Bad Money?

273
50572

It’s now seven years since the festering sore on the skin of Scottish Football became fully septic, causing the liquidation of Rangers Football Club. Many of us at that time felt that the environment which had enabled the systematic, industrial scale cheating by that club, having now been exposed as unfit to fulfil its purpose, would be dismantled and replaced by something more accountable, more transparent, more honest.

Many more of us thought that other clubs who were the victims of the cheating that had gone on would be seeking a clear-out and a rewrite of the rule book, if for no other purpose than to ensure that a repeat was not possible.

We were all mistaken.

Let’s be honest about this. Football, whether it is played in Scotland or Argentina, at the Maracana Stadium or at Fleshers Haugh, is a rules-based endeavour. The rules of the game – both on the field and in its administration – are there to ensure as level a playing field as possible, to ensure that the constraints put on one club are the same for the rest.

Referees are in place to ensure the rules are complied with on the pitch, albeit with varying degrees of success. No matter what you might think of the guys in black, their craft is carried out in full public gaze, and consequently they are accountable to public opinion.

Off the field though, things are rather more opaque. Without the revelations of Charlotte Fakes for instance, we would never have known that a club had applied for a licence with false information, to a committee partly comprised of two folk who were employees of that club, and by extension part of the deception. Nor would we have known that the Chief Executive of the SFA had written to the club in question looking for approval on how the controversy surrounding the issue of the licence could be managed in the media.

The detail of the crimes of the people in charge of our game are the domain of those who have relentlessly pursued the truth of these matters. The devil is always in the detail, and the real devil is concealed in the fact that many of us are forced to switch off when confronted by the daunting prospect of having to follow that multi-threaded narrative.

In that regard, we owe much to the likes of Auldheid and EasyJambo (and many others) who unravel those threads for us and present the facts in a way most of us can follow. By doing so, they have allowed us to keep our eye on the ball.

Despairingly though, the upshot is that no matter what the facts tell us, Scottish football, at boardroom level, aided and abetted by the mainstream media, has no interest in seeking justice, or more importantly, clearing house.

The sins of the past will be the sins of the future, because the authorities have learned no lessons in the wake of Rangers’ liquidation, and in fact have now enshrined Doublespeak as the official language of the game.
No sporting advantage is a curious phrase used to describe sporting advantage
Imperfectly registered in lieu of not registered
Same for Different

I could go on, but the sins of one club, whilst fundamentally undermining the integrity of the sport in this country, are not the real problem. The authorities who set out to distort, bend, break, and tear up the rule-book are.

So too are the clubs who have refused to back their fans’ demand for proper oversight of the game, who have stood back and said nothing (except: “nothing to do with us guv!”) whilst their Patsies at Hampden do their dirty work, refusing to engage with or explain themselves to fans. These are the real culprits, they who have betrayed the trust of their own supporters. And if we are looking for a reason, look no further than their bank balances.

The recent scandal where the SPFL shared the outcome of its Unacceptable Behaviour report with the Scottish Government on the basis that it would not be made public shines a harsh spotlight on this.

The football authorities currently receive public funds from government, but in a “have your cake and eat it” scenario, they are accountable to no-one but themselves – and that’s how they want to keep it.

Publication of the SPFL report would put them at risk of having the accountability that they fear thrust on them. No-one in football wants the sectarian blight on our game to be cast under the glare of public focus. Especially if it becomes apparent that the game itself is the medium in which sectarianism thrives best.

And they know that it does exactly that. The trouble is that the societal divisions caused by sectarianism is a money maker. The old adage sectarianism sells has never been truer. The divide and rule model of empire applied to football. It is good box office.

But making football accountable could force measures to be put in place to cut out sectarian behaviour – and the clubs do not want that. It’s not the fear of being held responsible for their own fans’ behaviour under Strict Liability that worries the CFOs of our clubs – it’s the fear of losing the hatred which sees the money – bad money if you will – roll in.

Why did the cover up take place? Because losing Rangers was just not acceptable to football. Removing one of the vital protagonists in a money making cartel that thrives on hatred was a greater fear than any altruistic notion of sporting integrity (also now Doublespeak for “lack of integrity”).

Who could have foreseen that amidst the chaos surrounding Rangers demise, that they were only a symptom of the greed and couldn’t care less attitude of the money-men in football, and that our eyes would eventually be opened to the possibility that the football industry in Scotland is itself the enemy of public harmony?

Ironic perhaps, that the beautiful game, born out of the sense of community felt by the founding fathers of all our clubs, would emerge as a major malign influence in those communities.

There is no doubt that football is not prepared to cede any of its sovereignty to its customer base. They will go on – as long as we continue to bankroll them – in exactly the same way, like their bedfellows in the media a self-regulating industry with little or no regard for the public.

I am a supporter of Strict Liability, and we have already had discussions on the pros and cons of such an intervention. It is also clear that there is no SFM consensus on that. I want to leave that aside for the moment, because we do have a consensus surrounding our desire to see greater accountability in the game, and it is clear that fans’ voices, however temperately and eloquently articulated, are falling on deaf ears at Hampden.

The women’s game at the World Cup has recently provided us a window into the past, of the origins of the sport in Scotland. That which is a celebration of each others endeavour, skill, excellence and culture. The spirit of our game nowadays is a million miles away from that, because the market has taken over. 

Taming the wild excesses of the market is the responsibility of government. It’s about time the Scottish Government did just that. It is certainly clear that the SFA or the SPFL have zero interest in reining themselves in.

