football: RA-GERS” in “Private Eye” issue 1552 of 23 July, in the same ‘In the City’ column.
In that article the first two paras deal with the same Share Issue but it’s the third paragraph that now gives me cause to believe that “Private Eye” may, shamefully, have bought into the Big Lie at the heart of Scottish professional football
[That lie is that Rangers Football Club, founded in 1872, which went into Administration in 2012 owing tens of millions of pounds to HMRC and about 200 creditors, had somehow exited Administration and avoided Liquidation]
The paragraph purports to sketch the background to the share issue in question and reads as follows:
“Rangers International was delisted from the AIM market in 2015 after it failed to appoint a new nominated adviser after a boardroom coup. Twice-disqualified director Craig Whyte sold control of Rangers in 2012, after the original club collapsed into administration.”
The last sentence of that paragraph is simply not true. Craig Whyte lost control of the Rangers of 1872 when his club entered Administration, and he was in no position to ‘sell the club’: the Administrators took over.
Those Administrators signally [and questionably, in a case currently being pursued in the Court of Session by the very Liquidators] failed to bring the club out of Administration either by finding a buyer prepared to take on the massive debts or by securing a CVA.
The club therefore entered liquidation, where it still sits, although renamed ‘Rangers 2012 plc’.
So, RIFC plc is the holding company NOT of the Rangers Football Club that was founded in 1872, but of a club that was created by Charles Green in 2012, and admitted for the first time into Scottish Football in 2012.
The Scottish Football ‘authorities’ created the myth that ‘Rangers’ had not died, and that a club that they themselves admitted into Scottish football in 2012 as a new club was a club that was already 140 years old!
Unsurprisingly, the holding company of that club that was created in 2012 went to market on the basis that it was/is the holding company of a 140-year-old club that was the most successful football club in the world in terms of sporting achievement!!
This is not a mere ‘football story’ but a story of lies and deceit in the worlds of ‘sports governance’ and ‘Finance’, and of journalists who fail in their duty to ask hard questions, journalists with a taste for ‘succulent lamb’ and choice French wines(I’m sure you know the type) or journalists/ editors who are gut AFRAID to tell the truth. [No Maltese journalist heroines or hero’s here in bonnie Scotland]
Are you yourself gut afraid to take on ”Rangers” and challenge the Big Lie?
Surely not.
If ‘Private Eye’ can take on even the most powerful politicos and institutions of State , it can surely spend a minute or two asking questions of the Scottish football Association and the Scottish Professional Football League and RIFC plc about the miracle of the non-death by Liquidation of Rangers Football Club plc in 2012.
Do, I beseech you, have a look into what your people are reporting as ‘background’ to anything to do with RIFC plc. They have not been terribly diligent or thorough
Yours etc
Good luck with your effort, JC.
I tried a similar tack (pointing out the twists, lies, cavilling for the new club) at the time when the Eye was mocking Shifty McGifty/MacLennan in his new appointment, and the following was the final sentence in its response to me. (From someone in the office – not IH.)
“ While the club’s rebirth was a significant legal/business event, in football terms the new club still plays at the same stadium, in the same colours, with the same fans as before.”
“ While the club’s rebirth was a significant legal/business event, in football terms the new club still plays at the same stadium, in the same colours, with the same fans as before.”
So, by that reckoning, the Bootleg Beatles are actually The Beatles?
In other news, still no hint of an apology to Kyogo from any official The Rangers institution, that I’ve seen. It’s almost like they don’t do apologies!!!!!
John Clark 26th August 2021 At 00:16
I’m not saying that I will send it, but I’m minded to do so, when I look at it tomorrow and perhaps edit/re-write, but I have drafted this letter to the editor of ‘Private Eye’.
………………………………………………..
Well done John! More power to your elbow! It is certainly considerably better than I could have managed. I hope that you have not had second thoughts as to sending it this morning – please get it in the post today. Needless to say, my subscription to the Eye will be in question if we don’t get some sort of decent response.
fishnish 26th August 2021 At 10:33
“ While the club’s rebirth was a significant legal/business event, in football terms the new club still plays at the same stadium, in the same colours, with the same fans as before.”
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
normanbatesmumfc 26th August 2021 At 11:06
So, by that reckoning, the Bootleg Beatles are actually The Beatles?
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I wonder if Gretna 2008 can claim the honours won by the now defunct, original Gretna FC, since Gretna 2008 also play at the same stadium, in the same colours, with the same fans.
I suppose we should at least be satisfied with Private Eye’s acknowledgement of the existence of ‘the new club,’ despite the rest of their linguistic gymnastics.
@Vernallen – not quite sure I follow the logic there but I wonder whether these cases came to light due to the need to complete PCR tests prior to travel to Armenia (I don’t know if sports teams are exempt from what appears a blanket requirement to test pre-departure to enter Armenia).
I agree with Albertz11 that this won’t be the last case this season. I do wonder if the football authorities need to reassess the regime they operate.
Celtic Europa League draw in full as Hoops set for tough test
Rangers Europa League draw in full with Ibrox club set for glamour ties
From one of our leading print media outlets .
John Clark 20th August 2021 At 22:32
0
0
Rate This
Cluster One 20th August 2021 At 15:52
‘..This will be the case JC pointed to the other day in the court Rolls perhaps.’
%%%%%%%%%%%%
Yes, it probably was.
I got the access number about 8.30 am , dialled in at 9.02 , got a recorded message that either the number I used was incorrect or the ‘meeting’ hadn’t begun. I held on for a few minutes until the line went dead.
I tried again, having checked the number on the email from the Clerk’s office, got the same response, tried again a few minutes later, and got the same result.
I was bloody annoyed that there was no message saying either that the hearing had been postponed, or dropped, or that the decision to let it be ‘open’ to the public had been reversed or whatever!
From the newspaper account it sounds as if it might have been interesting.
We’ll have to wait and see what comes up in November.
………………………..
One for the Diary JC.
Albertz11 22nd August 2021 At 08:11
0
7
Rate This
John Clark 21st August 23.28
Leaving aside your opinion on the OC/NC topic (i’m sure the transcript of the court case between BDO & D&P will be very interesting)
…………………….
When will they be released?
Jingo.jimsie.
RANGERS supporters have once again backed their club in incredible fashion, with the recent supporter share offering raising c. £4.5Million.
At the end of a season of success on the field for the Light Blues, the opportunity was presented to fans the world over to secure their share of the club as it enters an exciting phase of growth.
We are delighted to have almost 5000 new investors, from 44 different countries, thus highlighting once again the global nature of the Rangers support.
It is a phenomenal show of loyalty, with those supporters providing a fantastic base for the club to develop its long-term strategy which includes amongst other things, the construction of New Edmiston House, further improvements to Ibrox Stadium and the club’s digital transformation strategy.
……………………………………………………………………………………….
Not the £5 million i had been told (have sent a message?) but considerably more than the £2.5 million you said was suggested by?.
Cluster One 27th August 2021 At 18:55
referring to
‘John Clark 21st August 23.28.
and
‘.Albertz11 22nd August 2021 At 08:11’
‘When will they be released?’
%%%%%%%
Just on the reference that Albertz11 made to ‘transcripts’ of Court cases, Cluster One: I don’t know that a full word -by- word transcript of the Court’s record of proceedings is ever made public. ( The Court transcriber does, of course, record every word)
I suspect that all that would ordinarily be available to the public is the official text of the Judge’s (or Judges’, where there was more than one judge on the Bench) opinion/s.
Those judgments generally do not give anything like a verbatim report, but summarise the facts and the legal points made in relation to the ‘agreed’ facts and the judge’s reasons for accepting/not accepting the interpretation of and application of the law put forward by opposing Counsel.
As far as I know, unless the news media reports that a judgment in a case has been issued, only the parties to the case are told.
The rest of us have to scan the list of published judgments to find out. This is easily done on a daily basis.
If you haven’t already, have a look at
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/court-of-session
[ my apologies, of course, if you are already familiar with that process! I’m still not myself sure how best to use that page’s ‘search box’, and I’ve enjoyed coming across quite interesting cases unconnected with football]
Albertz11 @ 1026hrs:
Well done – about a 66% take-up.
I’m curious as to why this is a ‘club (TRFC)’ announcement, rather than a ‘company (RIFC)’ one. There’s no mention of the share issue on the official RIFC ‘Investor Information’ page that I can see. It’s on the ‘Club’ pages.
I also particularly like the use of ‘circa’ in the statement. Isn’t there an accurate figure of monies received available? Are some investors still to pony up?
There’s still no update on RIFC’s Companies House webpage re allotment of shares.
From a quick look at fan comments, they’re not interested in New Edmiston House. They want the money to go on (media-frenzy, potential signing) Joey Veerman.
(I’m aware that some will perceive the above as nit-picking. I’m unrepentant.)
Jingo.jimsie 28th August 11.19.
Well done – about a 66% take-up.
……………………………………………….
As i have said previously when added to 47,000 season tickets, 30,000+ MyGers memberships and 250,000 replica strips sold, then a sum of £4.5 million is more than credible. All this during a global pandemic with all the subsequent uncertainty that brings.
Unfortunately, this afternoons match between
@EdinburghUniAFC
&
@CelticFCB
has been postponed due to a covid related issue.
I believe the issue relates to the home team but yet again reinforces my belief that this will reoccur throughout the season.
Maybe Albertz11 can help . Are the shares issued for TRFC or for RIFC ? I know the holding company holds all the shares in the subsidiary – have they increased the share base in the football club or in the holding company ?
Albertz11 28th August 2021 At 17:37
0 1 Rate This
Jingo.jimsie 28th August 11.19.
Well done – about a 66% take-up.
……………………………………………….
As i have said previously when added to 47,000 season tickets, 30,000+ MyGers memberships and 250,000 replica strips sold,
……….
Kind of makes one wonder what they’re doing with it all to rack up such debts.
Albertz11 28th August 2021 At 19:00
0 0 Rate This
Unfortunately, this afternoons match between
@EdinburghUniAFC
&
@CelticFCB
has been postponed due to a covid related issue.
I believe the issue relates to the home team but yet again reinforces my belief that this will reoccur throughout the season.
+++++++++++++++++++++
On 26 August I was sitting relaxing at home when my mobile phone rang. The caller was a contact tracer to tell me I was a possible close contact of a positive test who had travelled on the same supporters club bus as me to the Celtic v St Mirren game on 21 August. I was tested yesterday morning and received a negative result back today. I am double vaccinated so am free to go out again, but it only re-inforced to me that Covid is going to wreak havoc for a while yet…a long while in my opinion.
paddy malarkey 28th August 2021 At 19:37
‘..Are the shares issued for TRFC or for RIFC’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
I’ve always understood , paddy m, that a private limited company cannot make public share issues on the open market?
If that is so, then your question raises interesting questions as to who has bought shares in which company?
I suggest that it is entirely possible that the ‘public offer’ on the open market ‘bombed’, and that that perhaps is why ‘Private Eye’ was remarking that there had been total silence from RIFC plc since the public offer was made?
Could it be possible that the RIFC Board has used TRFC as the share issuer ( inviting share purchases for TRFC shares from existing shareholders of TRFC shares and from selected private individuals only, (thus avoiding trouble with the FCA ? ) and is trying to insinuate/propagate the idea, without actually lying, that the ‘Rangers’ mentioned as having raised money from a share ‘offer’ is RIFC plc
Surely not!
But I have decided not to send my letter to Ian Hislop just yet: I was in course of re-writing it, with a view to posting it on Monday.
But now I wonder whether, maybe, Hislop’s men have smelled a potential rat, and that the ‘5000’ new investors are investors NOT in a plc but in a wholly dependent business on which the plug could be pulled a la CW, leaving investors in TRFC Ltd with worthless bits of paper, and the Directors of RIFC plc in the clear as far as liabilities to them are concerned.
Certainly, in my view there might well be a big, stinking desperate rat cranking up of the ‘loyal support’, as appeared , it seems to me, to have happened at the birth of SevcoScotland/TRFC and the launch of RIFC plc?
I speculate, of course, and make no assertions.
But maybe ‘Private Eye’ are on to something?
Perhaps I shall ask them when I write, as I will undoubtedly do? Perhaps with a copy to the FCA?
The global reach of Rangers is astounding. 5000 investors in 44 countries ( would love to see a breakdown), surely based on past statements you would have expected a wider base of investors as they are allegedly the most successful club in world football. Were the investors given an assurance of a return (lol) on their investment or was this more of a donation than an investment. As the circus people used to claim, there is one born every minute. It took a long time for this story to reach the main stream media despite other reports the issue failed to meet its target.
vernallen 28th August 2021 At 23:09
‘..5000 investors in 44 countries ..’232
%%%%%%%%
What was the amount raised by the share offer, £4.5 million?
When I was last at school, 4,500,000 divided by 44 was 102,272.7.
So , given that the minimum investment was to be £500, that means that the average amount for the 44 countries would be 102,272.7 divided by 44 . That is, 2,324.
So on average, one is speaking of 4 and a bit ‘Rangers’ fans in each of the 44 countries( 2324 divided by 500)
Big deal!
That would suggest to me that, in general, a few individual fans in these 44 countries were personally approached and invited to ‘invest’.
But what do I know?
Other than to take anything said by RIFCplc/TRFC with a salt-mine’s worth of salt!
Honest to God.
That we have to put up with cuckoo-land inventive nonsense foisted on us by a 9 year old club!
‘….It is a phenomenal show of loyalty, with those supporters providing a fantastic base for the club to develop its long-term strategy…’
Surely this must be a spoof as the current club from Ibrox and their fans normally go to great lengths to tell everyone that the company and club are separate, so surely it would be the company and not the club whose long term strategy was being developed.
The problem with continually lying is that eventually the liar slips up.
‘John Clark 28th August 2021 At 22:19
paddy malarkey 28th August 2021 At 19:37
‘..Are the shares issued for TRFC or for RIFC’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
I’ve always understood , paddy m, that a private limited company cannot make public share issues on the open market?
If that is so, then your question raises interesting questions as to who has bought shares in which company?…’
::
::
The offering which closed on 16th July was to buy shares in RIFC (SC437060), a public limited company.
There are 33,415,200 (I think) shares in TRFC (SC425159), a private limited company. They have a nominal value of £1 each. These are wholly owned by RIFC.
It surely cannot be proper that a private limited company appears to be making financial announcements, even on Twitter, on behalf of a public limited company of which it is a subsidiary. It’s an opaque, misleading practice, at best. I’m sure that some investors will believe they’ve bought shares in the fitba’ club & not the holding company.
I believe Barry Ferguson manages a football team in Scotland which can be a time consuming endeavor, arranging training, monitoring transfer lists, some work in promotion, etc. How he finds the time to pen 2 or 3 columns a week for the DR is incredible. Hopefully his team is performing beyond expectations and his casual approach to the manager’s job is welcomed by the team’s board and fans. Is this an exercise in supplementing income now that EBT’s are a thing of the past.
The ‘Statement of capital following an allotment of shares on 13 August 2021’ is now up on Companies House for RIFC.
It’s for £4,088,588.57 net & there were 17,850,000 shares issued. Those shares were 25p each, indicating that the gross amount invested was £4,462,500 (which is indeed c. £4.5m, as indicated in the media) & RIFC paid expenses of £373,911.43 to Tifosy & others.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC437060/filing-history
The RIFC Company house filing appeared today.
A further 17,850,000 shares in Rangers International Football Club. ( the company which owns the club TRFC). Interestingly the loyal fans were asked to pay 0.25 for their shares as opposed to 0.20 that the various HNW individuals was been asked to cough up recently.
This takes the overall shares issued to 408,858,857.
JJ
“It’s for £4,088,588.57 net ”
As others have pointed out previously the £4,088,588.57 number isn’t the amount raised rather it is the total nominal share value in circulation post offering – derived from the product of the number of shares in circulation times the nominal value (£1).
There will be a fee to Tifosy which will dilute the overall cash receipt but I don’t know how much that would be.
I’d like to see the revised list of shareholders to see if any of the previous HNW individuals propping up RIFC increased their stake. That might explain the difference between the speculated amount raised and the actual.
Westcoaster @ 1119hrs:
Thanks for the correction!
A11
“As i have said previously when added to 47,000 season tickets, 30,000+ MyGers memberships and 250,000 replica strips sold, then a sum of £4.5 million is more than credible. All this during a global pandemic with all the subsequent uncertainty that brings.”
A11 – I agree with you. Most clubs could only dream of that level of support at any time never mind during a global pandemic. The question is, will it be enough given the scale of losses the Club will have racked up in FY 20-21? As I’ve written before, non-season ticket revenue during FY19-20 was £18.75m, almost all of which disappeared in FY20-21. Even with improved commercial revenues ( the true net value we are yet to see given the ongoing SDIR litigation) and increased prize money the P/L losses will, inevitably, be £25-30m minimum. Government loans and the recent share offering will cushion the cash implications of the projected P/L loss but the ongoing audit discussions cannot in any way be comfortable ones for TRFC’s MD. We are 36 hours away from the transfer window closing and last chance to get some cash in from player trading before the usual suspects are asked to make up the difference to get the accounts over the line with the auditors.
My earlier post saying the nominal share price of RIFC was £1 should have been 1p.
@John Clark – I think a wee mistake in your arithmetic…you appear to have divided twice by 44. Also appears that the shorthand in the press release confused the club and Plc (maybe a result of years of linguistic gymnastics…).
I agree with Westcoaster – these are tough times for football clubs and the imminent closing of the transfer window probably has many finance directors pushing players out – a buyers market for sure (even looks like Dortmund might sell their prized asset – but not to a team in Glasgow…)
Westcoaster 30th August 11.39.
The question is, will it be enough given the scale of losses the Club will have racked up in FY 20-21?
…………………………………………………………………
Only time will tell i guess. Rangers are fortunate to have a group of investors who have backed the club financially but this is not a sustainable model going forward and player sales are inevitable.
As wokingcelt points out though (above), it’s a buyers market at present.
All about playing for the jersey , after all .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58385989
wokingcelt 30th August 2021 At 13:42
‘..John Clark – I think a wee mistake in your arithmetic…’
%%%%%%%
Thank you, wokingcelt: always grateful to be corrected, both for my own sake and for the sake of everybody else.
I used to ‘get the belt’ at school occasionally for such ‘carelessness’
In my post of 26th August 2021 at 00:16 I gave the text of a letter which I was thinking of sending to ‘Private Eye”. I did not send that letter, but did a re-write it and will send off the the re-write later today.
This is the text of the re-write:
“Mr Ian Hislop,
Editor,
“Private Eye”
6 Carlisle St
London, W1D 3BN
Dear Mr Hislop,
In issue 1552 ( 23 July 2021) of “Private Eye” a piece headed “Planet Football :RA-Gers” featured in the ‘In the City’ column.
The piece related to a share offer made by Rangers International Football Club plc several weeks previously.
Now, while I know that ‘Football’ may not be your personal bag- indeed I suspect that your eyes may already be glazing over- I also know that publishing ‘Truth’ is what the ‘EYE’ purports to be about.
It is therefore with an admixture of anger and disappointment that I am writing to say that that ‘football-related’ article contains a full-blown untruth.
How so? you ask.
Well, have a look at paragraph three of the article. There you will read “..Twice-disqualified director Craig Whyte sold control of Rangers in 2012, after the original club collapsed into administration.”
Your reporter clearly has done no research of his own and has simply swallowed the nonsense propagated since 2012 by those known since then as the ‘succulent-lamb eating’ journalists of the Scottish mainstream media: for Craig Whyte lost control of the Rangers Football Club that was founded in 1872, when in 2012 it went into Administration. He was therefore not in any position to sell it.
Instead, the Administrators appointed under Insolvency legislation took over control. Those Administrators signally [and questionably: as witness the legal action brought against them by the very Liquidators who took over as a result of their failure] failed to bring the club out of Administration, either by finding a buyer for the club with all its debts ,or by means of a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement.
It is an absolute falsehood that Rangers Football Club of 1872 was sold to Charles Green or to anyone else. No, it went into Liquidation. In consequence, it had to surrender its share as a shareholder in the then Scottish Premier League(“SPL”), and thereby lost its entitlement to membership of the Scottish Football Association (“SFA”)
Accordingly, it ceased to exist as a recognised football club participating in Scottish professional Football. It remains in Liquidation to this day.
During the period of Administration the Administrators had agreed that, in the event that Rangers of 1872 did not exit Administration as a ‘going concern’ via either a sale or a Company Voluntary Arrangement, Charles Green’s company ,SevcoScotland, would have exclusive rights to buy such of the principal assets of the failed club that could be legally sold to it.
That was done, and Green, renaming the company ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’ promptly applied for a share as a new club in the SPL Ltd
That application was roundly rejected by the SPL.
Green then applied for a share in the (“SFL”). This was eventually (if questionably) granted.
On foot of becoming a shareholder in that League, the new ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’ was admitted into membership of the SFA for the first time.
That is an incontrovertible fact.
The panic-stricken Football Authorities were much too afraid and fundamentally too unprincipled to assert and insist that the ‘Rangers of 1872 ‘had died as a football club, and that ‘The Rangers Football Club’ that they themselves had only just accepted as a new club was most certainly not, and could not possibly be, entitled to claim any of the sporting achievements and honours of the dead club.
So a ‘Big Lie’ was created , the lie that somehow the Rangers of 1872 had exited Administration, had avoided being Liquidated, and had merely passed into new ownership, somehow wonderfully free of the scores of millions of pounds of debt it owed to HMRC and many other creditors!
You must realise, incidentally, that this is not just a ‘football’ story of ‘sports’ jiggery-pokery.
It is clear to me that questions ought to have been asked of the claim apparently made in the ‘Summary’ section of the Prospectus for the IPO of the Rangers International Football Club plc (“RIFC plc”) published in December 2012.
The Prospectus in my view misleadingly implied that prospective investors in RIFC plc would be investing in the ‘holding company’ of the ‘most successful football club in the world’ with a history of sporting achievement and success going back 140 years!
I believe that that is a fundamentally unjustified and false claim: the football club of which RIFC plc is the holding company is plainly ‘The Rangers Football Club’ of 2012 foundation and admittance into Scottish football in that year.
For a newly created football club to be allowed to make such an apparently false claim is utterly unacceptable to anyone of any Sporting Integrity whatsoever.
Even less acceptable is that ‘Private Eye’ should lazily and unconcernedly be false to its own principles by helping to propagate the myth that TRFC is the ‘Rangers’ of my grandfather’s era.
Yours sincerely,…”
Good letter, JC. Well done.
Dave kings last AGM in 2019 he stated the club could not continue with director loans converted into shares as this AD-Hoc strategy could only get them so far. The next step was the sale of players. The directors loans convert to shares is now tapped out hence the recent shares to fans. This was not as profitable as it was thought it would be. So player sales is all that is left ( champions league money may have been able for the need to sell players on hold until the next transfer window) so all that is left is player sales to create the next amount of cash, that clock is ticking.
nawlite 31st August 2021 At 11:51
%%%%%
Thank you, nawlite. The letter was posted this afternoon, first-class.
I’m indebted to the posters who raised ‘Private Eye’s’ comments about the RIFC plc share offer.
‘Cluster One 31st August 2021 At 12:19
…so all that is left is player sales to create the next amount of cash, that clock is ticking.’
::
::
I tried to post something I thought would be interesting about TRFC & player sales in this transfer window this afternoon. It appears that my comment has gone into moderation.
There’s no bad language or anything contentious in it. No doubt it’ll appear eventually & when it does, it won’t be read because it’ll be time-stamped 1645 today & positioned back up the thread. It’ll be out of date anyway.
It’s a shame when the board is crying out for content.
Jingso J
No comment from you that I can see from earlier.
I tried to post at approx. 1645hrs. When my comment didn’t appear, I tried to repost and received a message stating that it was a duplicate post.
I again tried to post at approx. 1915hrs & received a message that I’d already posted that content. Therefore I assumed that my comment was in moderation.
I’ve been caught in the spam blocker twice before today, with posts appearing hours after being submitted. I spent about 20 minutes this afternoon preparing my comment before attempting to post. There is a dearth of posts on here recently. Why bother taking the time to compose posts when they don’t appear?
Another transfer window closes and all those Rangers” stars who were of interest to big name clubs are still here. How much longer will they sit back and watch as competitors from across the city leave earning big fees for their club and enriching their weekly pay package. How will the board feel knowing that, according to reports, that a sale or two was necessary due to the missing CL money. How does one placate those who were reportedly targets and are still at Ibrox. How deep does the Covid outbreak run. So many questions, so few answers.
vernallen 1st September 2021 At 01:29
0 0 Rate This
Another transfer window closes and all those Rangers” stars who were of interest to big name clubs are still here. How much longer will they sit back and watch as competitors from across the city leave earning big fees for their club and enriching their weekly pay package. How will the board feel knowing that, according to reports, that a sale or two was necessary due to the missing CL money. How does one placate those who were reportedly targets and are still at Ibrox. How deep does the Covid outbreak run. So many questions, so few answers.
++++++++++++++
Far be it from me to defend ‘Rangers’ but the fact they’ve sold nobody for significant money suggests they believe they can cope financially without doing so. Only time will tell.
JC, re. your letter to IH, in the interests of accuracy, is it not “Company” rather than “Creditor” Voluntary Agreement?
Apologies, not been on for a wee while and probably too late for any correction. Needless to say the gist of the phrase remains the same in the context of your letter.
Well done….
upthehoops 1st September 09.44
Although not sustainable in the long run, by retaining the squad who brought the title back to Ibrox last season must be seen as a positive at this stage.
The talk is of Stuart Gibson “and partners” to significantly increase their shareholding this season.
