Comment on Accountability via Transparency. by Big Pink.

    New post up

    Big Pink Also Commented

    Accountability via Transparency.
    Bogs Dollox
    You misunderstand. Firstly, I am not in any way disappointed about the player not coming to Celtic. As anyone who knows me personally will tell you, I am somewhat relieved if not delighted.
    My point was that Celtic (and any other club in that scenario) were in a no-win situation when the bid became public. These kinds of situations occur all the time. I know of several where teams lost their target in less public circumstances due to agents (quite correctly) creating a market. My other point, on the figures, is a separate one about speculative reporting. The figures you mention are not in the same ballpark as what have been suggested to me. Celtic’s offer was not close to £12k pw as far as I have been informed (not by anyone at Celtic of course).

    Accountability via Transparency.
    In football, like everywhere else in the capitalist world, a sale takes place when a commodity is worth more to the buyer than the seller. A football agent’s job is to stimulate the process.
    The Turnbull situation is no different to tens of similar scenarios played out away from the public gaze.
    Turnbull’s labour is probably worth more to others than to Celtic. Nothing unusual there except that the public acceptance of the bid puts pressure on either side.
    The figures being talked about here are (from my information) way over the top – double in fact – but my own advice to any young guy in David Turnbull’s position would be to leave the influence of the the hushed-up sectarianism report, the 5WA, and the pound-shop corruption behind.
    Go to a place where the game is as fair as it can be – and the very best of luck to him wherever he goes.

    Accountability via Transparency.
    On the SPFL secrecy over unacceptable behaviour report, NBM think that the report may be a whitewash, and would not survive public scrutiny.

    Recent Comments by Big Pink

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Times thing is a non-story. My first reaction was a ‘President Kennedy has been shot’ one. HMRC simply stopped pursuing the penalty portion of the bill several months ago because BDO was dragging its feet and birling their billing meter wildly, thus sucking the creditor pot dry. No way they were getting their money anyway. BDO’s Jarndyce and Jarndyce act raised some eyebrows when that news broke back then.
    As RTC has suggested, the timing of today’s ‘story’ may be significant.

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Excellent piece John. It is striking that the moral high ground has been totally unoccupied over this last 7 years. That so many have eschewed the opportunity to take a principled stand forces us to conclude that, in Fergus McCann's words;

    "There are no honourable men in football"

    I think Turnbull Hutton is the exception that proves McCann's rule, but sadly his ship has sailed. There are no Turnbull Huttons in Scottish football any longer, and more's the pity

    In Whose Interests
    I agree. A new post now up

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    No way of being able to demonstrate proof of course, but I think it highly unlikely that they wouldn’t have been kept in the loop throughout the whole process. Allied to what I knew to be their approach to the new club in the SPL (they were very much in favour of direct entry), I would conclude they were part of it. As I say though, no way to prove any of that.
    What I would say is this. Had the SFA made a decision to reintroduce gate sharing, we would have heard some serious thunder from Celtic Park. What we heard in the wake of the 5wa was a whimper.
    All about the money I think. Always has been. Always will be.
    Celtic’s – and every other club’s – attitude to sporting integrity is no different to Jim Traynor’s: at best devotion to sporting integrity is naive; at worst it is evidence of moon-howler syndrome.

    Football is a self regulating industry. The number one priority of football legislatorsi is to keep it like that. The ‘flexibility’ it showed after the demise of Rangers, what we would call breaking the rules, is something they want to retain. That’s why there is so much resistance to any kind of transparency or – God forbid – accountability.

    For me this has never been about anything other than keeping the customers at arms length from the decision making. Not green v blue, not TRFC v the rest. Fans v boardrooms is what this has always been about. When push comes to shove, with the exception of the ST revolt in 2012, the boardrooms choose TRFC and Charles Green over their own fans.

    The Res12 fiasco, SIX years of kicking things into the long grass, is proof enough for me that our sport is corrupted terminally.

    In Whose Interests
    Ex Ludo
    I don’t know if there are any conclusions to be drawn over the IP situation. Perhaps John C has it right on the marketing angle. It may well be that Celtic take the view that being involved in the ownership of the brand allows them to marginalise its use. It may also be that I’m being too kind to the Celtic board. John’s wider point though, and your’s is correct. Celtic are driven by self interest, or what they see as self interest, as demonstrated by their avoidance and delay tactics on the Res12 issue, and running interference on any attempt to shine a light on the darkness of the 5WA (of which they were aware), and the efforts being made by fans to hold power to some kind of accountability.

    On field success has immunised them thus far, but they are not out of the woods yet. The perfect storm is brewing; a hostile rejection of Res 12 at the AGM followed by NIAR hitting the buffers will be the mother of all reality checks. Unlikely perhaps, but not the stuff of fantasy that it appeared to be only a few months ago.