We have suggestions if anyone is listening.

273 COMMENTS


  1. The restriction imposed on the size of the Rangers EL squad highlights the lack of talent being conveyed by the Hummel Training Centre conveyor belt, not that anyone in the SMSM is going to provide any analysis of this. The SMSM are far too busy extolling the virtues of the next Virgil Van Dyke (per Robert Prytz) to ask relevant questions. Another indicator, perhaps, that money is too tight to mention. 

    View Comment

  2. Ex Ludo,

    mibbees the TRFC academy conveyor belt is a bit like the stadium…

     

    in desperate need of long overdue maintenance?

     

    I'll get my hi vis jacket.  indecision

     

    View Comment

  3. Re: Stooshie on TRFC Ltd UEFA Squad.

    I think folk *may* be reading it wrong.

    If the squad size is 22 then it has to made up of (according to UEFA) 17 Free Picks and 5 Locally Trained.

    The 5 locally trained players can be EITHER/OR Club Trained or Association Trained and there is vairous guidleines on what qualifies therein.

    So my guess is the 5 Locally trained on the list are:

    Halliday (Livingston 2007-10), Jack (Aberdeen), Hastie (Motherwell), Arfield (Falkirk) and Docherty (Accies).

    That would put McGregor into the free pick category.

    In theory that's how it could work for compliance – you'd need to see who went into the 17 and who went into the 5. 

    View Comment

  4. OttoKaiser@15.58

    Speaking of stooshies, JJ has composed and sent a missive to UEFA complaining about the Rangers EL squad apparent anomaly. I wonder where he got the idea John Clark? Come to think of it has anyone seen these two gentlemen in the same room at the same time?

    View Comment

  5. Re Ottos comment: the rules state 8 home grown but four of those have to be by the club. There are already 17 “free” players without McGreggor

     

    Re Jingso: yes the goal keeper was a late change from the original list. Doesn’t really affect it as both are “free players”

    View Comment

  6. Ex Ludo 18th July 2019 at 16:25

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

    It would appear that he can, when prompted, count to 22.

     

    Can someone tell me what "As  your predecessor Andrea Travero, who will be copied on my remittance …" means.

     

    Is he going to bribe someone. 

    View Comment

  7. Ex Ludo 18th July 2019 at 16:25
    …………………
    Don’t UEFA only correspond with member clubs and football associations? hence the reason the Res 12 guys had to get lawyers to speak to the club to speak to UEFA.
    Or has his letter been sent to a different department or something.

    View Comment

  8. Has this already been posted?

     

    "ROLLS BUILDING
    COURT 1
    Before LIONEL PERSEY QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court

    Friday 19 July 2019
    At 02:00 PM

    Judgment

    CL-2018-000726 SDI Retail Services Limited v. The Rangers Football Club limited"

    View Comment

  9. John Clark 18th July 2019 at 21:18

    Has this already been posted?

    "ROLLS BUILDING
    COURT 1
    Before LIONEL PERSEY QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court

    Friday 19 July 2019
    At 02:00 PM

    Judgment

    CL-2018-000726 SDI Retail Services Limited v. The Rangers Football Club limited"

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

    Yes …. by your good self 20 minutes ago. laugh

    View Comment

  10. Cluster One 18th July 2019 at 22:20

    '.. Will this let us know just how much the Damages will be?'

    +++++++++++++++++++

    God's honest, Cluster One, I don't know. 

    The last pronouncement from Persey, QC  seemed to leave scope for further discussion between the Parties at least in relation the 'further agreement'

    "..The extent to which, if at all, Rangers has been in breach of the further agreement is an issue that remains to be determined (if not agreed) by the Court." (judgment of the hearing of 22/05/19 , at Para 10(6)  see link  https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2019/1419.html   )

    No doubt further discussions were held.

    So tomorrow the Judge might simply record  that agreement on whether the 'further agreement' had been breached had been arrived at and that perhaps people had kissed and made up, and matters were amicably settled and that the Court has no need to get involved in deciding that particular point.

    As to  whether there was breach of the earlier agreement, I think that may have already been established, and 'some' damages may be ordered, but perhaps not on the scale that Ashley might have been looking for. 

    But of course I am not a lawyer [ I read medieval history, French and English, ffs!] and it may very well be that the whole 'question of quantum' [ nice alliterative ring to it, that phrase] has still to be gone into.

    But it's great fun. And, in any case, if there is any judgment made that is at all 'appealable', our man is almost certain to appeal! [Question: was 'kick the can' played in the streets of Castlemilk  when Dave was a boy?]

     

     

     

    View Comment

  11. Corrupt official 18th July 2019 at 22:39

    '…Res12 refresher and update..'

    ++++++++++++++++

    The more the SFA/Celtic/the SPFL generally try to dodge the central issue, the more likely it is that reference will be made to the COPFS. 

    They can duck and dive as  much as they like, but if there are grounds for suspecting a crime has been committed, the matter passes out of their hands. 

    And in respect of a plc, all the bluster and prevarication by its Board  cannot stop its shareholders demanding that a motion be openly raised, discussed and voted upon on at an AGM.

    As I understand things ( and I am very open to correction) the Board of Celtic plc simply kicked Res12 into the long grass in 2013- undebated and not voted upon then, or since.

    Resolution 12 has still  to be cleared from the Agenda, either by being debated and voted upon, or by being withdrawn by its proposers.  It cannot legally be quietly forgotten about, for the convenience of the Board.