I’m pretty sure that TRFC wanted to move players on. I’m surprised that they didn’t cash in on the likes of one or more of Kent, Morelos, Barisic and Paterson. Maybe the price wasn’t right. Makes the Barisic post match gesture on Sunday look curious though.
I agree with Albertz insofar as there is a double edge to this sword. They undoubtedly, by their own admission, need funds to complete the season. However they have kept their key players on board – at a spending rate they know could be catastrophic beyond the short term. So they have either made bad judgements over player trading on this window, or are sure of finding the funds. I don’t think they can be accused of bad judgement up to now given the progress that’s been made, so my guess is they’ve bet the farm on the ECL entry next season. For sure, they may judge that winning the Premiership is an easier route to that end than qualifying matches.
For all those interested, today’s edition of ‘Private Eye’ has another comment by ‘Slicker’ regarding the ‘astounding’ success of the Sevco Share Offer – could be another world record!
To John Clark – happy to be of assistance.
I’d like to clarify that i deleted my previous post as on reflection it showed a lack of respect to the other clubs in the Premiership, so not sure how it has appeared on the blog..
Its a massive gamble depending on CL money rather than player sales to remain heads above water. There are so many things that could go wrong, Covid could impact the squad in much greater detail than the current outbreak, injuries and suspensions could mount up, players could go off the boil, a sustained EL run could prove gruelling, etc. It will be interesting when the next set of financials do come out and how they are dressed up by the media with all the credentials they have in an understanding such statements. How often can they go to the well for investors. Interesting times ahead.
vernallen 1st September 17.23.
Many of your points could also apply to the club on the other side of the city whilst the others are of a speculative nature but yes “Interesting times ahead”.
A11 “Although not sustainable in the long run, by retaining the squad who brought the title back to Ibrox last season must be seen as a positive at this stage.
The talk is of Stuart Gibson “and partners” to significantly increase their shareholding this season.”
A11 – I would say “must” is a stretch. I think “could” would be more accurate given there is no doubt Rangers were actively trying to sell players but were unable to secure high enough offers for those deemed “sellable”. (or in the case of Patterson were unable to conduct the necessary medical as a result of his self-isolation).
Whoever is going to fund the cash deficit will, given the scale of that deficit, end up with a “significant” shareholding. Their support might be in the form of loans initially but inevitably further debt to equity conversion would result to ensure a going concern audit opinion. Depending on whether one uses 20p / share, which has been the prevailing “agreed” conversion rate up until the recent offering, or the 25p / share from that offering a £20m injection would result in 80m-100m additional shares being released. With 408m shares currently in circulation, an additional 80m-100m would indeed be “significant” and may raise constraints in terms of keeping individual benefactors below the “takeover” threshold.
normanbatesmumfc 1st September 2021 At 10:55
‘.. is it not “Company” rather than “Creditor” Voluntary Agreement?’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Yes it is! And that was after I had gone to the bother of looking up whether it was ‘agreement’ or ‘arrangement’!
Westcoaster 1st September 19.00
Your first point is a moot one as neither you nor i know with any certainty whether Rangers were ” actively trying to sell players” or not.
It is of course entirely possible for Stuart Gibson “and partners” to “significantly increase their shareholding” without Rangers issuing new shares.
From what I’ve heard/read , TRFC didn’t sell Patterson (and maybe other galacticos ) as they wouldn’t receive the purchase price in one payment . It may be that’s their modus operandi and they’re sticking to it .
Paddy M
There was a guy on Sky on deadline day (think he was an agent) who said that ‘a major Scottish club (sic) ‘ had demanded up front payment contrary to (in his view) all norms.
Kinda thought he was hinting at Leeds and Kent, tho that’s just me. He did say that selling club would not shift their position, and deal died.
Albertz11 1st September 2021 At 20:45
‘…possible for Stuart Gibson “and partners” to “significantly increase their shareholding” without Rangers issuing new shares.’
%%%%%%%
I am but a child in these matters and I’m in a position to contradict you.
But I would have imagined that if no new shares are issued, the only way for an existing shareholder/shareholders to increase his/their holding would be to buy from another shareholder-in which case RIFC plc receives nothing?
Am I wrong?
My post of 21.14 above : I hope it it’s clear that I meant to write ‘not in a position to contradict’.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC425159/charges
Not sure if it has been mentioned but it seems that all outstanding charges to Close Leasing have been satisfied, round about the same time as the recent share issue closed .
If the two are linked then King isn’t getting paid any time soon.
I hope we can all agree that the current business model of both CFC and TRFC is to develop players (either from their academies or from scouting talent else) and then selling on to generate a profit to cover costs elsewhere. This being the case I think it is not unreasonable to suggest that not selling a player in a transfer window is disappointing and may reflect on a failure of the business model.
Now, of course, you may take the view in the boardroom to not sell on the basis that sporting success is a viable option to securing funding in the short term (via CL next season through winning the league).
Ultimately it comes down to risk appetite.
Speaking personally I am happy that CFC have managed to stick to plan A over this transfer window with the thick end of £30m on three player sales.
Albertz11 –1st Sept/21 — 18:04
I agree that some of the issues I raised may apply to the club across the city, but with a robust financial position I think they are better positioned. There has to be some consternation around the boardroom table at Ibrox as they have not enjoyed the success of the other club in buying cheap and selling high. Was the director of football not rumored to be told to shift some bodies. How many times can they go to the well for investment, when will some of those investors look for some form of dividend, how many Stuart Gibsons are out there willing to throw money at the club.. What will the January window bring in regards to outgoings, and will the next set of financials dictate the course of action.
Vernallen 2nd September 01.18
Celtic are several years ahead of Rangers with regards to the business model you refer to. It would be churlish to deny this.
Rangers & Ross Wilson in particular have to replicate this.
Again as it seems no one read my last post (:-) king stated in his last AGM the AD-Hoc approach had served them well so far but could not continue. A working party was set to see that policy change and the need for player sales. Also did i catch the words bring the trophy back to ibrox? Under the name of The SPFL trophy, it has never been to ibrox before:-)
Albertz11 1st September 2021 At 20:45
‘…possible for Stuart Gibson “and partners” to “significantly increase their shareholding” without Rangers issuing new shares.’
JC 1st September 22.20
I am but a child in these matters and I’m (not)in a position to contradict you.
But I would have imagined that if no new shares are issued, the only way for an existing shareholder/shareholders to increase his/their holding would be to buy from another shareholder-in which case RIFC plc receives nothing?
Am I wrong?
A11 / JC – you are obviously both correct. It is quite possible for Stuart Gibson to purchase existing shares to increase his stake however those funds then do nothing to ease the cash deficit and any Going Concern pressure. The only significant shareholding we know to be “in play” is DCK’s. He holds 65,422,893 out of a total of 408,858,857 (Company House total – TRFC’s website is yet to reflect the recent offering). Stuart Gibson already holds 40,000,000. Were he to buy out DCK completely he would then hold 105,422,893 or 25.78% of RIFC.
There would be longer term benefits as indirectly this would assist RIFC in that it would remove DCK ( substantially – DCK still has an interest bearing loan outstanding) from the picture. In doing so this would eliminate some of the toxicity the RIFC currently has to bear as a result of having a convicted financial criminal as the major shareholder and perhaps take them a bit closer to being able to secure the services of a NOMAD, seek future institutional investors and enjoy some form of normal banking relationship to ease short term cash flow issues.
Intuitively, unless Stuart Gibson is going all in I don’t see him buying DCK’s shares in the short term and further loans and or new share purchases are more likely.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-58421171
I see the wretched BBC Scotland still cant refer to blatant racism issues as racist/racism/racial, continuing to refer to the problem as Sectarian in their title.
Even though the actual piece itself contains quotes from senior policemen and the actual charges contain the correct language, they still avoid the blindingly obvious. It’s as if they don’t want to offend a certain club/company/engine room subsidiary…..
normanbatesmumfc 2nd September 13.07.
https://www.rangers.co.uk/article/club-statement-02-09-21/20bn0Iq3p52ZsZD5YbCZDK
Westcoaster
2nd September 2021 At 12:04 Could push him close to the 30 percent margin then an offer would have to be made ( see dave king and the takeover panel) Can’t see him giving king the 25p a share that club 72 are locked in to buy, and why buy kings shares when they still have to pay back kings loan.
normanbatesmumfc @ 13.07
Too true!
a) “England players were pelted with cups and subjected to racial abuse” (Sky Sports)
b) “Celtic players were pelted with cups and subjected to racial abuse” (Me)
Discussion topic:-
Compare and contrast coverage by MSM outlets re the above – with particular reference to Scotland. Feel free to utilise prior knowledge of racial and/or religious intolerance.
Print media fights back !
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/rangers-new-media-partner-police-24896939
The ‘Investors’ page of Rangers FC website still shows that RIFC plc’s ordinary shares of 1 pence each are admitted to trading on JP Jenkins’ matched bargain platform’
I note from the link to the website of that ‘Trading Platform’ at
https://jpjenkins.com/companies/
that the ‘indicative’ share price is shown as ’19’
If they handled the most recent share offer they must know the actual price at which shares sold?
Did they not handle the offer? If not, who did?
JC – The recent RIFC offering was through Tifosy.
https://www.tifosy.com/en
Westcoaster 3rd September 2021 At 13:13
‘..The recent RIFC offering was through Tifosy’
%%%%%%%
Thanks, Westcoaster.
I suppose that means that JP Jenkins have been dumped?
Tifosy Ltd was incorporated as FZ Ventures Ltd in 2013, changed its name to Tifosy in 2016, and has Gianluca Vialli as a director. [ ‘tifosi’ is the Italian word for ‘fans’]
It made a loss of £1,080,031 for financial year ended March 2020.
paddy malarkey 3rd September 11.34
Fight has been lost.
They were KOd.
From DE AT H&H.
An open message to Daily Record employees.
You should have locked your social media accounts.
Too late now.
You can all thank Mark McGivern for the next few weeks of your life.
JC 3rd Sept ‘I suppose that means that JP Jenkins have been dumped?’
I don’t think so JC but I may be entirely wrong!! If I have understood the process after reading the blurb on the Tifosi site then Tifosi is more a vehicle whereby sports clubs can lower the cost of conducting a share offering by effectively passing on the costs of said offering to the purchasers by way of a transactional fee charged by Tifosi. The J.P.Jenkins platform is more of a trading platform for what is generally termed OTC (Over The Counter) share trading for buying and selling existing shares for companies who don’t qualify to be on a larger exchange eg LSE / AIM. Given that J.P.Jenkins still have RIFC up on their website I assume the trading facility is still active.
Albertz11 that’s a shocking comment! Both by H&H and by you for seeming supportive of it. It’s like ‘if you get us, we’ll get you worse’. No contrition, no remorse…just anger and retaliation at being found out for what they are. Typical, though, of most things related to TRFC nowadays – if they can escalate a battle, they will.
Albertz11 3rd September 2021 At 17:10
It appears some think that finger pointing rather than introspection is the way forward .
@A11 – can you help me out please. Where are you sourcing that message from? Many thanks
Albertz11 3rd September 2021 At 17:10
Hopefully he won’t be relying on being called a “Hun” as a defence .
https://www.followfollow.com/forum/threads/rangers-fans-singing-go-home-ya-huns-to-bayern-munich-ibrox-stadium-1972.114152/
Nawlite 3rd September 19.45
My only comment was in relation to the demise of the written press.
wokingcelt 3rd September 20.32,
No problem. It was on a Rangers fans forum.
I would like to make clear that i am 100% against ALL forms of Racism & Sectarianism. I have made this clear on various online Rangers platforms throughout the years.
Paddy malarkey 3rd September 20.38
Not sure how accurate but may offer an explanation.
…………………………………………………………….
The name given to Germans by Britons from WWI onwards was “H**”. This stemmed from Germany’s brutal actions in the Boxer Rebellion in China prior to the war.
For British people, “H**” then became a highly derogatory slur because there was so much hatred for Germany.
I am old enough to remember people being called “h**s” because of the way they behaved. This is why fans of both Rangers and Celtic used it against each other.
We moved on to other words but they didn’t. Over time, it has been used in an increasingly sectarian sense (h** schools, mini-h**s, etc.).
It was always meant to be deeply offensive.
Westcoaster 3rd September 2021 At 18:54
‘..Given that J.P.Jenkins still have RIFC up on their website I assume the trading facility is still active.’
%%%%%%%%
Thanks for your post.
If JP Jenkins still has RIFC plc as client, they are not as sharp as they ought to be in keeping their website up to the minute!
Showing 19p as the share price even after a well-publicised share offer at a price of 25p was reasonably successful cannot be of much help either to their client ( in that it undervalues) or to further prospective investors (in that it suggests that shares might be bought at around the 19p price)
I really don’t know terribly much about the world of shares and finance generally, [and I incidentally don’t mind if RIFC plc are ill-served by any of their agents or by H&H- (geez! surely heads must roll for that PR disaster?) ] but I don’t understand what’s in it for non-’emotionally’ motivated shareholders ( apart from those who are also salaried directors) in any business when no dividends are paid, and insolvency is perhaps being staved off by regular borrowings and more or less urgent share issues?
From https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/rangers-new-media-partner-police-24896939
“Rangers brought in the Heart and Hand Podcast as “Official Media Partners” to replace mainstream media outlets this season, meaning press conferences with manager Steven Gerrard are conducted by fans instead of journalists”
I ask, was it not ever thus?
Did not the whole of the SMSM [ excepting one or two individual journalists] buy into the Big Lie and help the forsworn, wretched ‘guardians of Scottish Football’ foist it on Scottish Football?
Were they not all ‘Rangers’-minded in that they were ready to replace the Truth of the death of RFC of 1872 that they themselves, front-page with pictures, reported one day with the Lie the next day that they had got it wrong and that ‘Rangers’ was alive and well?
Honest to God.
Such ‘journalists’ and newspapers deserve nothing but contemptuous scepticism.
And if the mouth of the new club that they tried, deceitfully, to tell us was 140 years old , a lie which they have assiduously propagated and fed for 9 years, now bites their feckin hand?… well, as wullie shakespoke said, ‘Our withers are unwrung’
Bad cess to them.
JC I believe the JP Jenkins indicative price is actually too high. As you point out buying the shares is an emotional investment and anything but a sound financial one. The recent share issue may have been a success because most of the money was going to the “club” but it further diluted the shares already in issue. I think there is something like 4x the number of shares as when it dropped to 20p. Has the perpetually loss making “Company” almost quadrupled in value? The J P Jenkins price reflects the price someone is willing to pay when the money isn’t going to the “club” and although someone paid that back in April I doubt they would now and it is even less likely when the accounts are published, even as an emotional investment.
I could be wrong but I think the CEO is the only salaried director and with DCK out of the picture none may be even claiming expenses.
Albertz11, RC (or whoever)
When the then Rangers visited Wolverhampton in 1961, the behaviour of their follow followers was likened to ‘maurading huns’ by the ENGLISH media no less (well the SMSM would never have written that, eh?).
So, its aw their fault!
Albertz11 3rd September 2021 At 22:04
So the word “Hun” was accepted by Rangers fans to be a derogatory term to be used against Celtic and Hibs supporters as it was believed they helped the enemy in WW2 ? They’ve stopped using it now so past indiscretions don’t count ? The fact that there are pages on many social media sites supporting the view that TRFC fans should reclaim the chant is an aberration and should be discounted ?The people claiming to have chanted it on Rangers supporters buses when passing certain schools and churches are lying ? And I haven’t a clue what you mean about Germany’s brutal actions in the Boxer Rebellion – I would be obliged if you could post a link – this is what Wiki says –
From contemporary Western observers, German, Russian, and Japanese troops received the greatest criticism for their ruthlessness and willingness to wantonly execute Chinese of all ages and backgrounds, sometimes burning and killing entire village populations.[120] The German force arrived too late to take part in the fighting, but undertook punitive expeditions to villages in the countryside. Kaiser Wilhelm II on 27 July during departure ceremonies for the German relief force included an impromptu, but intemperate reference to the Hun invaders of continental Europe which would later be resurrected by British propaganda to mock Germany during the First World War and Second World War.
And lastly , do you honestly think the words you replaced the term with , eg tarrier , taig paedo , are an improvement ?
Paddy malarkey 4thSeptember 17.35
Not my words hence my questioning the accuracy, but taken from a post on a Rangers fans forum from last week.
No mention of WW2 or Hibs in there so not sure where you’re seeing that?
Don’t use and never have done ANY of the words you mention.
ALL Racist/Sectarian comments be they Anti- Irish, Anti-English, Anti Protestant or Anti- Catholic should be Condemned, don’t you agree?
Albertz, posting what you did at 17.10 without any comment suggested to me you were supportive of H&H’s bellicose response to being caught out. If you were anti- that approach why not say so at the time…or are you only saying it now that you, yourself, have been ‘caught out’? Your past posture on here of defending/arguing against ANY criticism of TRFC* suggests to me you were happy with H&H’s response.
JC, regarding your comment that “…..the death of RFC of 1872 that they themselves, front-page with pictures, reported one day with the Lie the next day that they had got it wrong and that ‘Rangers’ was alive and well?”, I honestly don’t actually recall any of the journalists/newspapers admitting they got it wrong (with the possible exception of James Traynor, who was pretty much forced to on taking up his role with the new club!!). As far as I remember, they all told the truth on Liquidation Day, then a few days/weeks later reported quite matter of factly when doing their regular reports on Rangers* that it was in fact the old club…..with no correction, apology or anything. They simply ignored the truth they had previously written!
Nawlite 4th September 18.38
Rather than rush to judgement i instead prefer to wait and see what, if any evidence is produced that the newspaper concerned have themselves employed people whose own social media history contains either racist or sectarian comments.
If they have should they not also be held responsible and suffer the consequences?
nawlite 4th September 2021 At 18:477
‘….I honestly don’t actually recall any of the journalists/newspapers admitting they got it wrong.’
%%%%%%%%%%
You’re absolutely right, of course!
It was very careless of me to use words that suggested that any of them ever admitted that, as deniers of the fact of and the consequences of Liquidation, they are speaking as propagandist liars and enemies of Truth.
Albertz @20.25. You’re avoiding my point, deliberately or not I can’t say. Your refusal to judge the H&H guys for their already proven racist comments is what I’m using to tar you as a supporter of their racism.
I certainly hope that if Record employees have written things like the H&H guys have, then I hope they are dealt with appropriately. You haven’t yet said the same about the H&H guys despite being called out on it. You are shameless.
Nawlite @ 22.02
When cornered, like his alter ego RC, he always avoids the point – arguing (?) in ever decreasing circles.
It’s his MO.
If a company such as Nike, Coca-Cola, Tesco, Morrisons, Sky or Man Utd had been presented with the evidence (directly or through social media) that their PR/Communications agency had spouted this stuff they would be very publicly fired with immediate effect, no question. The lack of action from TFRC is frankly worrying for the message it sends to the fan base.
nawlite 4th September 22.02.
You have obviously not read my recent posts on the subject matter.
03/09 21.24
I would like to make clear that i am 100% against ALL forms of Racism & Sectarianism.
04/09 18.34
ALL Racist/Sectarian comments be they Anti- Irish, Anti-English, Anti Protestant or Anti- Catholic should be Condemned.
Just to make this clear for you. ALL Racist & Sectarian comments includes the H&H contributors.
Having seen some of the tweets/posts that have been shown online today then quite a few Record employees will be having a sleepless night. Desperately deleting many of their posts or in a couple of cases their complete SM history is too little, too late i’m afraid.
If this is an example of what is being said on a public platform, available for anyone to see, can you imagine what is being said in private WhatsApp group chats for instance.
Betc67. 4th September 22.12.
Hope the above post is perfectly clear with regard to my views on Racism/Sectarianism. I would be interested to see if you agree?
I am not RC? nor would i know him if he sat down beside me at Ibrox.
On the Close loan repayment Phil is saying that Close were the ones demanding repayment , I was initially of the opinion that it made sense to clear any debt with a high rate of interest and didn’t understand why it hadn’t been done sooner . It does seem however that bills and debt are only ever paid at Ibrox as a last resort so he may have got this one correct. If so then it could be situation critical once more with the transfer window closed any hopes of raising cash are becoming limited. Any money raised by the share issue has now gone to Close and fees for Tifosi and if those were initially intended as running costs then a shortfall will be evident shortly. The share issue was announced long before Malmo deprived them of any CL riches so a double whammy with that one. I note that Global financial situation is getting worse and inflation is taking off due to rising prices, increased wage demands and shortages as the effects of Brexit and Covid impact on our economy (another double whammy) The last situation you want to be in when this occurs is heavily in debt.
With Podcastgate the latest in self inflicted wounds and the Daily Record now effectively banned (along with the BBC) succulent lamb has turned to unpalatable spam. I think the phrase “don’t bite the hand that feeds you” may come home to roost especially when those hands were feeding you for free.
I’m afraid that Rangers* have chosen to go back to the dark days of Struth but the world has moved on and as Ian Archer once commented “Scotland would be a better place if Rangers* didn’t exist” .
It was Park and Co who employed a DUP councillor as their PR , It was they who aligned themselves with David Edgar and his chums and it was they who pandered to the bigot element in their support by introducing an orange top . I hope we are witnessing the start of liquidation#2 , we deserve better, fingers crossed we can finally rid ourselves of this poison.
Albertz11 4th September 2021 At 20:05
‘..if any evidence is produced that the newspaper concerned have themselves employed people whose own social media history contains either racist or sectarian comments.’
%%%%%%
I don’t know about that, Albertz11, but the newspaper concerned certainly supported and supports and propagates the untruth that ‘Rangers of 1872’ survived ‘Liquidation’.
That by itself leaves it exposed to the accusation that it employs people who are prepared to lie and support a lie.
And if those whose lie it supported now want to tear it apart, then hell mend it!
It deserves to die, tawdry, dirty wee local newspaper that it is.
In my opinion.
I appreciate that RIFC & TRFC operate on blurred lines of management & because of that there will be errors made.
Did no-one within the corporate hierarchy notice that the people they selected as their ‘Official Media Partners’ were named from a line in the song “Derry’s Walls”? (Perhaps better known within Ibrox as ‘The Cry Was No Surrender’?) The song celebrates the actions of the (Protestant) Apprentice Boys during (the Catholic) King James II’s siege of Derry in 1689.
‘Everyone Anyone’? Aye right!
Albertz11, thanks for your clarification that you think the comments from the H&H guys are racist and that your club should respond appropriately. Does this mean you believe TRFC should sever all ties with them as you suggest should happen with any DR employees who have used racist phrases in the past? If that’s the case, may I ask your view on why TRFC doesn’t come out strongly against the huge crowd who sing such things when attending games at Ibrox? It’s interesting that you can say “If this is an example of what is being said on a public platform, available for anyone to see, can you imagine what is being said in private WhatsApp group chats for instance.” about the DR employees, but failed to say similar about the H&H guys.
On another of your comments, you seem to be all over the place regarding the use of the word ‘hun’. In your earliest post on the matter, you are keen to explain to us how it came into use as a general “deeply offensive” term used by lots of individuals/(fan)groups to describe their rivals. Hours later, you hint that ‘hun’ is a racist term for TRFC fans by asking PM “ALL Racist/Sectarian comments be they Anti- Irish, Anti-English, Anti Protestant or Anti- Catholic should be Condemned, don’t you agree?”. I don’t understand how a word that you agree is used by everyone to describe a ‘bad person’ has become racist just because it is now mainly used by CFC fans to describe TRFC fans. Is ‘bstrd still okay because everyone uses it to describe the other?
Not wanting to get too deep into a mire here, but on the face of it (to me at any rate), songs like Derry’s Walls and the Sash are merely celebrations of something. Of course it will be contentious given the political controversies attached to them, but I don’t think there’s anything offensive or anti catholic or racist about them.
I don’t think it’s difficult to see or hear where racist sentiments are being expressed. The famine song is certainly horrible, as is the Billy Boys, but it’s not fair to attribute a sectarian or racist aspect to something which celebrates one’s own culture and history – and has no hatred attached.
The problem with bullies,liars and the corrupt is if you don’t stand up to them and allow them to get away with unacceptable behaviour then the problems escalate when they realise they can act with impunity. It is evident today in the corridors of power at Westminster where serial liars like the PM , serial bullies like the Home Secretary and the corruption on a scale that I have never witnessed before has become the norm.
The default position at Ibrox is one of bullying in order to get their own way . The media cannot be relied upon to hold them to account , what we see today is an internal squabble in the hope of extorting funds for a seat at their table . In the closed shop lodges people like David Edgar , Mark Dingwall and DUP man may impress the clientele with their tough talk of never surrendering but in the real world those successful in the land of diplomacy never act in this way. Once again they are seen as a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace by the rest of society .
Those at the SFA have been so invisible I would have to google their names to even know who they are , I do know what they are , they are cowards , cowards collecting a very large salary while hiding in the bushes.
What we need is for them to step up and deal with this rabble , and bigger naughty step.
TimTim
Sadly much of what is being played out here is the result of reducing everything to a binary state.
The ‘No surrender’ mentality is the essence of it. The deliberate use of the language of war to describe the process of multiculturalism makes it easier for those who can’t be bothered to think things thru for themselves to take a position.
The danger, as in NI is that it can quickly become a war. I fear that the Tories in particular have engaged with the ‘Ulsterisation’ of Scotland and consequently encourage hatred in the hope of dividing ordinary folk. Whether it’s a response to independence or merely a routine I don’t know, but it is deeply concerning for me.
@BP
Is singing “Here I am a loyal Klansman” and the “hood my father wore” acceptable ?
are they merely celebrations of a kulture ?
