Comment on Does Money Indeed Ruin Football? by John Clark.

    StevieBC 11th March 2019 at 00:53

    '…Absolutely no point in focusing on those who tarnish Scottish football at the stadiums – if there is no focus on those who tarnish Scottish football from their positions at the SFA / SPFL."


    And that is a point that cannot be made often enough, StevieBC.

    The wrongdoing of nutcase fans (even if there may be thousands of such), is as nothing compared with the cynical cheating and lying of the very  Sports governance body!

    The Big Lie was  devised, constructed and put into effect by  unscrupulous men of no moral fibre whatsoever: men ready to swear away any regard for sporting integrity, and even common sense, and sell their filthy little souls for an outrageous fantasy. 

    If there were never to be another incursion by fans, or another episode of sectarian singing, the Governance of our game will still remain rotten at its core  for as long as the Big Lie is allowed to stand. 


    John Clark Also Commented

    Does Money Indeed Ruin Football?
    StevieBC 11th March 2019 at 22:15

    '..Good to see the Scotland manager has his finger on the pulse WRT his team…'


    And good to see that the unfaithful, 'committed'  manager who so contemptuously walked away from the Scotland job( but got it back) is so oo oo understanding of  McGregor's hissyfit.

    Honest to God!

    How much crap can we take from  our Football Governance body?  

    Leave aside Truth: have they no bloody idea of how to lie in any kind of integrated manner?

    Does Money Indeed Ruin Football?
    easyJambo 11th March 2019 at 21:12

    '..The case no. for the H&J action is P997/17'


    Aye, eJ, I should have checked the list! broken heart Just hoping for some interesting development.

    Does Money Indeed Ruin Football?
    paddy malarkey's link at 19.07 this evening to the Strict Liability consultation document and the replies thereto [ what a brilliantly crafted series of intellectual arguments in support of their 'opposed' was provided by club 1872. Not Socrates, not Plato nor yet Aristotle could have matched it] made me turn to a Parliamentary debate about the abolition of corporal punishment in schools 


    I've been reading it on and off this evening. 

    Because I remembered:

    there was a fight at dinner time one day in 1955, on waste ground outside the school. 'Fight, fight, fight' was the cry, and I think every pupil who heard the cry was present to see as bloody a 'schoolboy' fight as ever was seen. 

    It happened that a wee wumman passing by stopped to try to break it up. She was hunted- and someone threw a clod of earth at her, some of which made a mess on her coat; and the fight carried on.

    When we all got back to our classrooms, we, that is, every class,  were asked 'who threw the clod'.

    No one owned up. 

    Result: the whole damned school got the belt.

    Even as a 13 year old I thought that a bit excessive- we had only just been reading about the Roman Army, where they were content just to punish one-in-ten!

    A more mature understanding of that and similar, one-classroom, experiences makes me instinctively opposed to SL. There can be no justification for punishing the 'innocent.' Doing so is essentially an admission of defeat, and a resort to the unprincipled behaviour of the bad guys. 

    We on this blog are strong in our condemnation of our Football Governance body's contempt for truth and justice when it comes to applying basic rules of sporting integrity: we should not , I believe, compromise ourselves by suggesting that there is a 'greater good' that can be served if we ourselves dispense with notions of fairness and truth and justice.


    Recent Comments by John Clark

    Accountability via Transparency.
    sickofitall 23rd May 2019 at 21:12

    '..When is the verdict on the sports direct case v rangers due to be published..'


    The short answer is: whenever the judge delivers his opinion.

    Given that there was  hearing just yesterday, and assuming that that was the conclusion of submissions, the Judge is not likely to deliver his opinion for a while. It could be late next week, or in a couple of weeks or even longer.

    But of course, Parties will know before anything ever appears online, and it's likely that whichever Party wins, he will make sure his PR people let the media know asap!




    Accountability via Transparency.
    Jingso.Jimsie 23rd May 2019 at 10:41

    '..After boring myself half to death scouring the SFA Handbook & JPP,..'


    I was thrown a  bit by para 5.2 of Annex D [on page 140 of the protocol]  'A suspension imposed upon a member of Team Staff will apply to all football…'.[my bold]

    It took me a while to arrive at the same conclusion as you did, having had to read references and cross references back and forth.

    Clarke's suspension does NOT include international competitions, and there will be no need for the SFA to fall back on their default position: jiggery-pokery with 'rules'!


    Accountability via Transparency.
    So FIFA has realised that greed is not always able to be satisfied. Their media release dated yesterday (but I first heard a report of it this morning on BBC radio) drips of disappointment:

    "…Additionally, FIFA and Qatar have once again explored the feasibility of Qatar hosting a 48-team tournament by in particular lowering certain key FIFA requirements. A joint analysis, in this respect, concluded that due to the advanced stage of preparations and the need for a detailed assessment of the potential logistical impact on the host country, more time would be required and a decision could not be taken before the deadline of June. It was therefore decided not to further pursue this option.

    The FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022™ will therefore remain as originally planned with 32 teams and no proposal will be submitted at the next FIFA Congress on 5 June."

    Or ,perhaps, fear of many more fatalities among immigrant 82p per-day workers labouring hard to get Quatar prepared even for the 32-country competition has outweighed greed ( and perhaps indicates some regret on the part of some members that Qatar was ever selected as a suitable venue at all)


    Accountability via Transparency.
    Ex Ludo 22nd May 2019 at 09:55

    '..Stevie Clarke being welcomed with open arms in today’s Herald..'


    Jist the wan photie? Huh! broken heart

    'The Scotsman' has  the photo of Clarke with Maxwell (what an odd handclasp!) on page 61,another photo of Clarke by himself  spread over pages 62 and 63, and another smaller photo of Clarke at the foot of page 63, and on the back page, centre, another photo of yer man. And lots of column inches of text to go with the photies!


    Accountability via Transparency.
    Talking about handshakes , having earlier in the year shaken the hand of the Prime Minister of Australia [ who, much to his own surprise it appears, won the recent election and is Prime Minister for another term]and the hand of the Lady Mayoress of Redlands Council, Queensland, I had the honour today of shaking the hand of the Provost of East Lothian.

    Mrs C and I took a wee run down to North Berwick as we sometimes do. As we sat in the sea-bird centre having an ice-cream, we noticed a guy down below with a gold chain round his neck, and a couple of Polis ,at the harbour. 

    On the way down to the harbour, this guy passed us, and I engaged him in conversation. The gold chain was the chain of office of the Provost. He gave me his card, shook hands, and explained that what was afoot was that the Duke of Buccleuch [aka the Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland ]was on a visit, and he had just seen him off on the wee boat trip to the Isle of May, to see the puffins' breeding ground.

    If I can add that while in the wee queue to buy the ice-cream, there was a woman from Auckland behind me, and a man from the Sunshine Coast ( where the hospital that sorted my dislocated shoulder is)

    It's these little serendipities that make life -even at my age- delightful; and make the sheer evil of what has been done in Scottish Football so damaging and distressing.

    Instead of adding to the spice and enjoyment of life by fostering and protecting honest sporting competition, honest sporting rivalry, our football governance people have done the very opposite. 

    Unlike the honest men (and/or women )of the FAW they abandoned principle.