    The question is so deep and fundamental that in no way will the proposers of the resolution contemplate withdrawing it. 

    It being  unthinkable that a sports governance body should get away with an alleged crime, the allegation simply has to be thoroughly and independently investigated.

    If all is sweetness and light and truth, wonderful!

    But no jurisdiction in the western democratic world simply accepts the word of the person or body against whom an allegation is made!

    Independent investigation is a must!

     

     

     

     

     

    View Comment

  12. Back from holiday in USA (where I came across a couple sporting Red Hand flegs on 12th), much to the amusement of passers-by😊 Every day’s a school day I suppose.
    Glad to see that Res12 is back under discussion here too. Next few months are likely to see some movement – and perhaps a wider ownership of the issue.
    Appalled at the Killie result, but for all the hand-wringing going on, “there but for the grace of God go the rest of us”
    We’ve all suffered a Berwick moment to a degree. I hope Killie recover quickly

    View Comment

  13. John Clark 18th July 2019 at 23:07
    [Question: was ‘kick the can’ played in the streets of Castlemilk when Dave was a boy?]
    ……………….
    I’m sure it was. But i believe dave had a problem with the rules of the game as it was played at the time. That problem with sticking to the rules of the Game (the rules of the game in life and also in sport)has always been his downfall and he just can’t shake off that stigma of how to abide with rules.
    That simple game of kick the can down the street has made dave the man he is today.

    View Comment

  14. John Clark 18th July 2019 at 23:07 

    Cluster One 18th July 2019 at 22:20 '.. Will this let us know just how much the Damages will be?'

    +++++++++++++++++++

    God's honest, Cluster One, I don't know. The last pronouncement from Persey, QC seemed to leave scope for further discussion between the Parties at least in relation the 'further agreement'

    ————————————–

       Dunno how those discussions have panned out JC,  but we did see the emergence of a "Pop-up shipping container", posing as a mega-store on the steps of the Louden recently.  Expertly levelled off, standing on bricks like a stolen  and stripped motor on Crimewatch. 

        Bearing in mind a big shop  lies dormant just a stone's throw away, it doesn't appear that the "discussions" were very agreeable. 

         I have no idea if the shipping container originated from an enterprising Turkish market trader, or it's origins lie with Hummell or Elite. ………….But it deffo had nothing to do with Sevco. "Honest M'Lud"…."No sirreee!"

        Maybe a big bhoy did it. ?..frown

    View Comment

  15. I am beginning to think the only way for Resolution 12 to progress is through a criminal investigation…by the City of London Police of course. Zero chance of anything progressing under the jurisdiction of the Scottish establishment. We even have a media who won't even report on it, and in many cases choose to mock it. Think about that – there is a mountain of evidence out there that wrongdoing took place, and the media don't want to know. They would rather a team succeeded by cheating – that is truly incredible. 

    View Comment

  16. Feel sick for Killie fans especially for those who had booked for Belgrade. 

    Not sure the manager will survive long unless they get off to a good start in the league

    View Comment

  17. tykebhoy 11th July 2019 at 13:55

    If you can't completely fill 18 – 21 then you can't fill any of 22-25 and therefore have an A list squad of less than 21.  If you can fill 18-21 but can't completely fill 22-25 then your A list is 21, 22 or 23 players.

     

    Not sure that''s right, Tykebhoy. Annex H list several cases where the 'club trained' allocation is not filled entirely but List A includes several 'association trained' players

     

     

     

     

    View Comment

  18. Corrupt official 19th July 2019 at 07:15

    '..the Louden ..'

    '++++++++++++++++

    Was I ever correct in believing that 'the' Louden was the one in Duke St, Glasgow? Aren't there now two Loudens, one of them being over Govan way? 

    I would think it's only fair if there are two, reflecting as that would do the fact that there are two clubs named 'Rangers' , one of them in Liquidation, the other now two months into its seventh yer of existence.

     

    View Comment

  19. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17783081.rangers-lose-latest-round-merchandise-fight-mike-ashley/

    Bosses at Rangers have lost the latest round of a long-running High Court fight over merchandise with Sports Direct owner Mike Ashley.

    A company in the Sports Direct Group, SDI Retail Services, has said bosses at the Glasgow football club have been in breach of obligations under a deal relating to replica kit.

    Bosses at Rangers disputed claims made against them.

    Judge Lionel Persey finished overseeing the latest in a series of hearings at the High Court in London earlier this year.

    He said on Friday, at a High Court hearing in London, that he had ruled in favour of SDI after analysing a number of issues in the latest stage of the dispute.

    The judge has not yet published a full ruling outlining the detail of that dispute or the reasoning behind his decision.

    In June he ruled on the meaning of one agreement after lawyers representing the rival camps were unable to agree the terms of that agreement.

    A ruling outlining the reasoning behind that decision has recently been published online.

    Rangers lost a round of the fight in October.

    Another judge ruled Rangers had breached the terms of an agreement made with SDI.

    Mr Justice Teare concluded bosses at Rangers had made a new agreement with another firm without giving SDI a chance to match that firm's offer.

    SDI subsequently made further complaints

    View Comment

  20. John Clark 19th July 2019 at 13:41 

    Corrupt official 19th July 2019 at 07:15 '..the Louden ..' '++++++++++++++++

          Was I ever correct in believing that 'the' Louden was the one in Duke St, Glasgow? Aren't there now two Loudens, one of them being over Govan way?