Of course if that kkkulture is one of hatred and the songs one sings promotes that kkkulture without actually saying offensive racial terms is it ok?
Better if they just stuck to singing about their club* , either of them.
TimTim
I agree with the last sentence, but I don’t think you need to hold with the tenets of the Orange Order to celebrate the Siege of Derry for example.
BP @ 13’52
agree completely and I think you have hit the nail on the head with the Tories and their scorched earth policy .
nawlite 5th September 13.30.
The two people concerned have resigned for Racist/Sectarian comments and will no longer contribute to H&H. If DE has made remarks of a similar nature then the club would have no option but to sever ties.
Rangers have continually made their opinion known on the singing of Racist/Sectarian songs and as you are no doubt aware have banned both individuals & supporters clubs in recent weeks. For me it will take the closure of stands or perhaps playing behind closed doors for the message to resonate.
It is not me who “is all over the place” as i have previously pointed out the comment you attributed to me was in fact taken from a post on a fans forum.
Big Pink 5th September 2021 @ 1341hrs:
I’m not clear if your post was a direct reply to mine of 1114hrs.
My post wasn’t about the song, although I supplied some background referencing it.
It was about RIFC/TRFC thinking that appointing a media partner whose name is derived from said song & is nothing but a ‘dog-whistle’ to certain groups was a good idea; up there with ‘orange taps’ etc..
JJ
Yes I understand what you mean. My point however was not a direct reply to yours. It was a broader one assuming the message in the song to have been delivered honestly.
The Daily Record
@Daily_Record
A number of historical tweets from some of our writers have come to our attention. The Daily Record takes any claims of discrimination or hate speech very seriously and we have launched a full investigation into the matter.
6:56 PM · Sep 5, 2021
International football and covid-19 .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58431607
It’s a real shame Easyjambo and Allyjambo no longer post. I’d be really interested to hear their views on how matters might progress following the recent fan ‘takeover’. I seem to recall either or both of them were active participants, in the funding at least. Despite living in Dunfermline, I’m not close enough to understand how DAFC operates as a fan-owned club (albeit Peter Grant’s appointment and resulting performances don’t look great!). I’d love to understand how such clubs go about making sure that sound decisions are made rather than fan-based ones e.g. as fans, we’d probably always want to buy that player to make the team stronger, but is it the right decision for the good of the club. What structure is put in place to stop the sort of ‘stupid’ decisions that the ordinary fan might make, while still allowing good fan-led decisions about stategy etc be made?
nawlite 6th September 2021 At 14:48
I’ve never been an advocate of fan ownership. it might work for some clubs but definitely wouldn’t for all in my view. In Hearts case it has been the aim since they came out of Administration, and their fans backed them to the hilt through the bad times. It will be interesting to see how it works out at the biggest Scottish club so far to put it in place.
In terms of demands made by fans social media is a guide to how unreasonable and completely unrealistic some fans can be in those demands. I doubt that will be the type to land in the boardroom though. In terms of my own club I have become increasingly concerned at the amount of people who now wish to try and define what you need to be and believe in to be a ‘real fan’. If some people had their way, only the following people would be allowed into Celtic Park.
Supporters of Scottish Independence
In terms of the point above, you MUST vote SNP in order to achieve this, even if you disagree on how they are running the country
You must HATE anyone who is a Conservative MP, or who votes for them. You can’t simply disagree with their policies, you must hate them.
You must demand that Celtic are publicly supportive of the Palestinian people.
I even read last week you should never go to a Weatherspoons Pub.
As someone who has attended Celtic games since the 1970’s I have never really cared about the political views of those around me. I like to think the club is open to all. This current push to demand conformity to the views of a very vocal group on social media really dismays me to say the least. Imagine them in a boardroom.
upthehoops 6th September 2021 At 17:50
‘..This current push to demand conformity to the views of a very vocal group on social media really dismays me to say the least.’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
I agree; but I would add that for 9 years now the (still relatively influential )SMSM has been pushing NOT just an ‘opinion’ with which others may disagree without rancour or bitterness, but an actual UNTRUTH that no sensible, thinking person can honestly accept; an untruth cobbled up by men who are a disgrace to themselves and their ‘office’ as supposed guardians of Sporting Integrity and Truth.
They are far more damaging than hate-filled ,nut-case social media types!
I note that a further share issue has occurred. A mere 80,000 penny shares but at the 20 pence price rather that the 25 pence price the “new” shareholders had to pay in the recent share issue. I assume therefore that this is from one of the “boys” although just a measly £16,000 “donation”. Still every little helps I assume.
I find it amusing the DR is gushing over the performances of two Rangers players and one with an affiliation with the club in the past. The WC qualifiers the performances were based on came against well known football powers Liechtenstein and Moldova. It is further interesting to note that none of this trio feature in starting roles ( maybe on a rare occasion) for their current employer, and, one of them has apparently gone out on loan.
David Edgard had a recent post on the uptick for H&H following the report in the DR. 60% increase in one area and 40% on other. Sounds like the PR department at Rangers has gone into overdrive.
Albertz on 5th Sept@15.26 (and other dates)
If you acknowledge that these anti Catholic racist and sectarian issues predominate (indeed are endemic and systemic in a largely Protestant society), then we have some agreement.
As for the ‘reported’ full investigation’ by the Daily going-down-the-circulation-tubes Record, nothing of note will happen. Also, recent ‘actions’ emanating from Ibrox are mere rhetoric and tokenism I’m afraid. From my perspective, nothing meaningful will occur in terms of humility and responsibility from within the WATP culture (that simply cannot be allowed to happen – David Murray will attest to that).
I take your point about severe action being taken against recaltritants, bu maybe, in the short term, you could suggest to the ‘masters’ at Ibrox that they might re-introduce your favourite little ditty from the 70’s which began:-
“A goal, a goal, we are ready to acclaim etc”
That might reduce hatred a tad!
Finally, on a lighter note, I found your explanation about RC’s blog identity comical – there was me thinking he sat IN your seat!
Giovanni 6th September 2021 At 20:35
‘..I note that a further share issue has occurred.’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Who would have been afforded the opportunity to buy shares at 20p rather than at the 25p that 5000 people in 44 different countries had to pay?
I think I would be bit miffed if I bought shares at one price and a few weeks later some director or large shareholder was able to buy them from the company ( as opposed to a private deal with another shareholder) at 5p less per share than I had paid.
Smells like a wee panicky sale to raise some readies that the ‘Share Offer’ failed to raise, or a wee favour to one of the in-crowd.
One never knows with RIFC plc, with its very limited borrowing powers and its need for cash here and now.
I find it curious that otherwise successful businessmen like the Parks and Gibson and whatshisname-King?- should be investing in and running a limp-along, hand-to-mouth enterprise, claiming that it is a 150 years old.
And one wonders whether our football governance bodies are questioning the possibility that TRFC might last the season?
No harm in a financially sound and thoroughly credit-worthy football club borrowing finance from banks or such like for major works such as ground improvement, ‘venues’ or museum purposes or such like.
But to be making regular share issues in order to meet basic day to day expenses is surely indicative of some financial stress?
Really, who would invest in a football club so living from hand to mouth?
Will there be another ‘insolvency event’ this season?
Will there be another ‘Duff and Phelps’-like ‘Administration’?
Will there be ( could there ever be?) another Charles Green?
Oh, be still my beating heart!
The thought of it all is too, too much!
John Clark 7th sept 2021 1:10
It would a leap of faith to believe that the football powers in Scotland could even consider such a scenario. Aren’t we constantly advised by Ranger fans that they are financially stable and all is well. It’ll be interesting when the next set of figures come out with the potential of the losses over the last few years topping $100 million. Sounds like there is nothing to worry about, another share issue to the world wide fan base will take care of that, barring a repeat of the last world wide share issue.
The Times (London) report on the Daily Record hate tweets.
…………………………………………………………………………………..
The Daily Record has confirmed that it is looking into claims that journalists used offensive and discriminatory language on Twitter.
The newspaper ran a front-page story last week disclosing that members of the Heart and Hand football podcast, an official media partner of Rangers FC, had used anti-Catholic and sectarian language in the past.
In response Rangers supporters compiled a dossier containing distasteful comments allegedly made by Daily Record staff members. In one tweet it is claimed that one journalist made an obscene comment about the Prophet Muhammad and also tweeted: “Where are the IRA when you need them?” alongside an image of the 2014 Commonwealth Games opening ceremony in Glasgow.
Others are accused of homophobic comments, with one writer allegedly stating that he had wanted to “stab” a “really, really feminine gay guy”.
It is alleged that writers referred to members of the travelling community as “gypos” and “pikeys” and used slurs against disabled people, Rangers supporters and the Queen.
David Edgar, the founder of Heart and Hand, said in a video posted online that he wanted to “ask the Daily Record if they will abide by the same conditions which they asked us to abide by. Will they apologise for this? Will the members of staff be disciplined?
“And given that the Daily Record said that any organisation who are facing an investigation for this should have their press privileges revoked, can I take it that the Daily Record will be voluntarily agreeing not to cover any Scottish football matches whilst any of their staff who are under investigation for hate tweets are investigated?”
In a statement, the Daily Record said: “A number of historical tweets from some of our writers have come to our attention. The Daily Record takes any claims of discrimination or hate speech very seriously and we have launched a full investigation into the matter.”
The Glasgow-based newspaper had reported that Ian Hogg and Cammy Bell, management team members of the podcast, had used offensive language. Both men resigned and issued public apologies after a police investigation was started.
A number of Rangers supporters claimed they had reported comments allegedly made by Daily Record journalists to the police. Police Scotland said it was unable to confirm whether it had received any formal complaints.
nawlite 6th September 21.52
If you will concede that the Racist/Sectarian issues that have blighted Scotland in the past, and still do to this day, are NOT the preserve of one demographic & one set of supporters then and only then will we have some agreement.
My comment of 07.38 should have been directed to betc67 and not nawlite so apologies for the error.
RC @7.38
I think you are blinded by the o***** light !
When RC comes on here and posts, then maybe you’re no’ him/her
That’s me done!
Bolton sign off CVA
From CQN
“it is remarkable how few clubs go to the wall. Most find a way to pay creditors and keep their lineage intact”.
So …how did the second most important institution in Scotland (according to David Murray – have I got that right?)- notwithstanding the fact that they (illegally) shafted their creditors – manage to retain theirs?
Oh, wait a meenit, ah get it noo! Via the ludge, judiciary, SMSM and the entitled WATP Brigade (!). Or so they think. Keep pluggin away JC.
Lest we forget. Thanks for the reminder Paul67
bect67 7th September 2021 At 16:26
‘how did the second most important institution in Scotland (according to David Murray – have I got that right?)- notwithstanding the fact that they (illegally) shafted their creditors – manage to retain theirs?’
%%%%%%%
RFC of 1872 did not of course, could not, ‘retain ‘ their lineage. They were liquidated ,and as a matter of fact and Law, ceased to exist as a football club. Their sports history ended in 2012.
It was then that, in spite of having initially followed the Rules the venal, frightened, disgracefully dishonest men were persuaded, or morally coerced to sell their very souls. They wickedly created the lie (the ABSURD lie) that a club they they themselves had newly admitted into Scottish Football in 2012 was the same club as the club whose life they had quite properly ended when its demonstrably incompetent Administrators failed to bring it out of Administration and let it slide into Liquidation.
That lie simply has to be faced up to, and the lie must be rescinded. And disgraceful liars in football governance have to be sacked.
Otherwise, Sport and Sporting achievements lose any meaning, when new clubs are allowed to market themselves as …… (you know the rest)
£16k that’s what the latest issue raised. We could speculate all day what it’s for but it points to being a cash flow issue if you need to shake the collecting tin in the board room just weeks after raising 4m . The latest NI rise will affect most of us but I wonder how much that will add to the monthly wage bill at all clubs who are still struggling due to the last 18 months.
“Rangers’ Commercial and Marketing Director James Bisgrove commented: “We are delighted to announce this agreement with City Talking Studios for the Rangers72 movie.
It is fitting that in the club’s 150th anniversary year we will be able to produce a film which will tell the story of one of the most remarkable moments in Rangers’ history.” [ statement from Ibrox]
I’ve been trying to find ‘City Talking Studios’ on the Companies House pages.
I have found only ‘The City Talking Limited’ (number 10516776) “01 Sep 2021: Return of final meeting in a creditors’ voluntary winding up ”
And ‘The City Talking Inc Limited” (company no. 11641524)
A Mr Hicken was a shareholder in the first named, and is a person with significant control in the second named.
How delicious, that a club pretending to be 150 years old are having a film made about a liquidated club, by a film-maker who has first-hand knowledge of being a director with ‘liquidation’ experience, and, perhaps, a wish to try to make his new company’s name as similar as possible to his old company’s name, to suggest , perhaps, continuity?
I wonder if Mr Hicken knows anyone called Charles Green?
With the Covid bug circulating around Ibrox recently what will happen to Mr. Hagi upon his return. Will the medical authorities accept the apparent agreement between the Romanian football authorities and the last place they played, will Rangers conduct further tests, what will his teammates think of his potential inclusion in any squad. Should be interesting as they were quite vocal last year when a Celtic player arrived home under similar circumstances.
John Clark @ 2212hrs:
The other director of The City Talking Inc., Steven Andrew Auckland (born March 1955), seems to have held no other directorships.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11641524/officers
Strangely, when you dig a little, there’s a chap called Stephen (note spelling!) Andrew Auckland (also born March 1955!) who has held a string of directorships in mostly-dissolved companies. His last listed appointment terminated in December 2012.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/PwDQnlruMLcfHpr46T5LB2dwDtU/appointments
Is this the same person?
I don’t know anything about Mr Auckland but the other guy is Lee Hicken who will be the creative person. He’s the real article, an award winning documentary maker. He’s made films for Leeds United and the Super League (Rugby League). He’s the CEO of The City Talking Inc. He’s good!
Giovanni 9th September 2021 At 12:51
‘..He’s made films for Leeds United and the Super League (Rugby League). He’s the CEO of The City Talking Inc. ‘
%%%%%%%%
He might very well be a superb film-maker but not a competent CEO when it comes to marketing his award-winning documentaries, if his company has to go into voluntary liquidation!
And naming the new company “The City Talking Inc” Limited looks to me like an attempt to hide the fact that it is not ‘The City Talking Limited’! but a quite different entity.
Kind of Charles Green-like!
Jingso.Jimsie 9th September 2021 At 11:30
‘..Is this the same person?’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
it may be, it may not be!
Without in any way referencing Mr Auckland, we have to remember that
“Companies House does not verify the accuracy of the information filed”.
The business world is a world of gentlemanly honour and public schoolboy trust, is it not’? The idea that company directors might tell an untruth is unthinkable, I’m sure you will agree?
An edit to my post of 1130hrs:
Stephen (better known as Steve) Auckland is, as PMacG would have it, a ‘serious media professional’. He holds several active directorships under his full name.
I assume that the ‘Steven’ version associated with ‘The City Talking Inc.’ is simply due to a typo & is, in fact, Stephen Andrew Auckland.
@ John Clark
“Rangers’ Commercial and Marketing Director James Bisgrove commented: “We are delighted to announce this agreement with City Talking Studios for the Rangers72 movie.
It is fitting that in the club’s 150th anniversary year we will be able to produce a film which will tell the story of one of the most remarkable moments in Rangers’ history.” [ statement from Ibrox]
I wonder which moment they are talking about?
Is it the miracle of surviving liquidation and resurrecting from the dead?
Should be coming out at Easter then, I take it? ?
Does anyone have any idea what this, from the BBC Gossip page, means?
“Rangers forward Ianis Hagi could return from isolation in time to face Lyon in the Europa League next week, after the Romanian FA agreed a deal with their North Macedonian counterparts following Hagi’s positive Covid-19 test (Scottish Sun).”
How does any agreement between 2 foreign FAs affect how a player is treated in Scotland?
Looked at the Scottish Sun website and found this. “In North Macedonia, those who test positive for the virus must isolate for a minimum of ten days after the result if they are asymptomatic.
But if the person who tests positive is actively experiencing symptoms of Covid, they have to isolate for 20 days.
But it’s understood the Romanian FA have agreed a compromise to stop that, and could have freed up Hagi in time for next Thursday’s crunch tie.
The Romanian FA’s initial statement on the matter read: “Ianis Hagi complained of slight headaches in the national team’s camp in Skopje.
“He performed a quick test under the coordination of the medical staff of the national team and the result is positive.”
That reads to me like he should be isolating for 20 days and there is nothing in the article that explains why he isn’t. As ever with our SMSM, I am left more confused by their reporting than I was before!!
John Clark 7th September 20.18.
As the blog is going through a quiet day may i ask you a question?
Would you include Lord Hodge among those ” venal, frightened, disgracefully dishonest men were persuaded, or morally coerced to sell their very souls.”
This is how you described him nearly a decade ago-
“I suspect that Lord Hodge is going to make a huge name for himself as an absoluteley outstanding legal mind if he arrives at the decision that the D&P Administration has to be declared nulll and void, and that consequently Sevco/ The RangersFC has no legal identity!”
This was him in the Supreme Court in 2017.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrDlC8HyoCM
5.00 minutes in.
” The FORMER owners of The Rangers Football Club”.
This is a legal judgement in the highest court in the land with 5 Law Lords sitting.
Just to be clear i have NO interest in reopening the OC/NC topic for discussion on here but i would be interested in your views given previous comments.
Thanks in advance.
JC – 9th Sept – “And naming the new company “The City Talking Inc” Limited looks to me like an attempt to hide the fact that it is not ‘The City Talking Limited’! but a quite different entity.”
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3376052/
Moratoria, Prohibited Names and Other: Re-use of a Prohibited Name
THE CITY TALKING LIMITED
10516776
Registered office: Suites D & E, 3rd Floor Platform, New Station Street, Leeds, LS1 4JB
Principal trading address: Suites D & E, 3rd Floor Platform, New Station Street, Leeds, LS1 4JB
Notice to creditors of an insolvent company of the re-use of a prohibited name
Rule 22.4(2) of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016
On 22 July 2019 the above Company was placed into liquidation.
I, Lee Jonathan Hicken of 7 Syke Green, Leeds, LS14 3BS hereby give notice to the creditors of the Company that it is my intention to act in all or any of the ways specified in section 216(3) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (as amended), in connection with, or for the purposes of, carrying on the whole or substantially the whole of the business of the insolvent company, under the following name: The City Talking Inc Limited (CRN: 11641524)
It should be noted that I/we would not otherwise be permitted to undertake those activities without the leave of the court or the application of an exception by the Rules made under the Insolvency Act 1986. Breach of the prohibition created by section 216 of the Insolvency Act 1986 is a criminal offence.
Section 216(3) of the Insolvency Act 1986 lists the activities that a director of a company that has gone into insolvent liquidation may not undertake unless the court gives permission or there is an exception in the Insolvency Rules made under the Insolvency Act 1986. (This includes the exceptions in Part 22 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016). These activities are – a) acting as a director of another company that is known by a name which is either the same as a name used by the company in insolvent liquidation in the 12 months before it entered liquidation or is so similar as to suggest an association with that company; (b) directly or indirectly being concerned or taking part in the promotion, formation or management of any such company; or (c) directly or indirectly being concerned in the carrying on of a business otherwise than through a company under a name of the kind mentioned in (a) above.
This notice is given in pursuance of Rule 22.4 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 where the business of a company which is in, or may go into, insolvent liquidation is, or is to be, carried on otherwise than by the company in liquidation with the involvement of a director of that company and under the same or a similar name to that of that company.
The purpose of the giving of this notice is to permit the director to act in these circumstances where the company enters (or has entered) insolvent liquidation without the director committing a criminal offence and in the case of the carrying on of the business through another company, being personally liable for that company’s debts.
Notice may be given where the person giving the notice is already the director of a company which proposes to adopt a prohibited name.
Ag JG51777
Albertz11
9th September 2021 At 16:14
0 3 Rate This
,…………….
JC can, and I have no doubt will, answer for himself; but, I think that is pretty desperate.
After spending the previous 5 minutes referring to “The Rangers Football Club plc” or “RFC”, he came to an event by which time the company was no longer operating as a football club and had changed its name to “RFC2012 plc”.
He, to clarify it was the same company, stated that RFC2012 was the former owner of Rangers Football Club.
As the former club no longer owns the IP (including, of course, the Rangers Football Club name) he was technically correct. RFC2012 plc was the former owner of that name – the name by which Lord Hodge had been referring to the company previously.
Of course, that’s been the issue all along. What is Rangers Football Club?
Is it a brand?
Is it an association football club?
Is it a Club?
Brand loyalty can be a wonderful thing.
@ Nawlite – it’s certainly a curious one. If he’s positive and flies back on a public flight I have no idea what that means for those on the flight (close contact for 2-3 hours on a plane?) or those back at TRFC (presume Nicola S rules has him in isolation?)
To a point raised by A11 a couple of weeks back it does raise the question of the football authorities rules going forward and aligning these with governments (especially those across UEFA, but also FIFA in World Cup qualifying).
Albertz11 9th September 2021 At 16:14
“Would you include Lord Hodge among those ” venal, frightened, disgracefully dishonest men were persuaded, or morally coerced to sell their very souls.”
%%%%%%%%%%%
No way!
I would respond that the Supreme Court was adjudicating solely on the question of whether RFC were liable for tax , not on whether TRFC were the Rangers that owed the tax! TRFC has not been asked to pay that tax as they would have been if TRFC were indeed RFC of 1872
I would add that the ‘venal people’ that I refer to are those in football governance who allowed/allow the new club ,the undoubtedly new club ,to claim to be and to market itself as RFC of 1872!
Not for me to question a decision of the court arrived at on a matter that wasn’t even before it!
(As an aside, we don’t know what point Lord Hodge raised in his query about the administrators: Whatever it was he was satisfied with the answer.
The fact that the Liquidators were able years later to mount a strong challenge against the conduct of the Administration is not a reflection on Lord Hodge: it simply means that he was not deciding then on the efficiency/effectiveness of the Administrators.)
The word unique is now bein used to describe Bacuna’s transfer fee from Huddersfield. Its to be paid in installments and is based on appearances, European football, etc. Hopefully the Huddersfield owner/manager has kept abreast of financial goings on at Rangers and the installment plan ( share issues anyone) could mean a long pay out, He also hopes to recoup the fee they paid for Bacunas in the sell on fee clause. Rangers also have an excellent record of moving players on for big sums. As the circus people say there’s one born every minute.
Vernallen 10th September 13.44.
Most transfer fees are paid in installments and can include additional payments for appearances, goals scored, international recognition etc.
“financial goings on at Rangers and the installment plan”? Could you expand on this?
“As the circus people say” What? Now you’ve completely lost me.
……………………………………………………………………………………….
I appreciate you had no knowledge when you posted earlier today that Dominic McKay was about to resign as Celtic’s CEO after just 72 days in the job. If it’s illness related then best wishes go to him & his family. The rather cold tone of the statements issued by either side though would appear to suggest otherwise and i would therefore be interested in your opinion on the subject.
@A11 – I can’t talk for Vernallen but with regard to developments at CFC I would disagree with your “cold tone” interpretation. For me three points to note:
1. CFC are a listed company and statements to the market tend by their nature to be quite bland.
2. Dominic MacKay has stated personal reasons. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that CFC would therefore respect his privacy.
3. Dominic MacKay has been in post for 10 weeks – not long enough for a long-winded vote of thanks.
Am I disappointed? – yes I am.
Is it the end of the world? – no it’s not.
If he has put his hand up and said he can’t/doesn’t want to do the job then actually I am glad he had the courage to do so.
Will the board now follow due process and take time to find and appoint a successor? Yes they will.
Will the MSM make hay out of it and talk about a rudderless ship/ long time to appoint/etc? Yes they will.
Wokingcelt 10th September 21.56.
I do realise how any listed company’s statements to the market can appear rather bland. I still feel however that there was a distinct lack of warmth from both sides.
Celtic’s statement in particular was telling for me with reference being made to how the interim appointee Michael Nicholson “carries the confidence of the board and his colleagues” and ” Michael is an absolute team player”. Is this a indication that DMK was lacking in these areas?.
Maybe reading too much into it.
Albertz
I don’t think you are. Mention of his successes in ST sales, his role in the transfer window and helping the manager settle in would have been expected.
I have my own thoughts about the reasons behind it, but I have to confess that Michael Nicholson’s promotion had me fall off my bike. Don’t get Auldheid started on him. ?
wokingcelt 10th September 2021 At 21:56
‘..Will the MSM make hay out of it and talk about a rudderless ship/ long time to appoint/etc? Yes they will.’
%%%%%%
Yes ,of course they will, you may be sure.
With some few honourable exceptions , every man/woman jack among them has supported the lie that TRFC is RFC of 1872.
Truth means nothing to them.
They are as ball-less as the wretched Dr Goebbels was sung to be, in the lyrics of a war-time army song, when it comes to calling out the ridiculous untruth that TRFC is RFC of 1872.
Their ‘journalism’ is of the scabrous, mucky end of the market.
If a journalist buys into a lie, what is his/her worth? How does he/she assess his own worth, as a pedlar of untruth?
Die for the cause of journalistic truth?
Don’t make me laugh!
Sell their souls for a few inches of lying copy.
Not one ‘journalist’ has ever explained why he/she believes that TRFC is RFC of 1872!
They haven’t even the guts to attempt to justify their stance, because that would mean expressing doubt about the validity of the claim that TRFC is RFC of 1872.
And to express that doubt means trouble for them.
The miserable wretches that they are!