        ———————————————————

        You are correct John, with the Duke St bar proclaiming itself as, "The original".

    https://www.rosemounttaverns.co.uk/pub/the-louden-tavern-duke-street.html

    View Comment

  21. Corrupt official 19th July 2019 at 19:10

    '..You are correct John, with the Duke St bar proclaiming itself as, "The original".'

    +++++++++++++++==

    Thank you, CO. It's been a while since I was in Duke St , and about an aeon since I was last anywhere near Govan!

    View Comment

  22. John Clark 19th July 2019 at 13:41
    Was I ever correct in believing that ‘the’ Louden was the one in Duke St, Glasgow? Aren’t there now two Loudens, one of them being over Govan way?

    I would think it’s only fair if there are two, reflecting as that would do the fact that there are two clubs named ‘Rangers’ , one of them in Liquidation, the other now two months into its seventh yer of existence.
    …………………….
    And one that was painted in recognition of it’s founding father.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1152286694911225857?p=v

    View Comment

  23.  

    I noted yesterday that the Director-General of the BBC told MPs that the BBC could become a subscription service. 

    "You could decide the BBC is a subscription service,” Lord Hall of Birkenhead told MPs. “It would be very, very different to the sort of BBC you have now, because you would be giving subscribers what they want, not the breadth of the population.” 

    On the basis of how the Pacific Quay people have protected and promoted the Big Lie and its creators, I would support moves to have  it be reduced to the same low status as any  money-grubbing, lowest-common-denominator ,unprincipled 'entertainment' subscription broadcaster .

    20 minutes or so before the M'well v Morton kick-off, I heard James McFadden come out with the 'when Rangers dropped down the divisions' observation.

    Jim Duffy did not volunteer any contradiction of that absolute falsehood.

    But then, neither did Geoff Webster, who I think is not merely a 'presenter' but also has some level of  editorial responsibility. 

    Why risk losing a few bob as match commentators or pundits for the sake of Truth?

    BBC Radio Scotland is as thirled now to that falsehood as it ever was, and clearly no one is going to be allowed to speak anything like the truth when discussing TRFC on the licence-fee funded BBC.

    If the BBC can be so wickedly unbalanced in a matter of 'sport', by its insistence on  giving  a section of the population the untruth that it wants to hear, then let only those who want to deny truth pay for a lying broadcaster, and rid the rest of us from the burden of the licence fee.

     

    View Comment

  24. 20 minutes or so before the M'well v Morton kick-off, I heard James McFadden come out with the 'when Rangers dropped down the divisions' observation.

    Off all people McFadden could never be accused of helping our Rangers. He has despised us for as long as he has been a player. At times there are folk who just don’t get involved or see it as either being pro or against new club idea. It’s a case of “if it smells like Rangers and looks like Rangers then it it’s rangers”. And there are a large large number of Celtic fans who are the same. There will always be a large number who will never accept it, but likewise a large number who don’t get involved or care. I don’t think it’s fair to assume every person who states what you proclaim as a lie is in some sort of conspiracy. I’ll stick up for Fad for as much as I know he hates Rangers I will never forget the memories of that night in Paris.  

    View Comment

  25. Darkbeforedawn 19th July 2019 at 22:50

    '..Off all people McFadden could never be accused of helping our Rangers. '

    +++++++++++++++++

    well, in so far as he (under BBC 'pressure' ?) bows the head and talks sh.t. he helps propagate the nonsense that the original Rangers were merely relegated!

    I have drafted the following letter to the DG of the BBC which touches on the point. I do not say that I will send it, but I may do.

     

    "Dear Director-General,

    Allow me to refer to what was reported (in 'Business Matters' online) yesterday as a quote from you:

    “.."You could decide the BBC is a subscription service,” Lord Hall of Birkenhead told MPs. “It would be very, very different to the sort of BBC you have now, because you would be giving subscribers what they want, not the breadth of the population.”

    And allow me to laugh hollowly!

    Why, man, do you not know that BBC Radio Scotland has already partially adopted the subscription model?

    I refer to the editorial policy of BBC Sportsound in relation to reporting matters concerning Rangers International Football Club plc and The Rangers Football Club Ltd.

    Very briefly , BBC Scotland refuses to allow its presenters on its 'Sportsound' programme to permit discussion of the fact that Rangers Football Club, founded in 1872, ceased to exist as a football club entitled to membership of a professional football league in Scotland (and therefore entitled to membership of the Scottish Football Association(SFA) )when, as many football clubs over the last century have done, they died the death of Liquidation in 2012.

    Instead, 'Sportsound' buys into what has become known as the 'Big Lie'- that is, that a football club newly admitted in 2012 to professional football and on that account newly admitted as a member of the SFA ,is one and the same club as the club in Liquidation.

    In doing so, they have quite blatantly demonstrated a readiness to capitulate to pressure from one section of the population of Scotland.I see no reason why I should pay a licence fee to help the propagation of what is absolutely a lie.

    Let us therefore make the BBC a subscription service. Then I need not pay to have lies battering my eardrums!

    Yours etc "

    View Comment

  26. John Clark 19th July 2019 at 23:40

     

    Darkbeforedawn 19th July 2019 at 22:50

    '..Off all people McFadden could never be accused of helping our Rangers. '

    +++++++++++++++++

    well, in so far as he (under BBC 'pressure' ?) bows the head and talks sh.t. he helps propagate the nonsense that the original Rangers were merely relegated!

    I have drafted the following letter to the DG of the BBC which touches on the point. I do not say that I will send it, but I may do.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    John – its your old mate Bogs here.