Big Pink 10th September 22.51.
Time will tell i guess.
Re- MN, he would appear to be part of the old guard at the club.
…………………………………………………………………………………………….
Celtic’s Director of Legal and Football Affairs Michael Nicholson, who has been with the Club since 2013, has been appointed to the Board of Celtic plc as acting Chief Executive Officer.
He has been at the centre of executive decision making at Celtic during his time at the club, working directly with the Board, the Chief Executive and the Football Department.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Although he has been appointed “acting CEO” the statement reads to me like this could be a permanent appointment.
Once again i may be wrong.
Albertz
Certainly very much an ‘Affirmative Cap’n’ type if guy, but he’s clearly not qualified to run a business. Maybe an MBA to pad out his legal degree, but zero experience in running a business, far less a football club. I’d be surprised , no astonished, if he got the gig.
Albertz11 10th September 2021 At 22:38
‘.Maybe reading too much into it.
Big Pink 10th September 2021 At 22:51
‘.I don’t think you are.’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
I have been critical of the PR people at Ibrox.
I am hypercritical of that PR statement from Celtic Park!
Is there no one at Ibrox or Parkhead who has a scooby about making PR statements?
God, I’m bloody sure that even I could do better!
Big Pink 11th September 00.02
Given the events at Parkhead over the past year or so would ANYTHING really surprise/astonish you?
Albertz: Given the events at Parkhead over the past year or so would ANYTHING really surprise/astonish you?
—————
Not really I suppose. Alan McDonald and Ian McLeod, two people I worked for (and most certainly their own men) were both pushed aside for doing the job of a CEO, making decisions which one particular shareholder didn’t like.
Anyone who is anything other than a messenger and a yes man to Dermot Desmond is always gonna be a candidate for an early bath, but McKay’s exit so soon into his tenure is only explained by;
A personal reason,
Lack of proper due diligence by the board and the outgoing CEO,
Panic in Dublin that he was not onside with DD.
I think we can safely discount the first of these, and consequently, the lack of good corporate governance in respect of the board membership is brought into stark relief.
Albertz11 — 10th Sept — 2021 — 21:33
I do understand the installment plan regarding the payment of transfer fees. However with the rumored state of Ranger’s finances I would have thought that the selling team would have looked for something up front. With the receiving team (Rangers) able to dictate playing time, etc, the idea of add-ons for appearances, goals, etc would be of concern to me. Who is this player going to replace except for some early cup games against weaker clubs. As for the circus comment if you have ever visited a fairground and played their games of chance you would understand where that expression came from and it could be applied to the hundreds of creditors let high and dry in 2012. As for the tone of the statement regarding the resignation of the Celtic CEO, its far better to have something in the open, even if its cold, which far exceeds the resignation statement, or media release, surrounding Warburton and his staff. That wasn’t cold, that was frigid.
Vernallen 11th September 02.03
“However with the rumored state of Ranger’s finances”.
……………………………………………………………………..
What rumours?.
………………………
” As for the circus comment if you have ever visited a fairground”
……………………………………………………………………………………….
A circus and a fairground are two entirely different enterprises in my experience, hence my comment.
Circus = Animals, Trapeze, High Wire
Fairground = Dodgems, Roller Coasters etc
Sorry if it sounds a bit pedantic but it is what it is.
………………………………………
“As for the tone of the statement regarding the resignation of the Celtic CEO, its far better to have something in the open, even if its cold”
………………………………………………………………………………..
Not exactly in the open when it raises more questions than it answers is it?.
If you were aware of the timeline and circumstances of Mark Warburtons departure then you would understand the wording in the Rangers statement.
‘Albertz11 11th September 2021 At 09:17
…If you were aware of the timeline and circumstances of Mark Warburtons departure then you would understand the wording in the Rangers statement.’
::
::
My recollection is that Mr. Warburton himself was unaware of the ‘timeline and circumstances’ of his departure & didn’t realise that he had resigned until TRFC issued a statement indicating that he had done so!
Jingo.jimsie 11th September 11.11
I would suggest that Mr Warburton was very cute in the language used at the time.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
‘Show us an email, a letter, a phone call indicating we want to resign’,.
……………………………………………………………………………………….
No mention of a verbal resignation which is just as effective
…………………………………………………………………………………..
“Two weeks later I got contacted by Forest for the first time, that’s the absolute truth.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Maybe the first time he specifically was contacted, but not the first time one of his backroom team who was working on his behalf, was contacted.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Albertz11 –11th sept 2021 — 9:17
Circus and fairgrounds probably have different meanings depending on what side of the ocean you are on. This side of the ocean both these venues have midways which are quite happy to have you part with your money. Something like a certain football club, in the past, asking for a service to be provided and not reciprocating with payment. If you logged on to any other blogs it might surprise you to see there is concern expressed by others, including Ranger sites, about the finances. Even Follow Follow has expressed concern at times. I agree with jingso.jimsie that Mr. Warburton was unaware of his resignation until the TRFC statement landed with the media. Whatever became of the action Warburton and his staff took to remedy this resignation fiasco.
While we are reminiscing, whatever happened to the private investigator who allegedly tampered with Alfredo’s car ? Did the case ever make it to court ?
Guess he would have to press charges against his missus for that to happen Paddy….. Awkward !
From Stephen Halliday ( of the Scotsman)
Saturday, 11th September 2021, 6:07 pm this quote from Postecoglou:
” “We have to be careful with the narrative of who brought me to the club,” added the Australian coach who took charge of Celtic in the summer ” ”
Enigmatic or what?
In plain speak, what the feck does ‘careful with the narrative of who brought me to the club’ mean?
Honest to God!
I hope that’s not what he was told to say by the interim CEO .
Because it instantly raises questions about HIS feckin common sense!
And if Postecoglou is speaking off his own bat, what the hell is he suggesting?
Is there no one at Parkhead with any more PR savvy than the PR people at Ibrox?
One thing I learned from my experience as a semi pro athlete and a participant in elite amateur programs was that the coaches/mangers always stressed focus on the team and its objectives. This also held true for the coaches and managers along with the support staff. We have two former Ranger players who are in management positions or still playing for another club constantly banging on about issues at Celtic and lately living in the very distant past regarding games against Lyon. How do teammates and players feel, are they getting proper attention and preparation, is one of the above fully committed to his team. Those games in 2007 have nothing to do with any up coming games and I would think both parties would be better attending to their current teams. Or, if they want to be journalists why not dig into the goings on at their former team. How widespread is the Covid issue, what are the true state of finances, how come two stalwarts from last season haven’t signed new deals. Hopefully they will get focused on their teams.
Vernallen
I’d suggest that Bloggers & Fans forums may not have access to sensitive financial information at Rangers or any other club for that matter.
I doubt that mainly ghost written columns that churn out nonsensical pap actually detracts from their main job tbh. Any lack of success may just be the result of not being very good as a coach.
Should all clubs provide information regarding the health, finance & contractual situations at their club or just Rangers?
Albertz11 — 12th sept 2021 — 18:49
Clubs that are listed on a recognized stock exchange have a certain degree of transparency in the matters you listed. A club that is not listed on a recognized stock exchange, and hasn’t been for a while, is not subject to the same rules and regulations of others that are listed. That scenario leaves the goings on of said club open to conjecture in regards to the financial status, advertising commitments ( cinch anyone), and therefore its a closed shop in regards to reporting etc.
Vernallen 13th September 01.14.
Whether a company is listed on the LSE or similar plays no part whatsoever when it comes to disclosing information on the latest covid, contractual or financial situation at any given time.
I would however ask you again if this should be standard practise for every club, or just one in particular?
As an aside the annual set of accounts released by Rangers in the past few years are the most transparent i have seen.
New podcast. Particularly of interest to Celtic fans, but I am sure will also be of interest to us all.
http://podcast.sfm.scot/e/twm-33-celtic-and-corporate-governance/
“John McGinn: Chelsea condemn sectarian abuse aimed at Aston Villa midfielder”
There are many ways, I suppose, to respond to the above (latest example) of anti-Irish and anti-Catholic racism, and I offer the blog some of my thoughts below.:-
I find it ironic that this is highlighted to such a degree by the English media, and even if the subject is covered by the gutless SMSM, the issues raised will not merit much of a talking point north of the border. The sort of scenario outlined above has been perpetrated throughout the history of Scottish football, and will never evoke such a response as there has been down south … and yes I am unapologetically referring directly to the Catholic Irish in Scotland – with specific reference to followers of Celtic. I would support what I have just written by stating my belief that this particular form of abuse of Celtic by Rangers followers has never been adequately reported, or challenged, by the ‘powers that be’ in Scottish society.
Must be great to share The Divine Right of WATP (for this – check the video evidence from the Chelsea v Aston Villa game)!
Bect67
I don’t know to what extent sectarianism WoS style has infected Chelsea, but it is worth noting that McGinn has never played for Celtic. Is it just one rogue arsehole football tourist who brought our brand of racism to London. Certainly Cheksea have had Catholics play for them, even ones of Irish descent. In fact one Irish Catholic Shettlestonian managed the club in the 60s.
It is all so depressing, but the FA’s response to a recent incident involving James McLean is encouraging. Can’t cherrypick anti-racism-unless you’re Murdo Fraser?
https://www.afc.co.uk/2021/09/14/spfl-member-clubs-invest-in-independent-advice-on-strategic-review/
SPFL Member Clubs- Aberdeen, Dundee, Dundee United, Heart of Midlothian and Hibernian, with the endorsement of the SPFL, have commissioned independent advisers to assist in a strategic and holistic review of the SPFL.
With respect BP, it is not central to my post that McGinn has never played for Celtic, or that Chelsea has had historic Catholic ‘connections’. Furthermore, I’m not at all interested if the ‘eejit’ spewing this vile was indeed a ‘rogue arsehole tourist’. These are surely moot points – at least to me. Am I being paranoid (!) in finding your reply a ‘tad’ dismissive and disingenuous- especially wrt the reference to Murdo Fraser?
Chelsea and the (English) FA’s responses have indeed been positive (and somewhat ironic) in the context of McGinn’ and McLean abuse- but the fact remains that such a reaction would not take place here (because of the power of an entrenched Scottish ‘establishment’) should it happen in a situation involving , let’s say, a Celtic and/ or a Celtic player at Ibrox.
That remains my view. I believe passionately and wholeheartedly in what I posted.
Bect7
I wasn’t arguing with your post and you have misunderstood my point.
It is so depressing to witness the reductive approach of the media in Scotland to instances of abuse suffered by James Maclean, James McCarthy and now John McGinn. Pretending it is some how a ‘lesser’ crime by mislabelling such abuse prevents acceptance ,acknowledgement and education. It is helpful to neither the abused nor the abuser.
From my inbox this afternoon:
“Lausanne, 14 September 2021 – The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has dismissed the appeal filed by Brazilian football official Ricardo Terra Teixeira against the decision taken by the Ethics Committee of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) dated 26 July 2019 (the Challenged Decision).
The Challenged Decision, in which Ricardo Terra Teixeira was found to have violated Article 27 of the FIFA Ethics Code (bribery), fined CHF 1 million, and banned for life from taking part in any football-related activity at national and international level, is confirmed.
On 20 December 2019, Ricardo Terra Teixeira filed an appeal at the CAS against the Challenged Decision, seeking a declaration that FIFA did not have jurisdiction to prosecute him as well as the annulment of the Challenged Decision.
The CAS Panel appointed to decide the matter: Mr Hendrik Willem Kesler (Netherlands), President, Judge Rauf Soulio (Australia) and Prof. Luigi Fumagalli (Italy) held a hearing with the parties by video conference on 24 February 2021 after several dates that had been fixed for an in-person hearing in 2020 had to be cancelled due to restrictions linked to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In its deliberations, the CAS Panel comfortably concluded that Ricardo Terra Teixeira had breached Article 27 of the FIFA Ethics Code and determined that the sanction imposed in the Challenged Decision was proportionate considering the extraordinarily high amounts of the bribes at stake,
Ricardo Terra Teixeira’s intentional behaviour, and his responsibility to serve as a role model as a result of the very prominent and senior positions he held in association football both at national and international level. Consequently, the Panel dismissed the appeal and confirmed the Challenged Decision in full.”
The first sentence of the last para seems to be missing a principal clause?
(note: One Swiss franc currently = 79p)
Yes it’s good that people ‘in prominent and senior positions in association football ‘ get called to account for abusing their positions.
Wish it happened here!
Albertz11 — 13th sept 2021 -12:54
Transparency should apply to all clubs in regards to the areas discussed and a stronger guiding hand from the directors of Scottish football would perhaps make this possible. However based on performance that is highly suspect. Is it possible that the Rangers accounts released in recent years are transparent due to the red hue attached to them. What about the accounts published prior to the recent years.
Cluster One 14th September 2021 At 18:51
1 0 Rate This
https://www.afc.co.uk/2021/09/14/spfl-member-clubs-invest-in-independent-advice-on-strategic-review/
SPFL Member Clubs- Aberdeen, Dundee, Dundee United, Heart of Midlothian and Hibernian, with the endorsement of the SPFL, have commissioned independent advisers to assist in a strategic and holistic review of the SPFL.
++++++++++++++++
It was only 4 years ago that the SPFL themselves said there should be an independent review into how they and the SFA handled Rangers EBT’s in the light of them being proven illegal beyond doubt. The SFA responded by saying “you can’t rake over old coals”. Not one of those clubs backed the review. Some even publicly agreed with the SFA.
Forgive me for being cynical about this. It may be well intentioned enough, but as a football nation we are so backward we can’t even make use of VAR when affordable versions are available. We also have a Refereeing appointments system blighted by nepotism, which fails to meet any of the diversity and inclusion criteria other organisations are bound to meet by law. We accept sub standard plastic pitches in the top league. We accept that there should be no financial fair play. This review will not have the power to change any of that.
It is unquestionably the case that there is rot and inefficiency at the heart of Scottish Football and that the various Board members in office from time to time since before 2012 are largely responsible for that state of affairs.
The Board has accordingly lost all credibility and authority.
The ‘commissioning’ (!) off their own bat of an independent review of the SPFL by only 5 members of that League surely points up the lack of trust in the present Board and the recognition that it is unfit for purpose.
Any Board that loses the governance initiative and finds itself having meekly to agree to ‘cooperate’ with a ‘review’ commissioned without as much as a by your leave by a faction of the league membership should resign immediately as having abandoned all pretence of exercising proper governance.
Honest to God!
With deceit and incompetence at its very heart, Scottish Football as an honest Sport has no chance of prospering, and the ‘commissioning ‘of an independent review that does not tackle the Big Lie head on is a waste of time.
John Clark 15th September 2021 At 11:40
Why should we even accept Delloite’s views anyway? Over a lifetime I came to expect that Consultants often came up with things that were already known, or to suit the wishes of those who were paying them.
In terms of Independent reviews we only have to look at the LNS review of Rangers EBT’s to see how the paymasters get their own way, with the paymasters even making up a previously unheard of rule, which had never never used before and has never been used since, in order to get their desired outcome.
Mention of Deloittes made me download their Annual Review of Football Finance 2021. I wished I hadn’t when I started to read the section headed ” NFTs and the iteration of football fandom” (p.50)
NFT’s? Non-fungible Tokens. (= non-mutually interchangeable)
An IT technophobe’s nightmare read, like reading about ‘blockchain and bitcoin etc.
[Incidentally, in the general report, I saw the word ‘Scottish ‘ appear only once when reference was made to ‘other European leagues’, the whole report relating solely to the Big 5 European premier leagues]
I’m still intrigued at the idea of a consultancy firm accepting a ‘commission’ from a few members of a company rather than from the Board of the Company. Deloitte must be thinking ‘That has to be the starting point of any review: the feckin powerlessness and uselessness of the Board’ !
John C
I think the commission would be pretty toothless if the SPFL board didn’t cooperate with the inquiry. I have had no sense whether or not the board are happy or otherwise about it, but I would guess they acceded to the request/demand in the safe knowledge that it would be stonewalled at worst or that it would be a show at best.
We await developments. ?
Big Pink 16th September 2021 At 12:11
‘….but I would guess they acceded to the request/demand in the safe knowledge that it would be stonewalled ‘
%%%%%%%%%%%
I don’t doubt that the SPFL will cooperate only to try to ensure that unpalatable truths are not unearthed!
But I ‘m genuinely puzzled how a handful of members can authorise/commission a review [which is really a kind of ‘no confidence’ statement] without a majority vote an extraordinary general meeting of all members of the SPFL?
It just sort of reinforces the view that the SPFL is drifting helplessly, with a Board that has abdicated responsibility.
John C wrote
It just sort of reinforces the view that the SPFL is drifting helplessly, with a Board that has abdicated responsibility.
——-
Indeed
https://twitter.com/chris_sutton73/status/1438496638012645387
‘John Clark 15th September 2021 At 11:40
…The Board has accordingly lost all credibility and authority.
The ‘commissioning’ (!) off their own bat of an independent review of the SPFL by only 5 members of that League surely points up the lack of trust in the present Board and the recognition that it is unfit for purpose.
Any Board that loses the governance initiative and finds itself having meekly to agree to ‘cooperate’ with a ‘review’ commissioned without as much as a by your leave by a faction of the league membership should resign immediately as having abandoned all pretence of exercising proper governance.’
::
::
I think this is a masterful piece of sleight-of-hand by the SPFL. The review is being carried out with the permission of the SPFL, but not directly under their auspices.
If the SPFL deem that the review has been worthwhile & there are are points to take forward/changes to be made, then it’s a win-win. The SPFL is at arms-length from any controversy arising from the findings & it hasn’t cost them anything.
If the SPFL deem the review a load of tosh, then again they have the position of being at arms-length from any controversy & again it hasn’t cost them anything.
Welcome to Ibrox .
https://content.invisioncic.com/Mrangmedia/monthly_2021_09/1AAA6D68-3A74-41FD-995C-1D5B10228CAE.jpeg.bcb6e8bb5d5ce73f63754e56add702ae.jpeg
After the opposition bus attack, and now the latest admission that Sevco cannot guarantee the safety of sports commentators in a secluded section of the stadium, what chance for rival fans?.
If safety is so problematic, stadium closures must be a considered option.
Re TRFC’s decision to withdraw stadium access to two BT Sport pundits on ‘security grounds’:
I’ve had a quick look at the regulations.
https://documents.uefa.com/r/Regulations-of-the-UEFA-Europa-League-2021/22/Article-78-Audiovisual-rights-holder-facilities-Online
There appears, at first glance, to be nothing to stop TRFC withdrawing access from accredited individuals working for the media. However, the home club is responsible for the security of ‘audiovisual rights-holders areas’ where, I would assume, said pundits would have been sequestered.
Clause 78.13 –
“All security measures that may be reasonably required to safeguard and control the audiovisual rights-holder areas (including the OB van area) are the responsibility of the club. The security of all audiovisual rights-holder areas is the responsibility of the club. These areas must not be accessible to the public and should have 24-hour manned security from the start of installations to the departure of all audiovisual rights-holder personnel and equipment.”
Is Stewart Robertson actually stating that it would take an unreasonable amount of security measures to ensure the safety of two pundits within clearly-defined areas in the stadium? That’s a fairly clear admission that the club can’t control its supporters within its own ground.
Or is it just another dog-whistle to the supporters?
Would the latest Ranger’s ploy on banning commentators from their grounds be possibly related to comments from the duo not showing Ranger’s in a positive light. Its also interesting that both men had strong links to Celtic. Also wasn’t it Rangers that started this trend when refusing to allocate tickets to Celtic fans for games at Ibrox. They are slowly placing themselves on an island in regards to media support (unless you wanted to pay $25K) and rival fan supporters which now seems to be spreading to other clubs which is an unfortunate step for all involved.
I see Rangers B have been handed a SPFL Trust Trophy lifeline as Ayr United were charged over two ineligible players. Ayr United missed a trick, because if they had been paying the players hundreds of thousands via an illegal tax scheme, backed with side letters which had not been declared to the SFA, it would all have been fine…I mean, Rangers themselves could have told them that!
upthehoops 17th September 2021 At 08:05
From the crypt ?
upthehoops.
From earlier this season.
……………………………………
Hearts Women hit with punishments after ineligible players ‘mistake’ in League Cup
Hearts Women have accepted punishments for listing ineligible players in Sunday’s League Cup win over St Johnstone.
The team defeated the Saints 1-0 at Oriam on Sunday thanks to a goal from Lia Tweedie.
However, the result has been reverted to a 3-0 win for St Johnstone due to the infraction, while the club have been hit with a £200 fine.
“Heart of Midlothian Football Club accepts the sanctions issued to Hearts Women for listing ineligible players in their League Cup victory over St Johnstone on Sunday,” a club statement said.
The WATP cancel culture, virtue signalling, gaslighting and identity politics (!) policies concisely, and expertly, summarised by Mark Derrywall – no doubt ably endorsed by the likes of RC …
“BT were told in March 2020 not to bring Sutton back”
“Lennon is the most divisive figure in Scottish society over the last 20 years and his behaviour on a number of accounts has been reprehensible and the club would not want such a person on the premises”
…and all because a previous lawbreaking and morally decrepit entity went shamefully bust – through nobody’s fault but their own!
I suppose Sevco feel entitled to tell BT how to run their operation, treating them as shabbily as The Society of Shafted Creditors. That may well ‘rebound’ on them as BT have belatedly reported the ‘case’ to UEFA, who will maybe see this a wee bit differently from most of our media.
Rewriting Dungwall’s egregious comments on Neil Lennon might go something like this:-
“TRFC has been the most divisive presence on the Scottish football scene over who knows how many years, and its behaviour on a number of accounts ( especially annual!)has been reprehensible, and the football authorities should not want them in their structure ” Aye right, I hear some say!
Ah well, more in hope than expectation, I type away and post here to cheer myself up, and ‘keep the faith’ that, some day, they will be brought to justice!
Whit an angry, unhappy mob Sevcoites are.
upthehoops 17th September 2021 At 08:05
‘…Ayr United missed a trick, because if they had been paying the players hundreds of thousands via an illegal tax scheme, backed with side letters which had not been declared to the SFA,..’
%%%%%%%%%%
Why did no one at Ayr United call in Bryson? I’m sure he might have sorted things out for them, if he had thought it worthwhile doing?
[Is he still around in Scottish football , with his ridiculous reasoning?]
In regards to the Ranger’s ban of two former Celtic players, now employed as commentators, would it not have carried more weight if they had at the same time, and, after a lengthy review, announced the banning of those fans voicing the not so pleasant songs heard every second week. Start by cleaning up their own backyard, then, have a look at the “security” issues posed by commentators well away from the fans. Instead of a pitch invasion we may have a commentator’s stand invasion.
A curiosity perhaps but just noticing whilst watching football tonight that Newcastle have same shirt manufacturers as TRFC and said manufacturer being a niche/ breakthrough type of brand. Curious that they have the Ashley link (well known for his tentacles in sportswear). Of course I am too old to be aware of the “cool brands” these days but are things as they seem?
Ps – on brands, Winfield 4 stripes (from Woolies) rather than Adidas Kick for me as a kid!!!!
‘wokingcelt 17th September 2021 At 21:57
A curiosity perhaps but just noticing whilst watching football tonight that Newcastle have same shirt manufacturers as TRFC and said manufacturer being a niche/ breakthrough type of brand…’
::
::
Wolves also use Castore as their strip supplier.
Had you turned to BT Sport last night & the Gallagher Rugby Premiership, you would have seen that Saracens (one of the ‘sexy’ teams in that competition) wearing Castore kit. The West Indies cricket team also wear Castore.
Fights with sponsors, fights with broadcasters……..Anyone else smell scorched earth?
From the BBC’s gossip column, a statement, apparently from the Livingston manager….Livingston manager David Martindale aims to take advantage of their “horrific” pitch when Celtic visit the Tony Macaroni Arena on Sunday. (Scotsman)
Last season was great, getting rid of 2 plastic pitches – one more to go! Apologies to any fans of those 3 clubs, but it’s not right.
I can hardly wait for the unofficial championship flag to be unfurled tomorrow. Who designed it and what relevance does it carry if its not recognized by the sfa/sfpl ( who apparently were not invited) to the flag raising. How does the league sponsor feel in regards to another snub by this self important entity. How prominent will the number 55 be in the flag along with a union jack. Too bad orange conflicts with red, white and blue. Hopefully the police are lined up for any post game carry over celebrations.
vernallen 18th September 2021 At 18:52
I can’t help but feel if any other club was acting in this way there would already be threats of sanctions by the SPFL. On another note I am reading that BT have reported Rangers to UEFA for their rather pathetic actions (IMO) on Thursday evening involving Mr Sutton and Mr Lennon. Also, pictures all over social media of one of their official media partners heading up an orange walk in Glasgow today. Is Rangers current stance over the media really where they want to be?
Jingso.Jimsie 18th September 2021 At 10:20
‘..The West Indies cricket team also wear Castore.’
%%%%%%%%%%%
From the Castore company website ‘about us’ pge
“We utilise advanced engineering and unique technical fabrics to create the highest quality sportswear in the world for athletes who demand the very best”
As regards ‘unique technical fabrics’ they may very well have super-quality fabrics for use in the kind of clobber bought by athletes at the Andy Murray end of the market.
But for use in ‘fitba’ taps’ for the average fan and his weans? I rather doubt it!
Fair-minded as ever, though, I’d be interested in hearing some fabrics-expert’s opinion as to whether Castore-brand fitba’ taps are ‘fabrically unique’
My post at 21.16
My source for Castore’s webpage is https://castore.com/pages/about-castore/
Can somebody ask the SFA and SPFL what exactly does a club need to do to bring the game into disrepute ?