    Don't tar James with the deniers brush just because he appears in the media and said some stuff. Or so the media said.

    I see A Lindsay Herron was on SuperScoopbord tonight on that Clyde 1. Who is he?

    View Comment

  27. Bogs Dollox 20th July 2019 at 00:23

    '..Don't tar James with the deniers brush just because he appears in the media and said some stuff. Or so the media said.'

    +++++++++++++

    Not sure what you're saying here, BD.

    I heard McFadden say the ' when Rangers dropped down the divisions'.

    If he believes that to be true, he is manifestly buying into the lie. 

    If he does not believe it, then he's not being true to himself.

     

    View Comment

  28. Darkbeforedawn19th July 2019 at 22:50
    —————————

    The 'looks like Rangers and smells like Rangers' is the only point that is allowed. It is the only point that is allowed by the SFA and the media. Anyone who does not subscribe to that point is dismissed. Jim Spence and Graham Spiers are the only two hacks who have said Rangers are a new club and neither contribute any more to BBC sport. It is a quite shocking state of affairs in a so called democracy that only one opinion is allowed. Even though the alternative opinion has legally binding facts behind it, whereas the one that is allowed has no legal backing whatsoever.

    At the end of the day in Scotland  'Rangers' are considered to be superior to all others. Ergo, the views of Rangers fans are given a higher priority than that of other fans. Even though Celtic have achieved a treble treble, the media STILL give prominence to Rangers on a daily basis. It was forever thus, and personally gives me a lot of pleasure that my club being so successful can cause so much upset to the nation's powerbrokers, who are even willing to see tax go unpaid if it helps Rangers succeed. 

     

    View Comment

  29. John Clark – I wish you well in your efforts to educate the BBC on matters of Rangers' liquidation, but I fear you are on a hiding to nothing.

    A year or two ago, I spent several months corresponding with the BBC on precisely the same matter. I sent umpteen emails to them, providing incontrovertible evidence of the demise of the original club, including a substantial list of links to the BBC's own reports from early 2012, all of which accurately reported the death of Rangers Football Club.

    However, I was told that their subsequent 'same club' reporting, which rewrote history to describe the polar opposite of earlier reporting, was simply a result of an evolving story and that in any case the BBC had an editorial policy to base all discussions regarding Rangers on the conclusions of a BBC Trust report into the matter, paying particular attention to an Editorial Standards Committee decision that the BBC should make reference to, and distinguish between, a new and old company, rather than a new and old club.

    Having read the BBC Trust report in its entirety, I could only conclude that if I wanted to read a copy in my local public library, I'd have to head for the fiction section. Suffice to say, the BBC's main driver in adopting their sacrosanct policy was advice supplied by the Scottish Football Association, who also provided such advice to the ASA, ECA, UEFA, FIFA and quite possibly the CIA, FBI, AA, RAC and YMCA.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-22951447

      

    View Comment

  30. John Clark 19th July 2019 at 21:55

     

    John, in what context did McFadden find the 'need' to utter the following in the build up to a Motherwell v Morton match?

    "20 minutes or so before the M'well v Morton kick-off, I heard James McFadden come out with the 'when Rangers dropped down the divisions' observation."

    I'd be interested to know if he found cause to mention Hearts or Hibs relegations, or Dundee United's, and so on, or was he caught up in a discussion about the relegation of West Coast football clubs like Morton? I'd hazard a guess at no, he didn't and wasn't. I'd even say I am sure there was no link between either of the clubs involved in the broadcast and the apparent link to mentioning 'Rangers' in a way that suggests the current club, that started life in the fourth tier of Scottish football, is one and the same as the one currently languishing in liquidation.

    There can be little doubt, regardless of McFadden's own honesty, that he was working from a script, perhaps a loose one, that the BBC provides it's commentators with to ensure that the word 'Rangers' is always mentioned, either in a positive way or just to push the 'continuity' propaganda. No doubt Celtic were mentioned at some point, too. You know? just to provide that BBC 'balance'.

    View Comment

  31. Darkbeforedawn 19th July 2019 at 22:50

    20 minutes or so before the M'well v Morton kick-off, I heard James McFadden come out with the 'when Rangers dropped down the divisions' observation.

    Off all people McFadden could never be accused of helping our Rangers. He has despised us for as long as he has been a player. At times there are folk who just don’t get involved or see it as either being pro or against new club idea. It’s a case of “if it smells like Rangers and looks like Rangers then it it’s rangers”. And there are a large large number of Celtic fans who are the same. There will always be a large number who will never accept it, but likewise a large number who don’t get involved or care. I don’t think it’s fair to assume every person who states what you proclaim as a lie is in some sort of conspiracy. I’ll stick up for Fad for as much as I know he hates Rangers I will never forget the memories of that night in Paris.

    _____________________________

    I'd suggest your comments, highlighted in bold, while probably true, are as a direct result of the lying propaganda pushed by the SMSM and, in particular, the BBC, that John has just written about.

    Continually publish a lie and more and more people will accept it as the truth, or, at least, stop pushing against the lie. And the continuous and unremitting need to repeat the lie, particularly when there is no obvious cause to mention it, is proof that it is, indeed, a lie.

    View Comment

  32. ‘Bogs Dollox 20th July 2019 at 00:23

     

    I see a Lindsay Herron was on SuperScoopbord tonight on that Clyde 1. Who is he?’

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

    Son of Allan Herron & proof that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. At one time, TRFC's in-house journo, with job title of Media Editor.

    View Comment

  33. Yes, our SMSM…

    and its malignant influence hanging over Scottish football continues.

     

    I see that Chris Jack, The ET 'Group Senior Sports Writer' is happily continuing to have 'articles published under his name'.

    Carry on as normal, nothing to see here.

     

    After the debacle of the wholly made up article – complete with fictitious QUOTES from a living person – you would think that anyone with a shred of honour / integrity would have immediately resigned from the publication, [mibbees to avoid being fired], and learn from the humiliating experience.

    Not so for a 'senior journalist' in Scotland.

    Just carry on as normal.

     

    The Internet Bampots know from long experience that the SMSM twists the truth, ignores the truth and blindly copies / pastes pitiful PR output as the norm.

    But, I think this Jack shocker is the first time I've seen such a clear and dishonest attempt to fill the column inches.

     

    Why would anyone buy an ET now?

    View Comment

  34. DBD, this is your lucky day.  Give me a call, I'm just back from Hong Kong and have some genuine, 100%, smells like, looks like etc Rolex, Rayban, Versace and Nike opportunities for you.

     

    View Comment

  35. Darkbeforedawn 19th July 2019 at 22:50
    “if it smells like Rangers and looks like Rangers then it it’s rangers”. And there are a large large number of Celtic fans who are the same. There will always be a large number who will never accept it, but likewise a large number who don’t get involved or care. I don’t think it’s fair to assume every person who states what you proclaim as a lie is in some sort of conspiracy.
    ……………
    “if it smells like Rangers and looks like Rangers then it it’s rangers”.
    I think it’s fair to assume every single person even if they don’t get involved or care know that a rangers was the most corrupt, guilty club in scottish football that left a list of creditors behind and brought shame on scottish football but is never mentioned in the same breath from any one person who come out with the ‘when Rangers dropped down the divisions’ observation.If they are going to pretend the club was dropped down let them not brush aside why they think they were dropped down.

    View Comment

  36. ernie 20th July 2019 at 11:56
    ………
    That made me laugh
    It reminded me of some clothing i seen on holiday. At first glance it looked like Calvin Klein, but on closer inspection it was Galvin Glein.

    View Comment

  37. Well, to be fair,

    "…if it smells like Rangers…"

    is probably an accurate comparison of RFC and TRFC.

     

    Both are putrid.

     

    I'll get my face mask…  broken heart

     

    View Comment

  38. Highlander 20th July 2019 at 10:10

    '.., the BBC's main driver in adopting their sacrosanct policy was advice supplied by the Scottish Football Association,..'

    +++++++++++++++++++

    In strict fairness , Highlander,to the BBC executives, who defended their use of 'new club'/'old club' by reference to Scots law, they were constitutionally bound to obey the order issued by the BBC Trust not to use those descriptions.

    Happily, the BBC Trust [ set up by Royal Charter, not by Parliament ]was itself dissolved in 2017, having previously been accused by a former Director-General, Mark Thomson,  of 'fundamentally misleading' Parliament in the scandal over large pay-offs to senior executives.

    It is amusing to read this extract from the Editorial Standards Committee's report: 

    "The ECS said it was "satisfied that although there had been a breach of the editorial guidelines in relation to due accuracy and the use of clear and precise language, it had not seen anything to suggest that the BBC had knowingly and materially misled its audience". (in the way, perhaps, that the Trust was alleged to have tried 'knowingly and materially' to mislead Parliament!)

    Sadly, by complying with the order, and abandoning truth thereby,the BBC has been knowingly and materially misleading its audience since 2013!

    The dissolution of the Trust two years ago should have been seized by the BBC to begin again to report the truth on their own account, or at least raise the question with Ofcom, which took over the monitoring of editorial standards.

    If the BBC can speak untruth in the simple matter of Sport, what bigger untruths will it be reporting on, say, Brexit, where matters of real national importance are at stake, rather than the piddly little affairs of a seven year old football club trying to live on a bunch of lies?

     

     

     

    View Comment

  39. https://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/17782969.rangers-lose-latest-high-court-battle-mike-ashleys-sports-direct/
    ……………….
    Bundesliga club target Alfredo Morelos.
    James Tavernier ‘tops Newcastle transfer wish list’ as Steve Bruce eyes Rangers captain
    ……………………..
    Nothing like a bit of deflection that the ibrox clubs two best players are targets for other clubs keeps the fans who don’t really care asking about the real issues.

    View Comment

  40. JC, absolutely!

    The BBC is not at all what it used to be, [or what we thought it was].

    The sooner a subscription model is introduced, the sooner we can all make a choice.

     

    The impression I get is that outside of the UK, the BBC is still held in high regard – including its news coverage, (generally).

    Perhaps the BBC is held in a higher regard by overseas consumers than by its UK consumers?

     

    I would certainly agree that the BBC is 'probably' the best of a bad bunch amongst the global, MSM news outlets.

    The perennial news ratings winner in the USA is Fox News, with its opinion driven coverage from typically thick-but-pretty presenters.

    …and I used to get strange looks from American colleagues for readily admitting that I watched RT and Al Jazeera output to get some balance!

     

    If the BBC can't accurately and honestly report on the Ibrox goings on, then any reasonable person would have to question the accuracy and honesty of BBC coverage of ALL other news items…

    to state the bleedin' obvious.

     

    View Comment

  41. Cluster One 1956.

    I suspect UEFA will hide behind that excuse but what JJ's letter might do is annoy UEFA enough to realise the stance being adopted by the SFA conflicts with Article12 of UEFA FFP.