Going by what the Gers have done all the other clubs effectively have carte Blanche to do as they like as the Gers have got away with so many indiscretions that can be used as precedents
John Clark 18th September 2021 @ 21:16:
John, I replied to ‘wokingcelt 17th September 2021 @ 21:57’ because he was (to my mind, at least) suggesting that there was some correlation between TRFC & NUFC sporting Castore kit & that the connection was BMA. (I’m aware that there’s a popular rumour that BMA is an investor in Castore’s parent company.)
I pointed out that Wolves (no BMA connection, AFAIK) also use Castore. I also pointed out that there’s a couple of ‘big’ teams in other sports that use the same supplier.
The people behind the brand seem to be ‘growing’ it quite successfully. I’m not in a position to comment whether their professional products are technically advanced, or superior, to the competition. As to whether their replica team kit is of similar quality (technically), again I’m not able to say, although I would doubt it. Every company pushes the boundaries when advertising its products. Castore is no different.
I have just been blocked! Nothing offensive, just wondering why! HELP!
Bect67
?
Thanks BP. I went to submit my comment and was asked to explain myself. The SFM logo was in the top left of the page.
BP
No idea what that is. There’s no comment awaiting approval or in Spam. If it happens again, send a screenshot ?
Stewart Robertson moans on one hand about the lack of tv money in scottish football. Then uses the other hand to upset a major sponsor of European tournaments. Where was this action when he was at Motherwell, or, has he been injected with a blue dye that turns him into a constant moaner, amassing portfolios on the SPFL/SFA, picking fights with a league sponsor, banning tv commentators, etc. Will the real Stewart Robertson stand up, or, is this all an act for their somewhat questionable fan base ( not all, but a good chunk).
bect67 19th September 2021 At 12:34
‘…BP…..
send a screenshot ?’
%%%%%%%%%
Mention of screenshot prompts me to ask: what happens to Stella Dallas? What does she do?
I can’t find the answer to that!
I can however say, with shame, that away back in 1964 while walking along past Parkhead Cross in Glasgow in company with, to me, a ‘better class’ lassie, I walked straight past my old man in his Corporation uniform.
He of course never mentioned it, and I try to hope that he might not even have seen see me.
But I still feel really lousy about it.
And I wonder: is any shame felt by ‘honest ‘people who supported the RFC of 1872 when they have bought into the big Lie?
vernallen 19th September 2021 @ 23:57hrs:
The question is whether Mr. Robertson is acting independently in his role as MD of TRFC or whether the board of RIFC is making the bullets & having Mr. Robertson fire them?
I think it’s the latter. I wonder if he realises the reputational damage he’s doing to himself in (apparently) being unable to say ‘No!’, or perhaps, ‘That’s not a good idea.’ to the RIFC board? I suspect he sees his next post as CEO of the SFA or SPFL. How will that pan out?
(There is, of course, a chance that RIFC/TRFC are ‘right’ & almost everybody else in Scottish football is ‘wrong’! It’s Scotland, after all, & we have Messrs. Maxwell & Doncaster steering their respective clown-cars to the best of their limited abilities.)
Monday 20th September 2021
Ayr United
Rangers
SPFL TRUST TROPHY
SPFL STATEMENT
SPFL TRUST TROPHY – RANGERS B V AYR UNITED – 20/09/21
At a disciplinary hearing today (Monday 20 September 2021) a Committee of the Board of the SPFL acting as a Tribunal considered a complaint that Ayr United FC in Playing Kinlay Bilham and Alex Jeanes in their SPFL Trust Trophy match against Rangers B on Tuesday 14 September 2021 were in breach of the Regulations in respect of the competition.
Both players were listed as substitutes and entered the field of play at 81 minutes. Ayr United FC admitted breaching SPFL Rules and Regulations by Playing the players in the match when they were, at the time of the match, Registered at the Scottish FA to West of Scotland League clubs Irvine Meadow XI (in the case of Mr Bilham) and Girvan (in the case of Mr Jeanes).
The Tribunal imposed the following sanctions:
(i) the Club was reprimanded and warned as to future conduct; and
(ii) the result of the match was annulled and instead recorded as a 3-0 victory for Rangers B.
No financial penalty was imposed on Ayr United.
Jingso.Jimsie — 20th Sept 2021 — 11:25
If as you suggest Stewart Robertson is being used by the board in firing all those bullets, I feel sorry for him. That is no position to put someone in and as you say the damage down the line could be rather harsh. Also if he sees himself as a CEO of the SFA/SFPL how would other clubs look at that appointment based on his performance to date in the Ranger’s chair/spotlight. How he must miss the Motherwell days.
Vernallen
I have had it on good authority for sometime that MFC don’t miss him.
vernallen 20th September 2021 At 19:24
If he is appointed some time in the (near) future the other clubs would just accept it as they have accepted everything else. Remember Gordon Smith?
For example all the other clubs put up their manager for interview on Sportscene and don’t complain about the one exception.
Albertz11 20th September 2021 At 18:05
SPFL TRUST TROPHY – RANGERS B V AYR UNITED – 20/09/21
the result of the match was annulled and instead recorded as a 3-0 victory for Rangers B.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
It’s amazing how often the football authorities have managed to punish the relative minnows of our game over the years with 0-3 reverses for rule breaches such as that of Ayr United’s registration errors.
They seem to have no problem in applying the rules and sanctions when they only affect insignificant clubs (or do I mean companies?), yet do everything in their power to admonish the big boys.
Compare and contrast Ayr’s fate with 2012 Rangers, when every effort was made by those football authorities to contort themselves through linguistic gymnastics to exonerate and fail to adequately punish a club guilty of industrial scale cheating described at the time as second only in severity to match-fixing.
vernallen 20th September 2021 @ 19:24hrs:
Stewart Robertson represents TRFC, the member club of the SFA & the SPFL. He’s a member of the SPFL Board, one of three members representing the cinch Premiership. He seems to see nothing strange in this role acting for his club & the wider Premiership in a competition which is sponsored by a company that his club do not wish to do business with. TRFC is actually in dispute with the SPFL over this. That’s surely a conflict of interest & he should recuse himself until the sponsorship issue is settled.
He’s been scathing about the governance & commercial dealings of the SFA & the SPFL for several years, yet very little has changed. He’s been an ‘insider’ for quite a while. I wonder what backing Mr. Robertson has among his fellow MDs/CEOs. Does he have ‘personal’ allies among them? Does he have (shall we say) ‘ideological’ supporters? Are his peers apathetic to his complaints? Perhaps someone better informed could enlighten us?
Highlander 21st September 2021 At 09:28
5 0 Rate This
They seem to have no problem in applying the rules and sanctions when they only affect insignificant clubs (or do I mean companies?), yet do everything in their power to admonish the big boys.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
In terms of the ‘big boys’ of the Scottish game I think of Celtic, Rangers, Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen. I can only ever recall the SFA twisting themselves into contortions to admonish one of those clubs for fielding ineligible players. They firstly set terms of reference to the lead investigator to eliminate certain pieces of evidence. They then sent their man to the investigation to advise of a ‘rule’ never used before, and never used again. It really is quite incredible. It was such an obvious stitch up, and all to protect a ‘club’ which had illegally denied the public purse of tens of millions of pounds. Why on earth should such illegal behaviour be protected?
With the news today that Celtic posted a loss of 11 million last year, the financial experts in the sports sections of the Scottish media should be painting a picture of doom and gloom over Celtic Park. If Rangers were able to approach a loss like that it would time for celebration and tons of column inches on how well run and financially stable they are. When will their figures be released probably early on a Friday evening and have no mention until days later.
Highlander 21st September 2021 At 09:28
Jingso.Jimsie 21st September 2021 At 11:19
upthehoops 21st September 2021 At 15:32
The same question remains:- Why do the other clubs allow it to continue? Not one of them ever speaks out or protests at what’s going on so they must be quite happy with it all.
Another offside goal at the week end and a mild comment by the Motherwell manager but nothing more.
Nothing will ever be done if the other clubs accept what is going on and to date they seem quite content to go along with the cheating.
upthehoops 21st September 2021 At 15:32
‘.. It was such an obvious stitch up, and all to protect a ‘club’ which had illegally denied the public purse of tens of millions of pounds.’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Happily, in spite of lies and deceit, the cheating club did NOT survive, but was liquidated and ceased to exit.
Of course, a further lie was then required to be manufactured by the wretched liars in football governance, backed by the running dog lackeys in the SMSM the lie that a brand new football club had a history of sporting achievement dating back 140 years!
The liars know that they are liars, and they that they have no response that can mitigate their betrayal of office[ may they live the rest of their lives in disgrace and shame]
Vernallan 21st Sept 17.01
“With the news today that Celtic posted a loss of 11 million last year, the financial experts in the sports sections of the Scottish media should be painting a picture of doom and gloom over Celtic Park. If Rangers were able to approach a loss like that it would time for celebration and tons of column inches on how well run and financially stable they are. When will their figures be released probably early on a Friday evening and have no mention until days later.”
I’ve only had a quick look at the results but I can only agree with you. Looking purely from a financial perspective (ignoring the hurt Celtic fans no doubt feel at the dismal attempt at TIAR) the results, in COVID context, are very solid. Notwithstanding a reduction in Football and Stadium Income of £15m Celtic’s cash position only fell £3m and was £19.5m at the end of the FY. An additional £13m RCF remained undrawn. Post the end of the FY they have had a strong net gain on player trading and the accounts, while giving no details, highlight that they have a “net receivables position” with respect to past player movement i.e. they are owed more money than Celtic owe other clubs which will further strengthen their cash position. Their P/L performance for FY 22, having secured Europa group football and had a strong net gain in the recent transfer window is almost guaranteed.
While the results will no doubt do little to comfort many Celtic fans there will come a time (as happened when assessing “The Bunnet’s” running of the club) when they look back with a different mindset.
Elsewhere in Govan there will be a club who will be wondering how their results (when they are released) could be spun. They will, as I’ve said before, be awful. No window dressing will disguise that when they issued.
Westcoaster — 21 sept 2021– 19:36
Will this be the year that Rangers break the 100 million mark in accumulated losses. Will this lead to a late Friday evening news release and the subsequent crowing of a new world record for achieving this feat in record time. How long will the money continue to flow from “investors”, how deep are the pockets, how short are the arms. How will the paid to play media react. Interesting times coming down the pike.
‘Ballyargus 21st September 2021 At 17:45
The same question remains:- Why do the other clubs allow it to continue? Not one of them ever speaks out or protests at what’s going on so they must be quite happy with it all…’
::
::
I suspect that the SFA & SPFL ‘one club, one vote’ principle is corrupted by the usual forces: cliques, deference to the ‘Big Two’, fear of losing the tiny bit of influence/social standing/the freebies associated with board/committee memberships, trepidation of being put on some, likely nonexistent, sh!t list that will have consequences in the future &, of course, troughers’ apathy.
Then there’s also the ‘Whit school didye go tae?’ lifetime expectation that you’ll support (or, at least, not agitate against) your ‘side’, simply because of who your parents were & where you were educated.
Over the past year the Board at Ibrox has dug very deep to keep the show on the road , a lot deeper than the outside investors did at the recent share issue . I believe they did so in the hope (or belief) that CL group stage money would relieve them of this ongoing burden. The perfect storm of Brexit/Covid/Evergrande /NI increases and the costs of everything else going skyward will affect all of us . The ability to borrow is being restricted to those who are credit worthy and those who are being rejected from loan sharks such as Close will not receive a warm welcome from the High St or the City .
Dave King is due to call in his loan in a few short weeks and if anyone thinks he will roll it over or increase it should check his Sebata companies share price. From the day he took control at Ibrox to today the value of Sebata in Sterling terms has lost over 90% of its value. King is treading water and is as desperate for cash as those left inside Ibrox.
The transfer window doesn’t open for over 3 months so zero funds can be raised in that way . By going to the public with the share issue rather than raising funds from within indicates they are now cash strapped . If they do get to January they have a dilemma , do they sell their top players (in a depressed market) and risk not qualifying for the CL . Even though the rules on ffp have been relaxed due to Covid are they still at risk of failing to gain a licence due to their losses. To top it all we have Ashley sitting in the wings waiting to extract revenge on those who ousted him and that includes Park as well as King . I can’t wait to see how the Daily Record blames Catholic schools for this one.
You couldn’t make this up.
RIFC/TRFC were negotiating with cinch up until the 7th of June about renaming their ground ‘the cinch Ibrox Stadium’ –
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/rangers-held-talks-rename-stadium-25046101
‘The parent company of Rangers entered negotiations to rename Ibrox with a firm that secured an SPFL sponsorship deal, a court has heard.
Advocate Lord Keen of Elie QC said bosses at Rangers Football Club Ltd spoke to chiefs at online car retailer Cinch about renaming the club’s stadium.
The lawyer told the Court of Session on Wednesday that the organisations explored the possibility of calling the club’s home ‘the cinch Ibrox stadium.’
Lord Keen spoke during a hearing in which the SFA succeeded in a bid to gain permission to appeal against an interim interdict which had been granted against it earlier this year…’
There’s a bit more info in the article about a ‘heavily redacted’ contract, dated May 2021, between Parks of Hamilton & TRFC, which seems to be the basis of the dispute.
Quite delicious isn’t it JJ?
They provided a heavily redacted contract from May 2021. Keen says he needs the full unredacted version to make sense of it.
There could be trouble ahead.
Jingso.Jimsie 22nd September 2021 At 15:23
You couldn’t make this up.
RIFC/TRFC were negotiating with cinch up until the 7th of June about renaming their ground ‘the cinch Ibrox Stadium’
Speculative, but until recently, was it not the case that Close Finance held securities over Ibrox, and would have had the final say on whether they could, or couldnae?
The Cinch revelations could prove costly as I’m sure they will seek recompense for a certain club* not displaying their name on shirts and stadia advertising as per the agreement . The SPFL should also fine them for failure to do so, then there will be the associated court costs if of course they end up on the losing side of the argument . Possibly the most damaging aspect of this is that once again they have shown themselves to be untrustworthy when it comes to business deals and are prepared to make ridiculous claims and excuses.
The SPFL must rue the day they decided an entity at Ibrox was an essential part of life in Scotland however I have a suggestion for them , introduce ffp and put these pups back in their box.
My speculation .
cinch have a large lump of money that they want to use to build brand awareness via partnerships in Scottish football.After discussions/negotiations , cinch decide to go with overall league sponsorship rather than a single stadium renaming . RIFC/TRFC spit the dummy oot because they are being forced to display advertising for a fraction of what they would have got had they concluded their own deal with cinch .
(I wonder if the redacted contract was drafted by the same hand that compiled the dossier ?)
Timtim 22nd September 2021 At 19:34
‘..The Cinch revelations could prove costly as I’m sure they will seek recompense for a certain club* ..
%%%%%%%5
If the contract was between the SPFL and cinch, cinch simply takes action against the SPFL for breach of contract, I would have thought.
The fight would then be between the SPFL and RIFC plc.
RIFC appear to have argued that the SPFL had no right to include them in any contract with cinch because they were already bound by a previous contract with another party [Park’s]
It looks like a major bols up for everyone but cinch, who’ll get their money one way or another!
Gross incompetence with an admixture of lies and deceit. Reminds me of 2012, for some reason.
With Derby County going into administration owing c. £30m to HMRC, it will be the first time since 2003 that HMRC will be a preferred creditor in a football administration (behind fixed charge / secured creditors and football creditors (England only), but ahead of unsecured creditors).
The law in respect of “Crown Preference” changed both in Scotland and England with effect from 1 December 2020.
It covers tax that is held by the company on behalf of others, e.g. VAT, PAYE, employee NICs. It does not cover tax due by the company itself, e.g. Corporation tax or employers NICs.
RANGERS have blasted back in their ongoing row with the SPFL – and say NO negotiations took place over a possible stadium sponsorship deal with cinch.
The Ibrox club insist it was the league’s new title sponsors who approached them “to discuss commercial opportunities” earlier this year.
Rangers say no ‘negotiations’ took place about renaming Ibrox
The Scottish champions are refusing to display cinch branding on team shirts, advertising boards or other media board.
Rangers chairman Douglas Park believes that the £8m deal struck by the SPFL breaches a commercial agreement between his company, Parks of Hamilton, and the club.
The matter is being dealt with at the Court of Session where Advocate Lord Keen of Elie QC said earlier today that the club had spoken to cinch about renaming the club’s stadium.
Acting for the SPFL, Lord Keen spoke during a hearing in which the SFA succeeded in a bid to gain permission to appeal against an interim interdict which had been granted against it earlier this year.
Douglas Park had won the court order which forces the SFA to comply with its own guidelines on arbitration.
The businessman instructed lawyers to go to Scotland’s highest civil court to seek a resolution.
Rangers, though, have hit back to say that isn’t the case.
They told the BBC: “Cinch approached Rangers to discuss commercial opportunities in early 2021.
“Rangers provided information on what opportunities might be available.
“This is common practice for our commercial team.
“At no point did cinch offer any terms to Rangers.
“Contrary to the SPFL’s claims, no ‘negotiations’ took place.”
Rangers believe they don’t need to display cinch branding because clubs are “not obliged to comply with this rule if to do so would result in that club being in breach of a contractual obligation entered into prior to the commercial contract concerned”.
Just been sent a video of Leigh Griffiths kicking a smoking flare into the St Johnstone support at Dens Park this evening.
No matter the provocation he receives, this is reprehensible at best and life threatening at worst.
Surely a lengthy ban & visit from Police Scotland awaits him. If not then why?
Timtim 22nd September 2021 At 12:45
Dave King is due to call in his loan in a few short weeks.
To top it all we have Ashley sitting in the wings waiting to extract revenge on those who ousted him and that includes Park as well as King.
RIFC/TRFC were negotiating with cinch up until the 7th of June about renaming their ground ‘the cinch Ibrox Stadium’ – Cinch found a better deal with the SPFL.
Do they sell their top players (in a depressed market) and risk not qualifying for the CL .
They have been trying to sell players and no one is interested in the price the ibrox club is asking.
If they do get to January they have a dilemma.
Do they go cap in hand to Ashley? It may be the only option left.
Albertz@21.33
Are Rangers* claiming the negotiations were dubbed ?
Perhaps the Ibrox board should look at appearing on the British version of Britain’s got Talent, or, The X Factor. Their juggling of stories of what was negotiated, what was discussed with cinch would surely appeal to the judges. If they were concerned about submitting an unredacted contract they could have applied for confidentiality agreements to be signed by all parties. It looks to be a case of them over-valuing the naming rights to the stadium, similar, to the over-valuing of numerous players they have been trying to flog. After all didn’t Dave King have a rather ambitious valuation of the roster a few years back.
C1@ 22:37
Imagine trying to spin the Sports Direct Ibrox Arena and a 1p in the £ per shirt deal into a positive . Did we ever find out where ra deedz were hiding ?
Come to the Cinch used car emporium. Home of a 2nd haun’ club, nearly new school jumpers, and pre-owned trophies……..Has quite a ring tae it. 🙂
Corrupt official 22nd September 2021 At 23:08
‘… Home of a 2nd haun’ club’
%%%%%%%%%%
Nay, Corrupt Official, rather more a ‘cheap, deceitful imitation’ of a deceased club, than decently ‘second haun’!
Vernallen 22nd Sept 01.22
“Will this be the year that Rangers break the 100 million mark in accumulated losses.”
More accurately, was FY20-21 the year Rangers broke the £100m mark in accumulated losses? Yes is the short answer. It has already happened, they just haven’t told us yet. The negative player trading in FY 20-21 combined with the COVID-related loss of non-season ticket “turn style” revenue of approximately £18m will have taken them comfortably over £100m of losses since formation in 2012. The only major unknowns are was there any positive offset from business interruption insurance which may have been in place and what the impact is of any improved commercial revenue linked to the switch to Castore netted against further legal costs and SDIR settlement provisions. The cumulative scale of share issues and the government loan indicate roughly where the numbers will land – a P/L loss in the region of £25-30m.
Given that no players left for any meaningful fee in the main transfer window affecting FY 21-22 and CL revenue didn’t materialise then I think a more interesting question is if Rangers fail to shift anyone in the January window is there any hope they could break even or are further losses inevitable this FY (21-22).
Nae fooling you John. lol.
TBH I wasn’t trying to fool anyone. I just stole a wee bit of artistic license to fit with the joke advertising blurb…… A new club with a used fanbase would be more accurate, but the Advertising Standards Authority don’t worry too much about accuracy.
It was intended in the third person. Arthur Daley-esque.
Anyhoos……Seems it wisnae them, but a big Bhoy that did it and ran away.
Re the ‘beanspilling’ about TRFC’s commercial activities, it’s a ‘cinch’ that the version of events outlined in RC’s post above is being spun by God knows who from the crumbling dome – most likely the board of the parent company. Also, I didn’t realise that the Govan mob was talking to the BBC – there ye go, I’ve learned something new today.
“They told the BBC blah blah …”. That wording doesn’t ring true wording and seems, at best, a bit ‘wishy washy’ to me! Or possibly fabricated.
I await with interest a response from Cinch, and the judge once he has seen the unredacted documents ( why would you redact anything if everything you claim about the vague nature of the contract is true?)
Now – got to get this off my chest…
It’s time, apparently, to have another attempt at ‘criminalising’ Leigh Griffiths, who admittedly behaved reprehensively against St Johnstone, from someone (see above) who seemingly sympathises with Kris ‘I know I’m associated with a mental health charity but that disnae matter cos we’re talking about a hooligan here’ Boyd, when chastising Griffiths for his actions – and looking for draconian punishment. Shylock and his pound of flesh springs to mind.?
It’s as if the poster was ‘bursting’ to ‘have a go’ at a guy with well documented enduring mental health issues, so although he definitely deserves punishment for his actions, how about a greater degree of understanding, humanity, help and support.
Or …let the polis just lock him up, eh?
Albertz11 22nd September 2021 @ 21:33hrs:
Interesting. Where does your extensive quote come from? It would have been much better had you supplied an attribution/link.
Instead of replying to Lord Keen’s assertions in in court, one of RIFC, TRFC or Douglas Park (I’m not at all sure who’s driving this forward, it may be one of, two of, or all three) decides to indulge in some ‘he said, she said’ via a BBC (?) journalist.
If Lord Keen, acting for the SFA, has used incorrect information in the CoS in front of Lord Braid, then the place to dispute the advocate’s position is in that very court. I’m surprised that those (apparently easily-proved, according to your quoted article) rebuttals weren’t made at yesterday’s hearing.
Still, the ‘clumpany’ works in mysterious ways & legal bills are just chaff in the wind…
betc67. 23rd September 11.17.
Where did i mention or show support for Kris Boyd?
Kris Boyd suffered a family bereavement and has used his media profile to raise awareness for an issue that affects people in every part of the country. He should be applauded for this by everyone, but sadly and somewhat predictably was subjected to vile online abuse on social media.
I have a great amount of sympathy for everyone who suffers with mental health issues, including Leigh Griffiths, but this should not excuse his recent actions which include last nights irresponsible behaviour.
I’m sure he has been offered all the “understanding, help and support” from his parent club (Celtic) but has to accept a personal level of responsibility going forward. Throwing a flare into a section of the stadium which included young children must be condemned, irrespective of who the perpetrator is.
Rather than “bursting to have a go” i was actually surprised no-one had mentioned the incident given its very nature.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58662407
Enterprising way of increasing income in Scottish fitba’
https://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/match-worn-football-shirts-and-shorts-brechin-city-3797806
For clarification on the Kris Boyd ‘stuff’, you need to dig a wee bit into the archives, and see what his historic disparaging and derogatory comments, which showed a complete lack of empathy to Griffiths, and, to my recollection, did not mention mental health issues with regard to his ongoing struggles.
I, indeed, acknowledged and posted at the time, that he, as a patron of a mental health charity, together with the fact that he had lost a brother who had sadly taken his own life should could reasonably be expected to have been more understanding of the Celtic striker. I was fully aware of that.
Griffiths had a ‘go’ at him, for his ‘pronouncements’ previously made about him, and his ‘attitude’ by Boyd. after scoring against Kilmarnock at Rugby Park. The irony , again as I mentioned at the time, was Boyd’s ‘position’ in a mental health charity
Whilst two wrongs don’t make a right, Griffiths himself has been subjected to vile abuse on social media – more so, I suspect, than Boyd.
Although I feel you have aggressively targetted Griffiths (why mention the polis?), you will note that I wrote ‘seemingly’ – so I would be grateful if you didn’t ‘put words into my mouth’ and/or do my thinking for me.
The incident has now been highlighted in the media, I’m pleased to note, and in a much more ‘temperate’ tone than your own post (please see the BBC Website).
I cannot express myself any clearer that I believe him to be a victim of poor mental health who needs ongoing support (not suggestions that he might be arrested/cautioned by her majesty’s finest). That is my main point, and that he does not need to be vilified more.
Finally, please note that my remarks are made from a mental health perspective.
betc67.23rd September 15.04
First of all let me thank you for the reply and hope you are well.
I have no knowledge of Kris Boyd’s previous comments regarding Leigh Griffiths but would have expected a degree of sympathy.
You have accused me of “putting words in to your mouth”, whilst at the same time making assumptions regarding the tone of my post that are incorrect. As an example of this, at no point did i mention “let the polis just lock him up”
Also at no time did i mention that “he might be arrested/cautioned” but simply said in the original post that he may receive a visit from PS. Would it not be standard procedure that he be asked for his version of events?
Would you agree with this?
From the BBC Website.
A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “We are aware of an incident involving a small number of smoke devices at Dens Park, during the match between Dundee and St Johnstone Football Clubs on Wednesday, 22 September.
“There were no injuries and no complaints have been made to police at this stage. Enquiries into the matter are ongoing.” .
Finally, to be perfectly clear this is not a personal attack on Leigh Griffiths who i still feel needs to accept some responsibility for his actions.
Despite previous well documented indiscretions i believe it is obvious he still requires help with his issues and sincerely hope he receives it.
In closing i would like to reiterate my earlier point that i genuinely hope you take care and keep well in the future.
Albertz11
Could you point me to any quotes where he has denied being responsible for his actions ? Or is it that he’s not contrite enough?
Jingso.Jimsie 23rd September 2021 At 11:52
‘..Still, the ‘clumpany’ works in mysterious ways & legal bills are just chaff in the wind…’
%%%%%%%%%%%
Tonight, and I hope he doesn’t suffer for it, but I think I may have heard from the mouth of one Kenny McIntyre of the BBC an ‘objective’, but casual, observation about legal bills.
I will not swear to the fact ( until I listen again to ‘Sportsound’) but it seemed to be a kind of implied criticism of perhaps the most litigious club in Scottish Football and the money, money, money it seems to ready to spend on law suits of one kind or another!
How very brave! Or was he expressing personal anxiety at the foolhardiness of his club?
Was anyone else listening?
JC 23rd September 23.22
Sorry to disappoint you but i believe that he (KMI) was criticising the governing bodies and not Rangers.
Tuned in to listen to the draw for the Semi-Finals and the discussion centred around the possibility of VAR being introduced in Scottish football. Pat Bonner was in favour, other guest? was more cautious and KMI mentioned “who was going to pay for it” as money was being squandered, or words to that effect, on court cases.
I could have picked this up wrong as i was multi tasking at the time, unsuccessfully as it turned out.
John,
I’m sure that the Onion Bears & Van Gogh Bears will come forward & organise bucket-collections at a few home games to assist in paying said legal bills to help the club/company.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58680425
Some fantastic kite-flying going on in the press today: it must be a quiet Friday!
The SMSM have Kamara selling for ‘eight figures’ in January.
If that’s not eye-popping enough, they’re quoting sources in Romania (including the player’s own agent, of course) who’re pumping Hagi for a £17m move to Mourinho’s Roma in the next window.
Poor Morelos; he’s not mentioned (as far as I can see). I wonder what that’ll do to his ego?
Still, the promise of ‘jam tomorrow’ (well January, anyway!) will likely be enough to please the followers of TRFC.
JJ “Some fantastic kite-flying going on in the press today: it must be a quiet Friday!”
Per my earlier post, a positive January window is likely the only chance Rangers* have of avoiding a further loss for FY 21-22 having failed to offload anyone in the summer window. Expect many more puff pieces between now and then.
Since it is Friday and the bar is almost open, mischievously, I will add that with a loss for FY 20-21 a certainty, should they fail to stop the rot in FY 21-22 then that would be TIAR.
JJ – I despair at the lack of understanding of the dynamics of modern transfers in the Scottish press (at least in how they report them if not understand them). Kamara signed a new contract in the last few days. That contract will include within it release clauses (if it doesn’t he needs a new agent). Those clauses, combined with interest for other clubs, will determine whether Kamara sees out his contract. If the release clause for January is 8 figures then either Kamara has secured a whopping increase in his weekly pay or a rather large signing on fee (there has to be a trade-off). The days of players signing contracts and allowing the club to retain all the value of that contract in any transfer are gone.
A case in point is the recent transfer moves made by Jack Hendry where he inserted the max transfer fee clause if the buying club was in the Champions League.
Jingso.Jimsie 24th September 2021 At 15:37
Some fantastic kite-flying going on in the press today
Weird that nobody wanted them just a couple of short weeks ago when the windae was open. :-)
Does anyone else get annoyed when no sooner has ne'erday passed, and Easter eggs start appearing in the shops
https://www.indycelts.com/rumours-grow-that-sevco-missed-wages-as-smsm-launch-17mil-squirrel/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Firstly , it’s a rumour but so is the alleged 17m bid for Hagi and the future 8 figure bid for Kamara both of whom could have been subject to a bid during the long summer transfer window . These rumoured bids are courtesy of a media that told us Barry McKay was on his way to Red Bull for 6m (500k to Forest) and the 30m for our favourite Colombian collector of red and yellow cards (going nowhere) It could be trying to put at ease the minds of those who may have monies owed or it could be trying to put lipstick on a pig to influence potential investors. If they have struggled to pay last months wages then there is little in the way of income coming in before January that can cover September,October,November and December’s wage.
Wishful thinking? , mibbees aye mibbees naw but I get the feeling that this season was a CL or bust play by those investors just as David Murray used to gamble on those riches to kick the can down the road . Going into administration ends next seasons CL group stage entry as I’m pretty sure it rules out getting a licence, it would also see many of the high earners released just to keep the club* afloat and any future transfer income from those players goes with it. If these rumours have substance then they are between a rock and a hard place . The last share issue came up short , club 1872 are skint , King wants his cash back , Ashley hovers over them and there are tax deferments and outstanding transfer fees to be addressed . There comes a time when you have to stop throwing good money after bad , the question is , has that time come?
Timtim 24th September 20.23
What rumours?
Origin of said rumours?
What number of rumours are we at now?
People believing what they desperately want to believe.
Timtim 24th September 2021 At 21:23
‘… Going into administration ends next seasons CL group stage entry as I’m pretty sure it rules out getting a licence..’
%%%%%%%%%%
Tut, tut, Timtim!
“Rules”?
Do we not have a governance body that knows not the meaning of “Rules”?
Isn’t it ‘bruited abroad’ that there is precedent for breach of ‘rules’ by the SFA in respect of the UEFA licence afforded to a now deceased football club, by their withholding the truth about that deceased club’s finances?
Admittedly, the deceased club in question was not ‘In Administration’ at the time, so its financial difficulties might not have been under scrutiny by UEFA.
They certainly appear not to have been properly scrutinised and reported on to UEFA by the SFA licensing approval chaps!
And any investigation into whether that ‘appearance’ had any substance in fact was arbitrarily blocked, by the SFA itself- acting as judge in its own case!
Obviously, actual “Administration” such as the recently announced Derby County’s, is perhaps too publicly known to be hidden from UEFA.
But by the Lord Harry, we can be in no doubt that our football governance bodies will do their damnedest to ‘save’ TRFC, rules or no rules, if, when, it goes bust!
Or, if they fail in that, will allow any new creation of a club by chancers to call itself TRFC II with a history of sporting achievement going back , what?, 150 years or so!
The rot is there, inbuilt in the heart of Scottish Football governance!
jingso.jimsie — 24 sept 2021 — 15:37
Perhaps there will be an offer from China for Kamara since no other leagues appear to be openly interested. Hagi and Mourhino are an interesting combination Hagi is said to be an offensive style player while Mourhino appears to prefer someone who can apply some defensive abilities. The rumor mill will be churning out all sorts of fantasy moves between now and January and if the money is as tight as it appears to be there may actually be some movement, but, nowhere near the figures being tossed around.
As betc67 alluded to, there would appear to be a lack of empathy toward Leigh Griffiths from Kris Boyd judging by his column in the Sun today.
……………………………………………………………………………………………
KARMA has a way of catching up with people.
Leigh Griffiths is about to find that out the hard way at Dens Park.
He was laughing when he tied that Celtic scarf to one of the goalposts at Ibrox a few seasons back.
Grinning from ear to ear during an Old Firm game the day he waved his Irish tricolour from the Broomloan Road Stand.
When he wiped his nose on a Rangers corner flag he thought he was being clever.
Well, let’s see how smart he is when Rangers supporters tell him what they think of him.
Griffiths is about to get bombarded with 90 minutes of relentless abuse and if he’s got a brain in that head of his he better be prepared to take it.
Listen, I’m not going to go into the reasons why supporters all over the country are going to give him a hard time this season. Frankly, I want nothing to do with it.
But what I will say is that Griffiths only has himself to blame — and the sooner he realises that the better.
Will he, though? Is he capable of accepting responsibility for anything in life? I’m not sure he is.
It seems to me that every time something happens to him he thinks it’s someone else’s fault.
He wasn’t to blame for how things worked out for him at Celtic, was he? No, that was all Neil Lennon’s fault apparently.
Honestly, I can’t remember reading anything as ridiculous as when Griffiths spoke about Lennon recently and claimed his ex-boss was just trying to stay relevant by talking about him. Really?
Are we talking about the same high-profile Neil Lennon who has been one of the most talked about personalities in Scottish football in the last 20 years?
Griffiths can’t surely be serious when he says Lennon needs him to stay relevant.
But that sums him up, doesn’t it? Rather than owning his mistakes and taking responsibility for them, his default position is to go on the attack.
If only he was as threatening on the park.
Because when you strip everything back with Griffiths, he’s not the player his fan club will have you believe.
Is he a good finisher? Sure, I’ll give him that. But in the last three seasons do you know how many league goals he’s scored? Let me tell you because I looked it up. It’s 17.
Two goals in season 2018/19, nine goals in season 19/20 and six goals in season 20/21.
I’m sorry, but that’s not the statistics of a top-level goalscorer.
This is someone with natural talent, sure.
But that’s not enough if you are to be considered a top player.
Yet his cheerleaders are forever making excuses for him, constantly telling anyone who’ll listen that Griffiths would prove everyone wrong.
That he just needed to get fit and he’d be back.
Griffiths ended up saying it himself but it was total and utter nonsense, every single word of it.
Griffiths is yet to score for Dundee
Griffiths has had more than enough time and opportunity to get himself in shape and he’s only thrown it back in people’s faces.
The scoring records in Scottish football should have been OBLITERATED by him in the last five years. Instead he put the tools away and it seems like he couldn’t care less.
Why Celtic gave him a new contract in the summer, I’ll never know. For the life of me, I’ll never be able to work that one out.
Even their supporters must have been scratching their heads.
Those fans slaughtered me for criticising Griffiths and more or less saying it takes more than just ability to play at a top club.
But while my wording could have been better I think I’ve been proved right. When he scored at Rugby Park one day he looked up at me and made a shooshing gesture, but I stand by every word. He’s not exactly silenced me since, has he?
Now he’s at Dundee I wonder if his manager James McPake is beginning to wonder if it was a good idea bringing him to the club.
They’re pals from their days together at Livingston so I can understand why McPake was prepared to give Griffiths the benefit of any doubt.
But since he signed, Dundee have yet to score a goal.
Listen, I’ve been there. I got abuse every single time I stepped on to a football park and had to take it. It’s part of the deal.
Okay, the shouts weren’t anything like the abuse Griffiths is getting but he’s 31 now and should be experienced enough to know how to switch off from it.
I just look at him and see someone who is more or less finished. Truth be told, he’s the way I was when I was at Kilmarnock and hung up my boots a couple of months before my 36th birthday.
I didn’t have the same drive to stay in shape so I realised it was time to hang up the boots.
As a striker you stand the best chance of playing every week, because it’s a specialist position. But you need to deliver.
Griffiths just hasn’t looked like delivering for a long time now. His decline is there for all to see with his scoring record miles off where it should be.
During the warm-up before the Dundee derby at Tannadice last weekend we were in the gantry preparing for kick-off when a ball flew past.
We were nowhere near the goals so it was obvious someone was deliberately trying to hit us.
I didn’t see who was responsible — but my money would be on Griffiths.
Why? Because he missed.
@A11 – I believe the rumour referenced by JJ is per the link he posted. And to be fair to JJ he has qualified his post by noting that it is only a rumour.
By its very nature the source of a rumour is somewhat irrelevant until the rumour is proven as fact.
And I would not expect TRFC to take any action to quash such rumour if false unless it was having an adverse effect on their business.
Actions will speak louder than words in the transfer window.
For clarity, I haven’t referenced any rumours.
That wisnae me, anither boy dun it & run awa’!
Apologies JJ and TT. In my defence I have an appointment at Vision Express on Monday!
“We need people, children, teenagers and adults to be brave and speak up. We have to make them believe someone will listen to them and help. We need to build more trust. We need to encourage them strive to be the best person they can possibly be. Help them to overcome the hurdles that life will inevitably throw up at them and make sure they are successful in their chosen field” (Mission Statement of The Kris Boyd Foundation).
Notwithstanding his family tragedy, I find it, quite frankly, nauseating to read his arrogant, spiteful diatribe (which ‘flies in the face’ of the above statement) in today’s Sun against the very sort of person his charity seeks to help!
His disgusting hypocrisy (in leading his organisation whilst earning a few bob from a ‘rag’ of a paper to malign, demean and undermine a bit of a ‘lost soul’, is egregious and despicable
No allowance is made in his article regarding the man’s mental health and wellbeing.
He has also fallen into the trap of basically telling someone beset by mental health issues to ‘get a grip’.
Albertz11 25th September 2021 At 07:46
Oh deary me !
Albertz11 — 25 sept 2021– 7:46
I think the most telling point in the Boyd article is as follows — I’m not going to get into reasons why supporters all over the country are going to give him a hard time this season. Frankly I want nothing to do with it. — From this point on he constantly harps on about Griffiths, almost like he was getting paid by the word. Not the way forward for someone who wants nothing to do with it. Also pointing out Griffiths scoring record in the last three seasons if a little self serving, can anyone point out Boyd’s stats for his last three seasons.
In terms of rumours about wages not being paid it’s worth remembering anyone can post what they like on social media without having to offer any evidence.
What it did make me wonder about is how it is flagged to the authorities when a club can’t meet its payroll. I remember instances in the past where it became public knowledge through media reporting that clubs had not met their wage bill. There is I believe sanctions for this, a transfer ban being one of them, although it means little unless the window is open.
My question is general. If a club can’t meet its wage bill who is responsible for telling the authorities? Is it down to players complaining to the Players Union or are clubs duty bound to inform them?
The original rumour prompted my questions, that’s all.
upthehoops 25th September 2021 @ 22:31hrs –
Clubs agree to operate ‘in good faith’ when they are members of the SFA & SPFL.
In the broadest of terms, if any club is unable to pay its staff, then they are in breach of said ‘good faith’ & should (no tittering, I don’t like tittering!) inform the relevant authorities.
Buried in a subsection of a subsection in the SFA Handbook, there’s a clause which states that the SFA has the right to examine, at any time, accounts & documents pertaining to a club’s operations.
I wonder how many times they’ve exercised that option?
Jingso.Jimsie 26th September 2021 At 11:38
If I recall correctly any time in the past that a club has failed to pay its players it normally becomes public knowledge via the Players Union. As for the SFA and ‘acting in good faith’…words fail me.
upthehoops 26th September 2021 At 21:28
‘..As for the SFA and ‘acting in good faith’…words fail me.’
%%%%%
Indeed.
There was a singular lack of anything like ‘good faith’ on the part of the SFA when it created the lie that TRFC of 2012 is to be regarded as being , in terms of sporting history, the Rangers of 1872!
Liars, and betrayers of their office as ‘guardians’ of the integrity of Scottish professional football, what are they like?
Who in his right mind would credit the SFA with even an understanding of the meaning of ‘integrity’?
There are , in my opinion, bad people in the world.
And also weak, ineffectual ‘leaders’ in the world of Scottish Football.
That it should come this!
Bad guys are one thing.
Useless toss-pots as bad guys are something else!
I cannot think of a better outcome for Scottish football than a team out with Glasgow winning the league this season . Real Madrid v Motherwell or PSG v Hibernian in the CL is long overdue.
Surely relevant, and possibly mitigating (?), to the indisputable fact that Leigh Griffiths acted rashly in kicking the flare towards a spectator area, are the following points …
Who threw the flares?
Who, if anybody, is investigating it?
Are our trusted SFA leaders involved in any investigation?
Will Dundee face punishment as club responsible for spectator safety?
Just wondering like.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58699735
bect67 27th September 2021 At 15:15
Only Griffiths knows for sure what his intention was. However it was not a good look because if he only wanted to move the flare to the trackside he could easily have done so.
On a wider note the furore over Griffiths is ignoring the now widespread and dangerous acts we see at many games regarding fans and pyrotechnics. Something really needs to be done about this because it is only a matter of time before someone is seriously injured. There is no room for whataboutery either, because fans associated with many clubs are now involved. As always the media in their desperate thirst to get Griffiths, have ignored the pimple brained clown who threw the flare in the first place.
Uth @ 16.53
Wrt to Griffiths, although I tend to regard his actions as not being maliciously intentional , your point is fair, debatable in the best sense, and well made.
As the rest of my post – well, all will be revealed in due course. (wont it ???).
Albertz11 27th September 2021 At 15:17
‘…https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58699735.’
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
That was an extremely useful link, and thanks for posting it, Albertz11.
Having only the faintest idea about ‘franchises’ I was prompted to try to find out a little more about the concept and the application of it.
I googled http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/franchise.asp
from which I take this:
“A franchise is a business whereby the owner licenses its operations—along with its products, branding, and knowledge—in exchange for a franchise fee.
The franchisor is the business that grants licenses to franchisees.
The Franchise Rule requires franchisors to disclosure key operating information to prospective franchisees.1
Ongoing royalties paid to franchisors vary by industry and can range between 4.6% and 12.5%.2 ”
The full article is worth a read, and I will try to read it with understanding. But at present, in thinking abut how ‘franchising’ would or could work in Scottish Football, I’m stuck at the starting gate on the question: who would be the franchisor? Who ‘owns’ Scottish Football? The SFA? or the SPFL? Or would each individual club be franchisor? How would a club lease the right to operate as a club, and what would it market other than its own brand and branded goods/services?
Anyone able to explain how franchise system would work? I am embarrassed by being so ignorant, but since we’re probably going to hear a lot more about it, I’ll need to try to get to grips with the basics so that I can follow the discussions that the ‘5-club Review’ might throw up in a few months.
John Clark 27th September 20.41
Thanks John. I have always had an interest in US Sports, and the way they operate, whether it be the NFL, MLB or NBA. From the draft system, to the pooling resources to ensure no one club dominates for a lengthy period of time just made sense to me.
The complete opposite of course to what happens in Scottish football where two clubs, sometimes one, have dominated for decades with turnover 5,10,15 times the competition. Added to this the best talent from the other clubs is snapped up by the big two, which not only weakens the individual clubs and in turn the league but has also led to the players own career stagnating through a lack of game time.
From a few years back but still relevant is how the NFL operates.
NFL Revenue Sharing 101
Posted on January 23, 2020 by Steve Thomas
January 23, 2020
By Noonefromtampa
Many people have questions as to how revenue is divided up among the various NFL teams, so I wanted to provide a general overview on the subject from publicly available sources and estimates made by industry followers. The NFL does not make detailed financial information available.
NFL revenue is split into two major categories: national revenue and local revenue.
National revenue, which is shared across all 32 teams, consists of:
TV deals with the various networks
NFL Ventures:
Merchandising; Fanatics is the lead NFL partner on this
NFL Enterprise:
NFL Network, NFL.com and NFL Sunday Ticket
Licensing deals, such as “official sponsors of the NFL”
Ticket sales (40% of gross)
Local revenue, which goes to the local team, consists of:
Ticket sales (60% of gross)
Concessions and parking, which are split between the team and stadium ownership
Corporate sponsorships with the local team
Tickets sales are split between the home team, which gets 60% of the gate, with the remaining 40% going into a shared pool that is split across all teams. This helps negates the impact of poor attendance on individual teams, such as the Redskins.
2018 Estimate of Shared Revenue Sources
Category Amount
TV Deals $5.1B
NFL Ventures $1.4B
NFL Enterprise $2.3B
Ticket Sales $330M
We know from the 2018 Green Bay Packers’ financial report that the league provided $274.3M in shared revenue per team. Multiplying that amount by 32 teams yields a net total shared revenue pool of $8.8B. The estimate of shared revenue from various sources is around $9.1B, so the difference between the two values means that league expenses are around $300M.
While every team gets an equal of the national revenue, the local revenue can vary greatly based on the size and type of the stadium, ticket sales, how much of the concession/parking revenue the team gets and the value of the team’s corporate sponsorships. In 2018, the Packers had $203.7M in local revenue for a total revenue of $489M. Economic experts who track sports league finances have estimated some teams have much higher total revenues than the Packers.
Some total revenue estimates for 2018 for the top revenue teams:
Dallas Cowboys – $950M
New England Patriots – $600M
New York Giants – $520M
Houston Texans – $500M
Washington Redskins – $495M
San Francisco 49ers – $495M
So, the better a team does at generating local revenue, the more money goes into the team’s pockets.
John Clark a wee read for you if you have not read it.
https://scottishfsa.org/chairmans-blog-17-09-21/
John Clark
Further to my post of 22.25.
A quick check back through the blog finds a post i addressed to you on the 11th of August at 23.54 in which the distribution of monies in US College Football was discussed.
Not sure whether you will find it interesting or not? and apologies to those who have no interest in the subject but given the increase in American owners of SPFL clubs may be something worthy of further discussion in the future.
………………………………………….
JC
Further to my previous post an example of how wealth distribution worked in College Football in the USA.
REPORT: FOOTBALL TICKET REVENUE SHARING COST UW MORE THAN $950,000 IN 2012;
SPORTS
TODD D. MILEWSKI , The Capital Times , tmilewski@madison.com
When it comes to football gate revenues, the Big Ten Conference takes from the rich to give to the poor.
Under a long-held revenue sharing plan, more than $6.6 million went from the Big Ten’s top seven gate-revenue-producing schools – the University of Wisconsin included – to the bottom five in the 2012 season, according to an analysis by The Gazette of Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
The Wisconsin athletic department contributed more than $950,000 to that transfer in a system that The Gazette found was unique among major college football conferences.
Here’s how it works:
Big Ten teams share 35 percent of the net gate receipts, after sales tax, from conference home games, up to $1 million per game and at minimum $300,000 per game.
Each school has four conference home games per season, meaning the most any would pay in is $4 million. Five schools reached that level in 2012: Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio State and Penn State.
The money from that pool gets split 12 ways and returned evenly to the schools.
In 2012, the total of gate receipts for the league’s 48 games was $36,458,053.71, or $3,038,171.14 per school.
Those five schools that paid in $4 million each ended up with a net loss of $961,828.86. Wisconsin paid in a little less – three of its four home games reached the $1 million cap but the home game against Illinois did not – so its loss was a little less as well.
It ended up being $957,854.22 out of the Badgers’ budget. Randy Marnocha, the UW associate athletic director for business operations, told a meeting of the UW Athletic Board’s finance, facilities and operations committee earlier this month that the department had budgeted to lose $800,000 last year in that revenue sharing agreement.
Michigan State also had a net loss ($862,933.66), while five schools had a revenue gain from the program:
Indiana, $1,722,143.29
Illinois, $1,312,175.70
Northwestern, $1,271,654.13
Minnesota, $1,266,143.74
Purdue, $1,057,815.29
Football gate receipts aren’t the only kind of money shared by Big Ten schools. Each year, they get a payout from the conference on media revenues, including those from the Big Ten Network.
Marnocha told the finance committee that in the 2012-13 school year, the athletic department brought in over $16 million from Big Ten media revenue.
Conference officials said the football ticket revenue sharing idea goes to the heart of the Big Ten philosophy.
“It’s very important philosophically because it was the first real commitment on the financial end, that our schools recognized that great things can be achieved by the collective good to share revenue in a way that’s beneficial to all,” Big Ten deputy commissioner Brad Traviolia told The Gazette. “It’s important to continue.
“It’s worked well for us. It’s a trust and a camaraderie among our institutions that’s been developed over a century. It’s part of who we are.”
October 31, 2013
bigboab1916 27th September 2021 At 23:05
‘…John Clark a wee read for you..’
%%%%%%%
Thank you, bigboab1916!
“Membership is on business criteria not what we would call sporting merit.”
Mmmnn….
Not altogether a new idea in Scottish football then, where we have had the extraordinary ‘business’ decision that a club created in 2012 is to be regarded as being the dead club which, if it had not died, would be approaching its 150th birthday!-for filthy lucre’s sake.
Let’s hope that the Yanks in Scottish Football fail in their attempts to ‘Americanise’ our game.
[And, begeez, do I not still remember the Locarno Ballroom on Sauchiehall St and the ‘Polaris’ fights in the 1960s? Happy days!]
Albertz11 27th September 2021 At 22:25
Albertz11 27th September 2021 At 23:28
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Grateful for those informative posts.
The key point for me is that gate-sharing seems to be taken as a basic principle, which recognises the obvious fact that there can be no game, match, bout, without an opponent!
I have difficulty, though, with the idea of no promotion/relegation.
Perhaps the 5-Club Review might find some way forward that keeps both gate-sharing and pyramid structure.
Might be quite interesting times ahead.
John Clark 28th sept 2021 — 10:17
The NFL is a financial beast compared to all other major sporting leagues in North America. The stadiums range in size from 60K to 80K so ticket income is massive. Unlike other sports they don’t have to support a minor league system to develop players, the colleges/universities provide that service for them. Baseball and hockey have to support multi layers of minor league teams to have a development system in place. Basketball is a little gray in that area, but do rely heavily on colleges/universities and some times high schools to act as a feeder system. While they don’t have promotion and relegation these leagues have play off systems that will enrich the owners and provide bonus money to players
John Clark 28th sept 2021 — 10:17
As follow up to my earlier post to show how a franchise system can benefit a team playing in a small and I mean small market, the Green Bay Packers of the NFL, play in a city with a population of just over 104,000 people. Green Bay is the third largest city in the state and the 303 rd largest city in the U.S. They continually field a competitive team and have won several Super Bowls. Without the franchise system and the financial benefits that accompany the system, it’s highly unlikely Green Bay would have a football team. Also, several of the NFL teams have had the city build their stadium under threat of relocating the team, enjoy immense tax breaks, and in some cases enjoy all the additional revenues associated with the games, food, drink, parking to name a few.