    All UEFA rules work on the basis that clubs who have failed to exit from insolvency cannot claim to be the same club , ie legal entity, which TRFC Ltd clearly are'nt on their application.

    The reference to Traverso is I suspect to alert him of the continuing anomaly that the SFA have created for UEFA given his response to Celtic shareholders lawyer in 2016 where he described TRFC Ltd as a new club/company based on the definition of a club and the forms it can take in Article 12.

    Given that  Res12 asked for UEFA involvement on the UEFA licence processing in 2011 in which SFA were fully involved, it is actually in UEFA's interest in terms of upholding the integrity of their competition to ensure that what happened in 2011 cannot happen again.

    What if there is actually a case re McGregor and it went unnoticed until the group stage and a club eliminated in qualifying put the cat among the pigeons?

    So UEFA really should be investigating the SFA and Celtic really should pass Res12 or a derivative at the next AGM.

    View Comment

  42. Allyjambo 20th July 2019 at 10:25

    '…John, in what context did McFadden find the 'need' to utter the following in the build up to a Motherwell v Morton match?'

    +++++++++++++

    I had only just switched on the steam radio when I heard McFadden speak. I didn't recognise his voice and was wondering who it was that was speaking about 'Rangers' ,and how well they are doing, fifteen minutes before the Motherwell/Morton kick-off!

    I assume that there had been some general chat about the premier league teams in general and the conversation had reached 'Rangers', with the BBC heads perhaps bowing  in homage at each mention of the holy name!angry 

    View Comment

  43. I wonder if someone who is au fait with Twitter could ask McFadden what he meant. You never know he might reply with a sensible answer. Either way it would give us a clue to his integrity. As a well known blogger states,"For the avoidance of doubt," I don't do twitter.

    View Comment

  44. Auldheid 20th July 2019 at 12:58

    '…and Celtic really should pass Res12 or a derivative at the next AGM.'

    +++++++++++

    It's late of a Saturday night, Auldheid, but a wee alarm bell is ringing. 

    The Res12 people would have to be careful NOT to withdraw the Res 12 motion that has been in 'adjournment' (for 6 feckin years!)  before they are certain that a replacement, differently worded, resolution will definitely appear on the agenda at this Autumn's agm and be debated and voted upon. 

    There is nothing the Celtic Board would like better than to have Res 12 withdrawn! 

    And they are no angels in this matter: if Res 12 is withdrawn,  they would try everything to prevent a new Resolution getting on to the agenda.

    After 6 years, it is clear that they, no more than the SFA, want the licence issue really and thoroughly investigated.

    Phew! Jings, crivvens and michty me! Forgive my moment of panic. I'm sure the Res12 folk are more aware of these things than I!

     

    View Comment

  45. JC and Auldheid.

    Isn't it so disappointing. depressing even, that we now know that those charged with running our clubs are prepared to use underhand methods to defeat their own supporters and shareholders in an effort to prevent an investigation into the likely wrongdoing of, not only of one member club (now defunct), but the SFA as well?

    I very much doubt that the clubs and SFA are worried about the effect an investigation would have on Rangers(IL), they know, after all, that no action can be taken against a dead club and the current club is protected by the very fact it is a different club. It is, particularly in the case of the SFA, the fear of what might come out about their own, personal, actions and blind eye turning that causes this reluctance to seek justice. That and the realisation that a proper, fully publicised, investigation would blow the continuation myth right out the water as an explanation would have to be made as to why the current club is not responsible for the actions of the club we know is dead but those running the game wish to pretend is still living and playing at Ibrox.

    Of course, anyone involved at Rangers at the time the (potential) fraud took place might feel the effects of any fallout, maybe even a criminal investigation.

    View Comment

  46. Allyjambo 21st July 2019 at 09:59

    '..Of course, anyone involved at Rangers at the time the (potential) fraud took place might feel the effects of any fallout, maybe even a criminal investigation.'

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Have you had a wee read at this link, Aj 

    http://www.bestcriminaldefencebarrister.co.uk/criminal-defence-barrister-blog/2015/october/06/personal-liability-of-directors-for-criminal-offences.aspx

    from which I take this excerpt:

    "..It is generally the case that examples of personal criminal liability for directors flow from the corporate criminal liability of the company of which they are a director. Having establishing the corporate criminal liability, the personal liability of the director depends upon their role in the company and the link to the criminal act(s).

    Although the personal liability of a director is dependent upon the company having committed a criminal act it can be established even if the company has not been or is not being prosecuted.[my underlining]

    The existence of personal criminal liability of directors is intended to ensure the accountability of those in senior positions at companies engaging in criminal conduct…"

    There are some delicious sections in the Fraud Act 2006, e.g.

    "12. Liability of company officers for offences by company

    (1)Subsection (2) applies if an offence under this Act is committed by a body corporate.

    (2)If the offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of—

    (a)a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or

    (b)a person who was purporting to act in any such capacity,

    he (as well as the body corporate) is guilty of the offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly."

    And, of course, the directors of a company in Liquidation are still accountable for their acts as directors of that company notwithstanding the Liquidation or the fact that they had resigned before the Liquidation

    And, further, I suspect that if a  wayward director had been acting in collusion with wayward directors of another company the directors of that other company could find themselves also being prosecuted.