Notice of Complaint | Leigh Griffiths, Player, Dundee FC
Wednesday 29 September 2021
Notice of Complaint | Leigh Griffiths, Player, Dundee FC
Alleged Party in Breach: Leigh Griffiths, Player, Dundee FC
Date: 22 September 2021
Competition: Scottish League Cup
Match: Dundee F.C. v St Johnstone F.C.
Disciplinary Rules allegedly breached:
Disciplinary Rule 71 – No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, match official, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute.
Disciplinary Rule 77 – A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player, match official or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football. Furthermore such person or body shall not act in any manner which is improper or use any one, or a combination of, violent Conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.
Disciplinary Rule 202 – No player shall commit Excessive Misconduct at a match.
Principal hearing date: Thursday 14 October 2021
Leave it to that bastion of journalistic excellence, the DR, to come up with another fantasy story. Rangers out to end 40 year hex of no victories in Czech. Interesting timeline for a team formed in 2012 but why let the truth get in the way. Sooner or later someone in the media will take a step forward and as a former sportscaster in the US used to say, “tell it like it is.”
Notice of complaint above …
‘Like a werefolf peerin’ o’er a dyke’ so ye ur’!…
… although a most reasonable chap as well no doubt
vernallen 29th September 2021 At 18:05
‘.. that bastion of journalistic excellence, the DR,’
%%%%%%
Geez! Should have had my eye-sight checked!
I read ” bastardin journalistic excrement”
and was nodding my head in agreement.
Seriously, though, what are we to make of guys whose jobs require them to buy into lies?
Whose job requires not Truth, but the earnest and sustained effort to support Untruth , in writing for an organ such as the ‘Daily Record’ which steadfastly refuses to accept that RFC of 1872 died!
I have made comparisons before, and I make them again. Ja!
Newspapers, ‘the freedom of the Press’, is killed when the organs of the Press support Untruth, in any sphere of public life.
And the barstewards know it, and gnash their teeth at being called out!
Bad, bad , and knowingly bad, as they are!
God grant their their presses grind to a halt sooner than soon. Press freedom does not include freedom to lie in matters of fact.
A11 – 29th Sept 11.01
“Notice of Complaint | Leigh Griffiths, Player, Dundee FC
Wednesday 29 September 2021
Notice of Complaint | Leigh Griffiths, Player, Dundee FC”
That Leigh Griffiths would be in trouble for his actions was a given. His actions were inexplicable and clearly wrong.
One of the root causes of the incident however is that flares, pyrotechnics, smoke grenades etc. are routinely used in football stadia and by football fans pre and post matches. This is an issue which simply has to be knocked on the head. Existing laws should be enforced and, if they were, the frequency of use would diminish. Instead, clubs and the police appear to be doing nothing, or at least nothing that is effective, to solve the problem.
We already have had a report of the partial permanent disability earlier in the year.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/7119913/rangers-celebrations-hospital-hand-missing/
Many of us may well have had an initial reaction of “hell mend him” with respect to that particular incident but it misses the point that it could just as well have been an innocent by-stander who ended up maimed. Does it take this to happen before authorities act?
I’m rather taken aback by the reaction of the media & others to the booing of Kamara last night.
The player was being booed because of what happened last season. Roofe was also being booed at times. Crowds love a ‘villain’ (real or imagined) to rail against (cf. Brown, Griffiths, Morelos etc. etc.). Kamara’s lawyer is such a clever man that he can interpret a boo as racist. Gerrard claims not to have heard the boos in the stadium during the game, but realised how ‘bad’ it was when watching a recording of the match (or when someone told him there was some mileage in remarking on it, perhaps?). At a stroke, 10k Czech schoolchildren are branded as racist & used to deflect from an underwhelming performance by TRFC.
I note that Frimpong was booed every time he touched the ball last night at Celtic Park. What was the crowd’s motivation for that?
JJ
I agree that there may be a rush to conclusion here re Kamara. I think if you change the teams here and supposed that a team has accused Rangers of being racist, and they showed up the following year at Celtic Park, the Celtic fans would be more likely to cheer them than boo.
The booing (I believe took place but did not hear it myself) by 10000 kids when Rangers took the knee is more than a bit depressing. The kids of course inherit that from their parents.
On the whole, I’m pretty satisfied that there was a racial motive. Doesn’t fit in with my worldview that Rangers are the good guys in this scenario, but I think they are.
I would be more convinced of that if Rangers didn’t cherry pick their racist incidents and put a stop to the routine filth that is spewed out at Ibrox every time they play, but having witnessed ST burning on the occasion of Mark Walters’ transfer, I am thankful for at least that much progress. The educational need in respect of Irishness/Catholicism/Islam remains urgent, but I do worry about the far-right jack-boot racism in places like the former Soviet satellites, and here in the UK.
Re my post at 11:11hrs –
A slight edit to my second sentence: The player was being booed because of his part in what happened last season.
J.J
As a quick response to your bemusement about Frimpong being booed (based on the irony that he was well enough liked by CFC supporters?) was, imho, the age old treatment of a former player from just about any club turned ‘traitor’. I have never understood, or contributed to, such idiotic resentment. Supporters don’t ‘own’ players.
I therefore found it more embarrassing than confusing. In all honesty, I squirmed – imagining, as I did, TV viewers wondering just what the guy had done wrong to warrant his abuse.
Good luck to him – he seems to have made a good career move.
ps just read your edit – not so sure I agree.
J.J
I have just realised that I misread your edit – in which you were referring to Kamara?
My humble apologies! Ignore my own rather hasty and somewhat presumptuous ps.
Was the booing of Kamara racist, or was it because he is the player responsible for getting a Slavia player suspended for 10 matches and for bringing the good name of that club into disrepute? The player has always denied the accusation of making a racist remark to Kamara, the Czech sporting public would be aware of that, and the 10,000 young people inside the stadium weren’t necessarily Sparta fans.
I know there has been a previous incidence of racist remarks there, but I thought the commentators’ repeated reference to the incident at Ibrox before and after Kamara’s dismissal last night and an attempt to justify his second yellow on the pressure of racist booing was cringeworthy.
Maybe that’s because the whole furore at Ibrox resulted in Goldson escaping a straight red for the tackle that caused the ruckus and that still irritates me.
Kick racism out of sport and everywhere else.
To follow up my comments from this morning:
If the booing of Kamara was racially motivated, why was there no audible booing when Bassey, Balogun, Aribo, Bacuna, Sakala, Tavernier & Morelos (sub) were on the ball? The booing was targeted at two players, Kamara & Roofe, both of whom were involved in unsavoury incidents during & post game in a match against Slavia Prague at Ibrox last year. I also accept that TRFC should do more to eradicate anti-Irish/anti-Catholic/racist behaviours within their own support, both home & away.
I’m also aware why Frimpong was booed last night.
Perhaps someone can explain why Shay Logan always got pelters when playing CFC (home & away) after his allegations against Tonev? Was that abuse from fans racially motivated or was there another reason?
I note that Sparta Prague has issued a statement condemning TRFC’s allegations & that TRFC are contacting UEFA over the booing.
I see from the BBC sports pages that the SFA and SPFL look like they might finally be catching up with most other developed leagues by introducing VAR.
All I can say is that I hope our top class referees (with a sum total of zero representation at the recent Euros) sharpen up their act otherwise we could be in for more u-turns on the pitch than even the current UK government could manage!!!
wokingcelt 1st October 2021 At 16:23
If the VAR supervisors are drawn from the same (toxic, conflicted ) pool of referees , I don’t foresee much progress .
VARy diplomatic there Paddy! Aye right!
All the subtlety of a sledgehammer – but I agree.
Plus la change etc?
@PM @B67 – I think the difference will be in bringing to light the decision making process. In the old days you couldn’t complain unless (according to the late Jimmy Sanderson) “were you at the match caller?” And nothing changed anyway.
I think all teams (well maybe 41/42) will benefit from the technology – perhaps Dundee Utd would have been awarded a penalty last weekend.
Fundamentally for me it will hold our referees to account. Are they biased as a group – we could argue forever. Have they been good enough over the years – I don’t think so and VAR should call that out without fear or favour (no reason why we don’t share the facilities with the English FA to reduce costs and access world class VAR refs).
Is that James Farry I hear turning in his grave…as I am sure we all know light is one of the best disinfectants.
‘The Scotsman’ this morning is bumming its load about its award winning ‘journalists’ , including a couple of their sports journalists.
Personally, when I hear of ‘award-winning journalists’ I call to mind those journalists who have risked or suffered imprisonment or have been killed in the cause of telling the truth.
Now, I find it hard to believe that any of our sports journalists really believes that TRFC is the Rangers of 1872.
It follows that the winning of awards by any of them by writing well about a wholly false ‘sports’ scene – going with the flow of false nonsense rather than exposing it and calling for a restoration of sporting truth in football governance- is a somewhat less than praiseworthy achievement.
Let any of the award winners go into print and explain, showing their evidence-based reasons, why they assert that TRFC is the RFC of 1872, a club which had to surrender its share in the SPL Ltd , and in consequence lost its membership of the SFA and its right to participate in Scottish professional football?
Or why a football club newly created in 2012, freshly admitted into Scottish football at that time, is permitted to claim the history of a club that died in shameful debt to us all?
Personally I am very pleased to see that VAR will most likely be getting introduced into Scottish football in a couple of years. I am sure we all have decisions in mind where it might have benefited our particular team, but in all honesty who wouldn’t want to make use of technology that 30 nations are already using? It seems England operate it differently to other nations which may have skewed the views of some people in Scotland, but if it is operated along the lines of how it is in UEFA competitions I see it as a real benefit. Apparently top flight clubs will be expected to contribute £60k per year each. I hope this is not prohibitive to some. I believe the Hearts CEO was speaking about it on Sportsound today, although I didn’t hear it.
@UTH – I get that £60k as a pure cost might be difficult to swallow for some clubs. Call me a communist but I would top slice £720k (or whatever the actual cost is) off UEFA prize money to the teams that get given it for their participation to pay for VAR. If the various governing bodies were joined up UEFA could make it a pre-condition of entry to their competitions and the national bodies then make the obvious recovery from the beneficiaries.
wokingcelt 2nd October 2021 At 21:07
Your suggestion about UEFA prize money is a decent one in my view. However, as we now have five clubs outwith Celtic and Rangers who have commissioned their own review, and who also have people of significant wealth behind them, I doubt that £60k a year will be a show stopper.
During my weekly Friday night catch up over several pints and whiskies last night we all agreed that VAR is not perfect, but it definitely gets far more right than wrong. What’s not to like!
upthehoops 2nd October 2021 At 21:45
‘.. I doubt that £60k a year will be a show stopper.’
%%%%%%%
Andrew McKinlay of Hearts made the point this afternoon that a mistaken decision by a referee can cost your club relegation, or progress in a cup competition.
I imagine ( as he does) that even the financially struggling clubs in the premier bit of the SPFL would find the money to buy into VAR.
I don’t think I’ve heard McKinlay on radio before, but on this afternoon’s showing, I was very impressed, very, very impressed, at his live-on-air PR style.
Other clubs, I think, could perhaps learn from him.
Did anyone else hear him today?
John Clark 2nd October 2021 At 22:40
Didn’t Andrew McKinlay come from Scottish Rugby??? Now what other club had a CEO who was very successful with Scottish Rugby but who left in circumstances that were never fully explained?!!! I may be unfair here as I certainly don’t know any facts. As for McKinlay being impressive, Hearts in general have been so far this season, but there’s a long way to go.
In terms of VAR and what it could mean for clubs it’s an absolute no-brainer in my view. Any club opposing it would struggle to put up a strong argument. Surely Referees too would want it, giving them the chance to correct wrong decisions that were not apparent at first glance, but which TV showed to be just plain wrong. I am actually very pleasantly surprised the SFA are pushing for it.
upthehoops 2nd October 2021 At 23:05
‘..what other club had a CEO who was very successful with Scottish Rugby but who left in circumstances that were never fully explained?’
%%%%%%%
In an odd way, uth, you reinforce my point: the Dominic nonsense must rank high in the PR disasters of Scottish Football.
You and I ask questions; and get nothing but crap answers, if we get any kind of response at all!
Is there no one at Celtic Park with the wit and wisdom to find how to tell the truth in a way that is least damaging to the club?
In my view, Celtic made a feckin hames of how they reported the standing down of McKay.
There are people at Celtic Park who need their arses kicked.
John Clark 2nd October 2021 At 23:30
The trouble is though John that money talks. We will never know what happened, and the most likely reason is that DM would have left quietly with a significant financial settlement. There is of course speculation, but we will never know, and even if he left with a lot of money it still doesn’t mean he was absolutely in the right and the Celtic Board were absolutely in the wrong. Someone I know told me ‘for a fact’ what happened, but it was fourth hand information originally coming from someone who used to work in a decent position at Celtic, but has not been there for many, many years. In truth I get a bit fed up with it all. My club is not perfect, but neither are they the devil incarnate.
Re VAR:
I suspect that it’s the referees who are pushing for it & the SFA & SPFL are having to support it.
It’s a lovely earner for officials; you need seven of them for each game (ref, 2x AR, 4th official & 3x VAR). There’s lots of games in the three UEFA competitions to be appointed to as well.
If you like a 3 o’clock Saturday kick-off, then there will be far fewer of them, as VAR officials will likely have to do double-shifts to accomodate six Premiership fixtures over two or three days.
I wonder. How brave will Stuart and Tam be on “off the ball’ in the next hour or so, speaking with the author of a book about the liquidated Third Lanark FC,
a club that was run into the ground by its deceitful owner , liquidated, ceased to be a member of a league and lost its membership of the SFA?
What a splendid opportunity to mention the ignominious death of RFC of 1872, and the extraordinary deceitfulness of the Scottish Football establishment in creating the myth that RFC of 1872 did not cease to exist.
No, I don’t really wonder: there’s absolutely no one on the BBC with the guts and integrity to mention the truth about the corruption of Scottish Football any more than there is in the Scottish print media.
John Clark 3rd October 2021 At 15:29
Jim Spence was basically forced out of the BBC simply for stating that “some people believe it to be a new club”. Graham Spiers, once a regular on Sportsound, said he was “not prepared to have his intelligence insulted by people saying it’s the same club”. Spiers is never on Sportsound these days. Liquidation deniers only are allowed, and of course Tom English who bases it all on how a duck looks and walks!
I remember saying to a friend in 2012 as various headlines appeared that liquidation meant the end, “no-one will be able to save them from that fact”. My friend replied “don’t be so sure…they will get to decide what they are and the authorities and media will not challenge it”. How right he was.
upthehoops 3rd October 2021 At 21:08
‘…how right he was’
%%%%%%%%%
RIFC plc clearly implied in the ‘Summary’ section of its Prospectus for its IPO that it was the holding company of a football club which had a long history of sporting success, and not of a newly created football club.
The Prospectus Rules today [ and I cannot imagine that in 2012 things were any different] say:
” The prospectus summary
1.The prospectus shall include a summary that provides the key
information that investors need in order to understand the nature
and the risks of the issuer, the guarantor and the securities that are
being offered or admitted to trading on a regulated market, and
that is to be read together with the other parts of the prospectus to
aid investors when considering whether to invest in such securities. …
2.The content of the summary shall be accurate, fair and clear and
shall not be misleading…”
To my simple mind, implying that you are the holding company of Rangers of 1872 and not of what was Charles Green’s (and the SFA’s) Club12/Sevco5088/SevcoScotland is definitely misleading.
And if I had the money to do so I would consider I had grounds for raising an action against the Nomad and the FCA for failing to spot what I consider to have been a misleading statement.
And I would definitely ( if ,sadly, only metaphorically!) kick the arse of the then heid honcho of the FCA, (now the boss of the Bank of England) to whom I had written on the point, and whose staff mislaid my correspondence, and did not offer any explanation.
If I am right (and no one has yet demonstrated that I am wrong and that RFC of 1872 was not liquidated and ceased to exist [just as Third Lanark did!]) then no wonder the constant reinforcement of the myth!
Geez, when you think of the sweaty palms, the panic, of those who really need TRFC to be RFC of 1872!
I would not want to be any one of them.
May they lie uneasy in their beds now, and , in the fullness of time, in their rotting graves!
So there’s this fans group, right, who we all hoped might call out the football authorities on their corruption, the Bryson Law etc…..and here’s their chairman (I think) choosing to write about the terrible implications of registration rules. So now HAS to be the time for him to tie in some mention of the face of the whole ‘ineligible but eligible’ shenanigans, right? We’ve waited so long and now here he is writing about the very subject we want them to challenge and………nope, they sh*te it again with the following article!
OK I am biased.
I can not but help being outraged and upset at the latest punishments being handed out by the SFA but last time I had a go at them about this, I believe it was in defence of Kilmarnock FC.
And if you enter a competition, tick the box saying I have read the terms and conditions and you have not read them, then the fault if you fall foul of them is your own.
I get that.
But the ineligibility of players playing for various competitions is not universally agreed. In short, the rules appear to be different dependant upon which competition you are in. Lower league clubs with loan players can end up in a tangle over whether the player who is a Colt player from the Premiership B team is playing for them this week in the cup, can’t play for them in the other cup because their parent clubs says no or they have carte blanche to play for whoever they pay wages to in the vital fixture which could net some serious cash for their club.
And Lower League clubs tend to be run by people inadequately paid or in voluntary positions.
Then there is the, “you are not allowed to play for more than so many clubs in a season” rule. What’s that about?
I shall tell you, what I think.
Not for the first time, clubs who fall foul of the rules, and who bleat about them publicly, are mercilessly silent on change. They tend to shout out loud as my hometown club, Ayr United did when they got chucked out the cup against Rangers Colts because they fielded two ineligible players. It was an administrative breach – an “inadvertent error”. The cost? Out the cup. Rangers B get a 3-0 win and into the next round. Already flying high in the Lowland League, the Colt side look to be getting an opportunity to show their progress in the SPFL Trust Trophy where they could face teams the league below their first team.
It’s a great reward for winning the war of paperwork.
Both ineligible players entered the field of play for a short period of time and for that the punishment is the same as if they had been on from the start, scored all the goals in the game and taken their top off to celebrate whilst running into the crowds and causing a dangerous surge is slightly difficult to comprehend .
Is there a more serious breach of the rules where they get fined, docked points in their league and made to sit on the naughty step?
But in fairness to the SFA, these are rules endorsed by Ayr United.
Each year there shall be a mechanism available to all clubs to change rules. Usually, it is called the Annual General Meeting. There you can table amendments to things and try to gain support from your fellow members and force the hand of the administrators to play fair.
When did that last happen?
When was the last time that somebody made a proposal, and it ended in change?
Maybe they voted, changed their mind because the vote never got through and then decided that the status quo was just as good as the change they thought they supported… but didn’t.
And so, if Ayr are serious, they should lead the charge.
They should support the five clubs making the case for a review and actually having that review – welcomed by the SPFL – but seeking to widen and extend it to cover the daftness of the rules. The reality is that in a world where people are increasingly questioning their leisure time, looking for something to fill the opportunities that COVID has brought to our attention – fitba needs better press to encourage people with more opportunities to enjoy life safely and not be stuck back in the house.
If any leisure activity needs to explain rules based on administrative procedures, they are at a disadvantage. Nobody is going to sit listening for long enough to hear the reasons and turn up the following week.
It is just daft and as Ayr said in their statement,
“Whilst the breach was in error, it was believed to be in spirit of the competition to give young players a chance. Ayr United accept the determination and will not appeal, even though it was believed that the punishment overwhelmed the crime.”
What would be criminal is after winning something we lose those people attracted to watching our game because they fail to see the point…
The Scottish Football Supporters Association – This is what they say “We are a voluntary organisation funded by donations from fans and other interested parties who believe that it is essential that the interests of the key stakeholders are represented and that football clubs and the football authorities are held accountable to those stakeholders.” This is what they do – waste my time and yours by turning a blind eye to the biggestg issues affecting Scottish football!
nawlite 3rd October 2021 At 23:27
‘…funded by donations from fans and other interested parties’
%%%%%%%%%
Interested parties? What ‘interested parties’ and what are they interested in? Trying to shut down discussion of the Big Lie, accepting the Myth, and ‘moving on’?
Nawlite .
Excellent post .
I was blissfully unaware of Ayr being awarded a 0-3 defeat by the authorities until a friend mentioned it to me on the 6th hole of my local golf club.
The 6th isn’t a very difficult hole , just a short par 4 but I struggled to a double bogey after Sandy Bryson entered my thought process for the first time in a long while.
The Honest Men I was golfing with weren’t aware that Sandy( or his employers ) had previous.
I couldn’t get the word “imperfect “ from my mind.
Just for a recap, I googled the meaning.
The definition of imperfect is someone or something that has at least one fault or that is not fully formed or complete. A china dish with a small crack in it is an example of something that would be described as imperfect. A map of all of the homes in an area that is not completed is an example of an imperfect map.
One fault or not fully complete !!!!
Ten years worth but still no sanctions !!!
Kangaroo court springs to mind.
Compare and contrast with Ayr United.
Justice ???
Scottish fitba summed up , in one judgment.
The farce continues.
The SFA has failed to learn the lesson of obfuscated elegibility, so eloquently explained by Alexander Bryson (Jim Farry’s sidekick, lest we forget!) to the Nimmo Smith Commission.
It appears that the onus of player eligibility is still left to clubs to fathom & the SFA is reactive to breaches. It should be proactive to potential wrongdoing.
When a player’s registration status changes & is notified to the SFA, then the Registrations Department should advise the club that the player is eligible for certain competitions & not eligible for others. Mr. Bryson has been Head of Department for well over 20 years & should be an expert in his field. Who better to ensure clubs fulfil their obligations?
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/apr/15/czech-government-official-uefa-glen-kamara-ondrej-kudela-racism-ban
f you haven’t already, you need to look at the BBC website’s video of Sportscene pundits discussing the Ryan Porteous red card. Not having seen the game, it was informative for me as it highlighted an off-the-ball foul on Porteous by Morelos, shown to suggest that was why Porteous was angry enough to then commit the red card tackle on Aribo.
I’m not mentioning that to excuse Porteous or even to comment on whether it was a red card or not, but wanted to flag that in the clip Richard Forster describes Morelos’ kick at Porteous as “great play” if it riled him enough to get sent off. I know we have crap pundits, but that is a ridiculous comment for an ex-player to make imo.
@nawlite – I also saw that last night and was surprised not so much with the pundit comments (sadly my expectations are not high for the discourse on Sportscene) but the failure of the ref to book Morelos – there was zero attempt to play the ball and it was a clear deliberate, cowardly foul made more dangerous by being an attack from behind (which the referee saw and gave).
I have always been an advocate for referees having to explain their decisions afterwards. Nothing would act to deliver more consistent performances than the knowledge that you would have to explain your thinking. If someone can explain to me why Morelos should not have been booked for that foul it would be appreciated.
I’ve been having some fun reading a long email from the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists , about the ‘Pandora Papers’
“IMPACT
Governments vow investigations within hours of Pandora Papers revelations
As the first wave of stories on a massive leak detailing the financial secrets of the global elite and enablers of a shadow economy is published, reactions roll in around the world.
By Spencer Woodman and Brenda Medina
Image: Stefan Wermuth/Bloomberg via Getty Images
October 4, 2021”
There is mention of some of the names of folk in South America who over the years have been involved in ‘off-shore’ extra-legal business registrations and such like.
I read this stuff in the hope of recognising the odd name here and there, although, of course, the names I’m thinking of are pretty small beer compared to the King of Jordan!
The ICIJ are in the business of real investigative journalism, and individual journalists are putting themselves at some real risk from some serious bad guys with a lot to lose.
There is little chance of any of our SMSM people ever being accepted by the ICIJ as having the moral courage required to report truth, since they have ducked out of reporting the truth in a relatively trivial matter of sport!
nawlite 4th October 2021 At 15:47
He might be an ex footballer , but he’s still turning out for us !
paddy malarkey 4th October 21.39
Reminds me of a story i heard regarding Mr Foster.
Whilst out for a meal with his then girlfriend Amy McDonald they were approached by a Rangers fan who reassured him that despite a particularly bad run of form that he “isn’t the worst right back we’ve ever had”.
“Cheers for that” said Ricky somewhat relieved.
“Naw” came the reply “there was a guy called Jim Denny back in the 70s who was much worse”.
Punter wanders off, Ricky, crestfallen looks at the ground whilst Miss McDonald collapses into hysterics.
Letter on it’s way to SPFL from the USA
4 October 2021
Neil Doncaster, Chief Executive Officer
The Scottish Professional Football League
Hampden Park
Glasgow G42 9DE
Scotland
Dear Mr. Doncaster:
As a matter of introduction, my name is Larry Cafiero, and I am a football fan in the United States who has followed the Scottish Professional Football League since 2017 in my capacity as a supporter of one of its member clubs, Celtic FC. Insofar as my experience as a fan may be limited compared to others who may have followed the football in your league for much longer, allow me nonetheless to point out a situation that needs your immediate attention.
Mr. Doncaster, you have a problem. While it’s true that we all have problems, yours affects tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands or even millions, of football fans worldwide. It’s a phenomenally huge problem that, if not addressed immediately, is certain to hemorrhage football fans outside Scotland – and possibly within Scotland as well – from following your league.