    Speaking entirely in the abstract, it is entirely right and proper that allegations of potentially fraudulent behaviour by company directors should be thoroughly ad independently investigated, for their sake if the allegations are shown to be unfounded, and for the sake of the rest of us if there is found to be truth in the allegations.

    View Comment

  47. AllyJambo

    Although the SFA role in 2011 is the catalyst for Res12 what has happened since is what they really fear.

    1. The Judicial Panel Tribunal on Craig Whyte omitted to  include his failure to pay the wee tax bill which would have brought focus on how that happened in 2011, given he gave an undertaking to pay it. He was charged with non payment of PAYE and VAT so why not the wee tax bill? Significantly LNS was involved with Regan in drawing up the Terms of Reference for that tribunal in Feb 2012 a few days after administration was announced. Was he informed of that failure and why it should be excluded or was he duped?

    2. The Terms of Reference for the LNS Commission itself were skewed by the failure to provide SPL lawyers with HMRC documentation relating to the wee tax case charging RFC with negligent or fraudulent behaviour. Had that been provided evidence of specific dishonesty iro side letter concealment,  but the non disclosure allowed LNS to state no question of dishonesty in concealing them.

    Had all the evidence been provided the charges would not have been breach of registration rules but breach of the Articles relating to acting in good faith that are the basis of those made in relation to the UEFA licence 2011 in May 2018

    3 However even there if what was reported in a statement by TRFC the day after non compliance charges were made, the period at the end of March 2011 was  excluded from scrutiny that if true prevent any scrutiny of the basis on which the charges were made in the first place ie court testimony.

    The significance of this is to focus on the monitoring period under CW and not the grant when SDM was the major shareholder trying to sell RFC and Dave King was a Board member.

    The other significance was that under UEFA jurisprudence as explained by Traverso, breaches in the monitoring period did not attract sanctions until the following season. This removes the locus of Celtic shareholders as the argument Celtic were deprived of CL money in 2011 fell if only the monitoring submissions was being investigated . Clever stuff.

    Luckily, usable documentation surfaced then that challenged the exclusion of the end of March and this was provided to SFA the night before the JPDT sat in June 2018. Three weeks later the CAS card is played and you have to wonder had that documentation not surfaced would the CAS card have been played? (This is all on the Res12 Archive btw.)

    The pattern from the foregoing tells us that the Judicial Panel Protocol  introduced a few years before might work for on field offenses but is totally inadequate for achieving justice where the SFA are possible offenders.

    That is what Res12 is now up against but as long as supporters at large are ignorant of the issue, largely because sms do not focus on it or dont care, Scottish football is testimony to the adage " Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

    Celtic btw were presented with the same documentation relating to events at end of March 2011 in June 2018 and in August 2018 in presence of independent witnesses, with papers detailing the consequences in UEFA FFP terms of misrepresenting the status of the liability at end March 2011 as potential, when in fact it had become a payable and overdue under FFP, but for unfathomable reasons have decided to depend on the SFA continuing with a process that is clearly flawed.

    Celtic shareholders will want to know why, but as all clubs are covered by the JPP, hopefully their supporters will start asking questions of their Boards  of an organisation whose decisions in the past relating to a massive breach of trust by one club have been anything but just.

    View Comment

  48. Allyjambo 21st July 2019 at 09:59

    '…that no action can be taken against a dead club..'

    ++++++++++++++

    Oh, I don't know about that, Aj.

    The history books could/should show that Rangers FC of 1872 died an utterly dishonourable death, not occasioned by the run-of-the-mill  business failure that even perfectly honest businesses can suffer but a death caused by its serial cheating both of the Football Authorities and of HMRC over  a number of years.

    Post-mortem expulsion from Scottish Football is entirely possible and appropriate.

    And of course the absurd pretence that TRFC Ltd is the same club as that monstrous cheat of a club should be forthwith abandoned, and Scottish Football put back on the path of Sporting truth.

     

    View Comment

  49. I’ve just read back through the last few posts from Auldheid and John Clark. Entirely more interesting that golf thingy over at Portrush. The clause in the companies act stating that former directors of companies in liquidation are still liable for corporate and personal misdeeds is a wonderful back stop.

    View Comment

  50. John Clark 21st July 2019 at 14:29 

     

     

    Allyjambo 21st July 2019 at 09:59

    '…that no action can be taken against a dead club..'

    ++++++++++++++

    Oh, I don't know about that, Aj.

    The history books could/should show that Rangers FC of 1872 died an utterly dishonourable death, not occasioned by the run-of-the-mill  business failure that even perfectly honest businesses can suffer but a death caused by its serial cheating both of the Football Authorities and of HMRC over  a number of years.

    Post-mortem expulsion from Scottish Football is entirely possible and appropriate.

    And of course the absurd pretence that TRFC Ltd is the same club as that monstrous cheat of a club should be forthwith abandoned, and Scottish Football put back on the path of Sporting truth.

    ___________

    Which kind of backs up what I was saying, JC. The 'club' will be unaffected, just as the vile Jimmy Saville was/is by his post mortem revelations (pardon my distasteful analogy, but it's the most lucid one I could come up with). The supporters, of course, won't be unaffected by such things as change of history, but they're not what those blocking Resolution 12 are concerned with (other than in some cases being supporters of the deceased club, but still more concerned about their own part in the deception and/or cover-up).

    In short, I believe those involved in blocking a proper investigation/inquiry are solely concerned with the effects the revelations might have on them, such as job loss, reputation loss, jail time?, and even own club revenue.

    They are, each and every one of them, self-serving barstewards.

     

    View Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.