No doubt you already know this: You cannot allow the inept level of officiating to continue in the SPFL. For the sake of argument, I will merely refer to the level of skewed officiating as inept; however many, both in Scotland and elsewhere, have made a very strong and compelling case for the officiating at Scotland’s highest level to be not so much inept as much as it is corrupt.
Of course, ineptitude can include corruption, but you cannot be corrupt and inept at the same time, at least not successfully. But I digress.
It was the great Jock Stein who said, “If you’re good enough, the referee doesn’t matter.” However, contextually speaking – and this is how I, and others, interpret this quote – Stein was referring to officiating that is fair and objective in its execution. It’s beyond crystal clear that you don’t have that in the SPFL this season, and for all intents and purposes, you didn’t have it last season either.
The latest in the sky-high pile of “honest mistakes” was the red card on Hibernian’s Ryan Porteous on Sunday. Putting aside the fact that the challenge successfully separated the ball from the player in question, it bears noting that Ryan Porteous has only received two red cards in his SPFL career, both received from the same official, Nick Walsh, and both received in games where Hibernian played Rangers (source: Transfermrkt.com).
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Can you, in all honesty, tell me with a straight face that this is a coincidence, one of hundreds this season and last? Would you really try to convince me, and thousands of other football fans, that this, and so many other calls made and not made, are really just “honest mistakes”?
To list all the “honest mistakes” in Rangers’ favour this season and last would make this letter the size of the Oxford English Dictionary, so I’ll spare you. You’re welcome. But in the meantime, this situation has reached a tipping point where your league has lost most, possibly all, its officiating credibility. Needless to say, this does not reflect well on the SPFL, and its effect on casting Scottish football in a negative light spills over Scotland’s borders.
In other words, it’s not a local problem for the SPFL. It’s global.
Here’s my perspective, from 5,000 miles away: I have a larger than normal group of football-loving friends here in the United States with whom I converse, many on a daily basis, and the general consensus here on Scottish football is this: It’s corrupt, and in its corruption the SPFL is relegated to a backwater status in the eyes of many of my American contemporaries watching and following football abroad.
Even recently, an acquaintance said to me in conversation about Scottish football: “It’s a joke. I’d rather watch the Allsvenskan.” And while admittedly this comes from a guy who my friends and I describe as a “Bundesliga snob” and while there is absolutely nothing wrong with Swedish football, I had nothing concrete to point to in order to counter his argument, because he is right: The SPFL, as it stands right now, cannot be taken seriously when only one club – a nine-year-old club at that – solely benefits from what appears on the surface to be a skewed officiating policy that consistently, and without fail, rules in their favour.
The choice is yours: As the league’s chief executive, you can fix this and make Scottish football respectable again. Or you can do nothing and contribute to its continued atrophy. It’s a simple choice, and I know you’re smart enough to make the right choice.
To be realistic, if I were a gambling man I would wager that this letter doesn’t make it past your secretary. Or your secretary’s secretary, for that matter. Regardless, while I don’t have the answers, I do have what I think may be the start of one.
Let me suggest this: You may want to try employing FIFA/UEFA officials from outside Scotland to officiate SPFL games. See if that works in the way of restoring objectivity and, in the process, credibility.
It goes without saying, but it bears repeating, that this credibility would foster respect, returning Scottish football to the status it once held — and a status it deserves — as one of Europe’s best; a justified respect for the Scottish game in both Scotland and beyond.
Football fans of every SPFL club deserve the best football officiating the league can provide. Of course, that can be said for any league in any country. That’s not happening right now at Scotland’s top level.
But it can be.
It’s your move, sir.
Sincerely,
Larry Cafiero
Author Larry Cafiero Posted on October 4,
Haha, sorry Paddy Malarkey. I genuinely didn’t realise that.
@bigboab1916 – your post certainly took me back. I wrote a not dissimilar letter to Jim Farry in the mid 1990s on the low standard of refereeing. My main thrust was that if our senior clubs were willing to buy and play foreign players, acknowledging that the talent pool was there to be exploited, why would the same principle not apply to referees. Scotland didn’t have a monopoly of great refs, the pool was too small and having more flexibility and allowing refs to officiate across national boundaries could only boost standards.
The response I received from Jim Farry was unbelievably condescending, snearing and dismissive. I still regret misplacing that letter and if sent today would probably have gone “viral”. I like to take a little satisfaction from Fergus McCann having his day in court, proving corruption at the heart of Scottish football.
wokingcelt 4th October 2021 At 22:53
Suprised you got a reply.
bigboab 1916 4th October 22 ,25.
was the red card on Hibernian’s Ryan Porteous on Sunday. Putting aside the fact that the challenge successfully separated the ball from the player in question
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
In the words of a well known American sportsman “you cannot be serious”
Both feet off the ground, out of control, excessive force, he has previous for this kind of challenge against Rangers players in the past.
Coulibally, Morelos 2, Jack, Barasic and now Aribo.
On each occasion he could have won the ball fairly but chose not to.
Boy needs to take a good look at the way he conducts himself in these games.
As for your list of “honest mistakes” that number hundreds this season and last, can you perhaps compile a list, as for every decision that goes in favour of Rangers i could give you one that goes in favour of Celtic. Any opinion on the Dundee Utd penalty appeal last Sunday at Parkhead for instance?
Rangers fans believe referees favour Celtic
Celtic fans believe referees favour Rangers
All other fans believe referees favour Rangers & Celtic.
nawlite 4th October 2021 At 15:47
Not as sorry as some of the Firhill faithful !
bigboab1916 4th October 2021 At 22:25
‘..Letter on it’s way to SPFL from the USA.’
%%%%%%%%
I will say only this: Regan had the self-preservation sense to jump. Doncaster persists in maintaining that everything in relation to the Big Lie is hunky-dory.
They were both at the very heart of the myth creation, when resignation would have been the honourable thing to do when instructed by their respective Boards to create the lie that TRFC is Rangers of 1872.
Those two have a lot to answer for, albeit as mere camp guards following orders from above.
Like the ninety-something year old concentration camp guy recently convicted.
A bad thing was done to Scottish Football, and that has to be acknowledged.
Albertz11 4th October 2021 At 22:57
0 0 Rate This
bigboab 1916 4th October 22 ,25.
was the red card on Hibernian’s Ryan Porteous on Sunday. Putting aside the fact that the challenge successfully separated the ball from the player in question
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
In the words of a well known American sportsman “you cannot be serious”
I’m not sure if you are defending Sevco or the referees Alby, but it matters not. The one thing every Scots football fan will agree on is the fact that our whistlers themselves are the root cause of any perceptions, by dint of getting so much wrong.
The entire structure needs binned and sub-contracted to a non domestic agency as the current selection, vetting, and training process is not fit for purpose.
I doubt you will find any resistance to such a move from the overwhelming majority of all fan-bases to such a suggestion, so why is it not happening?……..
That is the only issue worth debating that will promote progress to a fairer game.
Tying it to any partisan mind-sets is a hindrance and unhelpful. Deflection never is.
I am a Celtic fan, and I say Aye !….Bin them……..Anybody else?
Whether the Porteous tackle was a red card or not, is not the issue for me. What I do know is if the exact same tackle had been made by Goldson on a Hibs player, it would probably not even be a free kick, (he got the ball and Aribo fell over the sliding player). At the very worst it would have been a free kick for Hibs and a yellow card for Goldson.
Brother Bobby Madden was an absolute disgrace on Sunday. All an Aberdeen player had to do was go to the ground when challenged, (fairly or not) and a free kick would be awarded. Celtic had 2/3rds possession and conceded 29 “fouls” or should that be falls. Aberdeen with 1/3rd possession conceded 10 free kicks.
The “the” Rangers need the Champions League group stage place for next season, or it’s financial Armageddon again, like the disgraced original club. The fix is in and the “honest mistakes” will continue and in all probability, increase.
As for Albertz predictable whatabouterry, immediately prior to the Dundee Utd claim for a penalty, there was an even more blatant foul on the Celtic defender. If we want consistency of refereeing, either both were fouls or neither were. What club’s player committed the foul or where the foul was should have no bearing on the decision.
Plus ca change, plus le meme chose;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmowVWW-oH0
bigboab1916 4th October 2021 @ 22:25hrs –
The SPFL have no (well, very little) say in the appointment of referees. That’s a function of the SFA. The standards & competence of whistlers is also within the SFA’s remit.
https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish-fa/referees/referee-appointments/
‘REFEREE APPOINTMENTS FOR ALL ASSOCIATED LEAGUES ACROSS SCOTLAND
The Scottish FA is responsible for appointing referees to matches in all senior competitions, Scottish Junior FA football and Scottish Women’s Football.’
I’d be interested in finding out what makes Scotland’s referees appear so inept.
Bias, unconscious or otherwise?
The misplaced desire to satisfy SFA assessors to ensure regular, frequent access to £1k match fees?
Hierarchical imperatives?
Something else?
::
::
We’ve just completed Round 8 of the Premiership. Here’s a list of referees who’ve officiated in those 48 matches (you can click through highlighted characters for further info):
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/scottish-premiership/schiedsrichter/wettbewerb/SC1/saison_id/2021/plus/1
16 referees have handled a Premiership fixture.
Bobby Madden is top of the list with 5 matches officiated, but only 6 different teams. He’s had Aberdeen x3, HoMFC x2, CFC x2, TRFC x1, StJFC x1 & DFC x1.
Willie Collum has had 4 matches involving 8 different teams.
John Beaton has had 4 matches involving 8 different teams.
Kevin Clancy has had 4 matches involving 7 different teams (CFC x2).
Don Robertson has had 4 matches involving 5 different teams (DUFC x3, RCFC x2, TRFC x1, CFC x1 & StJFC x1).
Nick Walsh has had 4 matches involving 7 different teams (HFC x2).
I’d expect that, this early in the season, no referee should have had multiple matches involving the same team or teams. There’s 30 odd top flight refs listed by the SFA. Some are obviously held in higher regard than others.
BTW, Andrew Dallas appears not to have had a Premiership game allocated to him.
You can look at the other match allocations on the link.
CO & Norman.
I am defending neither Rangers nor the referees CO. Two decisions go in Rangers favour and all hell breaks loose it seems. The fact that both decisions were correct seems inconsequential to certain people.
Whether foreign referees would improve the standard is debateable as having spoken to fans from many different countries it would appear that their referees also seem to be either incompetent or corrupt depending on who you talk to.
Norman. Lets be honest.
You DONT know that had CG committed the tackle he would avoid a Red card
You DONT know that Rangers need the CL monies.
Your references to “Brother Madden” are childish and do you no credit. at all.
Since Rangers return to the PL Bobby Madden has,
Awarded 6 penalties to Celtic and 1 to Rangers
Red carded 7 Rangers players and 3 Celtic
Red carded 7 of Celtics opponents and 4 of Rangers.
As for Nick Walsh would it surprise you to learn his football allegiances were to a team in Green and not Blue?.
Corrupt official when you say “I’m not sure if you are defending Sevco or the referees Alby”, surely you are aware by now that Albertz11’s sole function on here is to react to anything anti-Rangers/TRFC with a whatabouttery type response. Not just me who knows this, as evidenced by NormanBates’ comment of “As for Albertz predictable whatabouterry…..” at 10.45. A11 is just too obvious.
Someone on Twitter is claiming Rangers have submitted the 2021 financial year end accounts
*Preliminary £31,682,536 in losses.
*Short term liability £16,533,348.
*Long term liability £15,554,544.
Short term liability includes HMRC.
We will wait and see, however the case for financial fair play in Scotland has never been clearer in my view.
On the subject of Referees I have absolutely no idea whether any of them act out of deliberate bias. I would certainly hope not.
However, what I do know is that a couple of years back a Sportsound Presenter put it to a former Grade 1 Referee that many people, at least many Celtic fans, think the vast majority of the Referees support Rangers. To my astonishment the ex-Ref concurred that was indeed the case and always had been during his time, although he himself admitted to being a Celtic fan.
How anyone, anywhere can think such a situation is healthy is beyond me. Firstly, current diversity and inclusion laws are there to ensure that certain groups are not always favoured to the exclusion of others, yet none of this applies to Refereeing appointments. Secondly, who within the SFA ensures this disparity and why? Do they think people from that background are more reliable and honest? Whatever it is it gives a perception of bias whether or not any actually exists. Other nations demand a declaration of interest from their Referees, then ensure there is no conflict of interest by not giving them games involving their team. Why is it only in Scotland that this is deemed as unnecessary? It has to stop.
CO and nawlite
With tongue in cheek (??????) …
When Albertz11 was masquerading (? )as some sort of reasonablechap (who, incidentally, has disappeared I believe, since the aforementioned first posted) I, being fair minded myself, reckoned that he displayed all the characteristics of someone with an adult form of argumentative personality disorder. Different user name – basically the same condition.
As a reminder, this can be displayed in various behavioural ways but, in the context of SFM blog input , it manifests itself in the entrenched WATP entitlement mentality (users on here need no reminding of the ‘principles’ of this). This is critical to our understanding of what makes him ‘tick’.
The trigger for his ‘guard old Derry’s walls’ whataboutery is for any poster to dare adversely criticise the Divine Right of Sevco.
In some cases (e.g. this one), no amount of reasoning, understanding, tolerance, cajoling etc seems to work in the treatment of this ingrained and deep rooted ‘malaise’. Posters on here often try this approach – but it never seems to work.
The condition may not be terminal (dum spiro spero?) though I doubt it.
In short, yir stuck wi’ him for the foreseeable …
Regarding the apparent refereeing bias towards Rangers.
Since returning to the Premier League in 16/17.
All domestic games.
Red cards – Rangers 22 Celtic 13.
Yellow cards – Rangers 356 Celtic 268.
Penalties for – Rangers 47 Celtic 50.
Penalties against – Rangers 24 Celtic 22.
normanbatesmumfc. 5th 10.56.
No Red cards given.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKekKP48AKA&t=3s
upthehoops 5th October 2021 At 14:34
‘Someone on Twitter is claiming Rangers have submitted the 2021 financial year end accounts’
%%%%%%%%
Nothing on the Companies House website yet.
Perhaps the return to CH has only just been made, which would suggest that the tweeter is an insider with access?
The figures cited would probably be near enough the mark to be a real source of anxiety.
And perhaps HMRC will have RIFC plc flagged for helpful early reminders to be issued?
I would ignore the rumoured losses until they have been verified officially , I asked the individual directly where the figures came from and there was no reply . He also stated they still owed Close when it clearly states on companies house their charge(s) have been satisfied.
File under wishful thinking until proven otherwise.
I guess we will learn soon enough if TRFC have filed their accounts and what these show. I thought that SGs celebration on the pitch on Sunday was a little OTT and his explanation that the players and fans “will need each other” in the months ahead (BBC website) was a little cryptic. Is he alluding to hard times to come?
@A11 – thank you for making the case for the prosecution. Presumably with such a tape of errors/bias you would agree that the standard of refereeing in Scotland is not fit for purpose? And certainly not aligned with any campaign to market the SFPL as the “best small league in the world”.
However your comment with regard to foreign referees is not borne out by either common practice nor current ratings. There is a reason why international fixtures have referees from neutral countries appointed. And remind me how many Scottish officials were at the recent Euros?
Quick fact check for those with selective amnesia …
Any reference to Rangers, in the context of it RETURNING to Scottish football’s top tier, is to a non-existent club.
TRFC/Sevco could not possibly have rejoined something they had never previously been part of, and therefore, any claim to them ‘returning to the Premier League in 16/17’ is, how do you say it JC (?) – a BIG LIE!
Daft intit?
Jingso.Jimsie 5th October 2021 At 11:48
‘…I’d be interested in finding out what makes Scotland’s referees appear so inept.’
%%%%%%%
I idly wonder whether there is in other footballing countries anything like the same level of discontent with the standard of refereeing as there is here in Scotland?
I also wonder whether the SFA would be prepared to give us some facts and figures about
a) the number of applicants there are at any given time, in the 12 referee associations ,
b) the number of school pupils at any given time who apply for the refereeing SQA
c) what percentage of persons who take the refereeing course fail to complete it,
d) what percentage of examinees succeed but subsequently drop out?
I assume that ‘data’ of that type is routinely collected and analysed?
Perhaps it’s time for a more public sharing of the problems with recruitment, training, retention, and motivation of would-be referees?
(And I should maybe add that my sweeping assertions about Scottish Football governance and the creation of the Big Lie are not directly related to the refereeing function or referees in general..)
bect67 5th October 2021 At 22:43
‘.. how do you say it JC (?) – a BIG LIE!’
%%%%%%%
Yes, indeed, bect67.
And for fun’s sake, I fired off an email today to ‘transfermarket’ asking why they showed ‘Rangers’ as having won 55 league championships, since The Rangers Football Club was admitted into Scottish Professional Football only in 2012 and could not possibly have won 55 titles!
Ignorant or ill-willed , they need to be told the truth, and the fact that they bought into the myth shows them up as being apt to get things wrong, and perhaps undermines their credibility as any kind of ‘authority’ in matters of football.
Bad cess to them and may their every venture fail as being propagandists of untruth!
Albertz11 5th October 2021 At 12:13
‘..Norman. Lets be honest………You DONT know that Rangers need the CL monies’
%%%%%%%%%
It’s not for me to speak for ‘Norman’, Albertz11.
But OF COURSE TRFC needs the kind of money that success in Europe can bring!
Financially they can hardly wash their face and are hanging on desperately.
They have no meaningful borrowing facilities, except to tap into their directors for loans, or make further share issues to try to raise a few bob.
And I’ll warrant there is another Craig Green or Charles Whyte out there right now waiting for the opportune moment when Administration strikes and Liquidation follows,
..knowing that the new club THEY create will be happily and rejoicefully accepted by Scottish Football governance as being the Rangers of 1872!
While its interesting to see the various comments on Scottish referees and what can be done to improve it, a more interesting research project would be on the woeful record of Scottish clubs in European competitions. If memory serves right this year, like other recent years, has not been a banner year. Rangers losing to 10 men teams twice, Celtic battered by a German team, while Aberdeen, Hibs and others flounder. Time to get back to the grassroots and find solutions, otherwise, Scottish club football will be fodder for the other nations.
What will Abertz11 have to say when the actual Rangers financials come out. He seems to be the only one who believes things are all roses in the financial garden.
vernallen 6th October 01.26
What will Abertz11 have to say when the actual Rangers financials come out. He seems to be the only one who believes things are all roses in the financial garden.
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
Where have i said that?
In truth i expect the Rangers financials to reveal massive losses.
I have previously commented that we are fortunate to have a loyal group of investors who to date have been willing to step up and make up any shortfall.
This of course is not sustainable in the long term.
JC 6th October 00.02
Like Norman you don’t know whether Rangers needs CL monies.
Would they prefer to have access to it- Yes. Is it a necessity?, neither you,i nor norman can state with any accuracy that it is.
‘Albertz11 5th October 2021 At 17:08
Regarding the apparent refereeing bias towards Rangers.
Since returning to the Premier League in 16/17.
All domestic games.
Red cards – Rangers 22 Celtic 13.
Yellow cards – Rangers 356 Celtic 268…’
::
::
I don’t think those statistics prove anything.
In the matter of red & yellow cards, it’s not the number awarded (& recorded) that raises eyebrows, it’s the number that are apparent ‘stick-ons’ that aren’t given.
Referees aren’t consistent. They’re loath to book players early in a game, even though their conduct should be sanctioned under the Laws. They’re loath to give a second booking to players late in a game, leading to a red card & suspension. That skews any analysis of numbers awarded.
::
::
On a moderation point: if Albertz11’s posts are being put in purdah, would it be possible to have them posted immediately after the last post when they are released, rather than included in the thread at the time they were submitted? I’m sure most miss some of his postings as they are appearing out of sequence. Thanks.
How long is a “long term” Alby?…..It’s been ten years of historical losses already. For e.g that would be a pretty long jail sentence, but no so long if one was a giant tortoise.
Does “loyal”, mean until bankrupt, or, Enough left in the bank to retire to a modest French chateau?
Long term, , is really just a sound-bite, and the only truism that can be taken from it is, it is not eternal, and gets shorter with each passing day.
I once knew a club that tried to live like that………..Wonder what happened to them.
Albertz,
Of course I don’t know for certain whether Goldson would have “got-away” with the Porteous tackle. However, 50 years of watching refereeing bias in favour of Rangers, (not by all refs) leads me to believe he would have.
Especially when the referee concerned coaches the Rangers youth players as part of his day job!!!
RFC 2012 has been awarded £3,404,500 plus interest against the administrators for underselling the business and assets.
https://scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2021csoh994db16e7faaf44562b70dd717109201c0.pdf?sfvrsn=b8f1694d_1
Summary and disposal
[253] For all of the foregoing reasons, I hold that the noters are entitled, in terms of
paragraph 75 of Schedule B1, to an order that the respondents contribute the following sum
to the company’s property by way of compensation for breach of duty:
Loss of chance of sale of marketable players £977,500
Loss of chance of sale of Steven Naismith £827,000
Loss of chance of lease and sale of Ibrox Stadium £750,000
Loss of chance of sale of Murray Park £850,000
Total £3,404,500
[254] I would intend to award interest on this sum at the rate of 4% per annum from
6 February 2017.
[255] Before pronouncing an interlocutor I shall put the case out by order in case parties wish to address me on any matters (arithmetic or otherwise) arising from this opinion. I am grateful to all counsel for their very thorough and helpful presentation of their respective cases.
@normanbatesmumfc – being somewhat remote I am both intrigued abs astonished by comment re ref coaching youth player as part of day job. Can you please elaborate? Many thanks.
Lurkio 6th October 2021 At 12:54
‘..RFC 2012 has been awarded £3,404,500 plus interest’
%%%%%%%%%
Thanks for posting that link, Lurkio.
I take this from the judgment, from last line of para 30 and the last three lines of Para 31
[30] ………………..Sevco Scotland Limited subsequently changed its name to The
Rangers Football Club Limited.
[31] After the sale of the business and assets, a number of players declined to transfer to
Sevco and instead registered with other clubs, in England and elsewhere. Sevco sought to
argue that it retained the players’ registrations and was entitled to transfer fees. Certain
clubs made payments to Sevco to avoid litigation, including Southampton (for Steven Davis)
and Coventry (for John Fleck). No transfer fee for any of the players was payable to the
company. On 4 July 2012, the SPL member clubs voted to refuse to allow Rangers’ SPL share
to be transferred to Sevco. The club was accepted instead into the third division of the
Scottish Football League for the season 2012-13!”
That is, there was no transfer of an existing right to be in Scottish Football. TRFC was admitted as a new football club, while the old club died , and its sporting history and achievements died with it, as James Traynor so graphically described at the time.
It really is time for the SFA to confess its lies, and restore truth and sporting reality and integrity in Scottish Football.
On the actual judgment, I had hoped that BDO would have been awarded a greater sum. But perhaps the low amount awarded will make it not worth their while to appeal?
Well done BDO!
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/19628910.judge-finds-ex-rangers-administrators-duty-breach-club-collapse-saying-ibrox-sale/
……………………………..
A SENIOR judge has ordered administrators of Rangers to pay £3.4m in compensation over “breach of duty” after deciding that Ibrox and Murray Park should have been put up for sale after the club collapsed.
Lord Tyre has made a judgement after former club administrators Paul Clark and David Whitehouse of Duff and Phelps were accused in court of a seriously flawed strategy in raising money for thousands left out of pocket by the club’s financial implosion in 2012.
…………….
https://scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2021csoh994db16e7faaf44562b70dd717109201c0.pdf?sfvrsn=b8f1694d_1
Is there any other football club* in the World that is named after the year they were liquidated?
RFC 2012 (part of the great deception)
Lurkio 6th October 2021 At 12:54
‘..RFC 2012 has been awarded £3,404,500 plus interest’
+++++++++++
So that is all the stadium and training ground were undervalued by…LOL!. Good Lord! How much did Charles Green have them valued at as soon as he took over? Not that I am surprised.
Thank God my club has never cheated the taxpayer in this way while laughing in their face. How can ANY Rangers fan think this is ok…seriously?
UTH …
…because some delusional ‘we are the people’, in perennial ‘righteous’ denial, would, incredibly to the sane mind, see this as a victory for Rangers FC (1872-1912) ?
In my post of 18:05 this evening I didn’t make it clear that it was D&P I was referring to when I said the small amount of damages might make it not worth while for D&P to appeal, not BDO!
[I can’t see BDO appealing, because so much of the ‘valuation’ is anyone’s guess, and Lord Tyre’s guess is, I suppose, as good as anyone’s! And they made the most important point-the Administration was a bit of a dog’s breakfast by any standard]
I wonder whether the firm will ‘do’ Clark and Whitehouse ?
Not they’ll care, multi-millionaires that they are! -thanks to the general farce made of the conspiracy case made against the purchasers of SDM’s ‘Rangers’.
@bect67 – and it wouldn’t surprise me to see comment in the SMM that this victory will boost SGs spending power in the January transfer window! ?
Lest we forget!
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/disguised-remuneration-a-supreme-court-decision-spotlight-41
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC004276
Albertz11 — 6th October 2021 — 8:21
I meant to imply that you seem to be of the belief that Rangers can continue to rely on their supporters to stump at funds at any hint of financial woes. That avenue may be closing as the last few share issues have not been a roaring success and it seems SG is growing a little concerned regarding the implications of what is to be expected as another major loss in the upcoming financials. Surely there has to be concerns in Scottish football about the rumors circulating on several blogs about the state of finances and what it could mean. Only the auditors have the real facts and will soon deliver a highly anticipated message.