In Whose Interests

1004
138539

Any organisation’s plan for a top-down review of development would ordinarily be welcome news. Self evaluation, or even better independent evaluation is an ongoing process amongst professionals, individually and collectively alike. In the case of the SFA however a healthy scepticism is required. We are after all dealing with people who are the poster boys for self-interest and short-termism.

The SFA had previously commissioned a thorough review of the game (decades ago) by Rinus Michels, the inventor of “Total Football” and his report was largely ignored, partly because it implied criticism of the then current regime, and partly because it would cost money. A “Total Shambles”.

Henry McLeish also famously recommended (again after being commissioned to do so by the SFA) a more balanced approach to governance between the SFA and SPFL. This would have required a blazer or two having less say in the running of the game – and was therefore ignored.

Mark Wotte, the prominent Dutch coach hired as performance director at Hampden also suggested during his tenure that, in order to improve technique, more ball time should be provided for players in games.

He recommended seven a side competitions as the norm for u-15s (less players – more participation).

To accommodate this, club infrastructures would have required expensive upgrading, and coaches in clubs, not responsive to new ideas lobbied hard for the status quo.

The upshot is that we carried on with the same eleven-a-side games where many players hardly got a kick.
And in this classic Einsteinean definition of insanity, no overall improvements were to be found in the national team’s fortunes.

No wonder Wotte fled the scene in 2014 after three years.

Of course the details are debatable and subjective, but experience tells us;
Anything that
a) costs money or
b) upsets old boys’ networks
has a tendency to be hidden out of sight.

The recent “announcement” is merely a reaction to a couple of poor results, caused in part by inaction in the wake of previous reports’ recommendations.

An increasing number of observers of our game refer to an inferior mindset amongst players in Scotland, that we accept losing as the norm.

Hardly surprising that such a mindset is prevalent amongst professionals.
They must despair at the chronic self-interest, ineptitude and fecklessness of the “leaders” of our sport – an organisation that appointed Gordon Smith as CE (think about that for a minute) based on who his pals were, where McGregor and Petrie can become senior officers – “because it’s his turn!” – despite being unqualified squares in a round ball game, and where fairy-tales take precedence over reality.

As long as the blazers have a seat on the SFA bus, nothing will change.

1004 COMMENTS


  1. upthehoops 2nd November 2019 at 00:24

    '…The fact  the Scottish media are even willing to entertain convicted tax cheat and cold shouldered Dave King says much. '

    +++++++++++

    No, uth: it says not 'much' but everything.

    It says everything about 'succulent lamb' eaters of the print press and about  BBC Scotland chiefs and their readiness to suppress the truth, and propagandise lies.

    It says that there are lying bast.rds in control of our Scottish media.

     

    View Comment

  2. I would say Rangers accounts highlight the need even more for them to at least have a crack at Champions League qualification. We have been here before.  The integrity of the game in Scotland is already low…I fear it is going to get even worse. 

    A tax cheating criminal who has also had the rarely used financial cold shoulder applied is still held in high esteem by the Scottish media. Arguably he is the most respected major shareholder in the country.  Utterly bizarre.

    It's not about honesty, it's not about sport, and it's not about football. It's about something far more sinister. How can this ever change, and why are the other clubs so happy to allow it?

    View Comment

  3. Smugas   1st November 2019 at 21:22

     

    How are everyone interpreting that Laird announcement.  He’s putting up a £5m facility.  But it almost reads like he’s covering the entire shortfall whatever that may be.  Brave lad…

     

    Pretty sure the same 'promise' was made by Oasis but when push came to shove, they had to find the money elsewhere

    View Comment

  4. Already the online SMSM coverage of the RIFC results is swiftly being dropped down the list of headlines…

     

    RIFC is still;

    – a significant loss making business

    – a business with no clear plan or timetable to break even

    – wholly dependent on significant, additional funding for its very survival.

    View Comment

  5. The bottom line for RIFC is that they appear to have gone all in in the hope of stopping 9IAR and getting access to the Champions League qualifiers.

    It's the most risky "speculate to accumulate" model I've ever seen in Scottish football, even worse than Murray's "for every fiver ……" strategy.

    Their only escape would seem to be the sale of their most marketable players, which is likely to damage their prospects of wining the league. 

    View Comment

  6. Well, to be fair, the TRFC MD Stewart Robertson seems to have successfully managed one immediate risk.

     

    Assuming it was him, he has done well to drop Metro Bank and – somehow – get Barclays on-board as the new RIFC bank.

    View Comment

  7. StevieBC 2nd November 2019 at 10:08

    If there are no credit facilities and it is a cash only business then I would imagine its pretty much risk free to Barclays.

     

    LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

    The RIFC Group maintains cash to fund the daily cash requirements of its business. The Group does not have access to any further banking facilities.

    As at 30 June 2019, there are interest-free, unsecured loans with investors amounting to £10.3 million, other commercial loans of £3.0m, whilst the Group also has finance lease agreements totalling £1.2 million.

    As at 30 June 2019, the Group held £1.0m within cash and bank balances.

     

    View Comment

  8. easyJambo 1st November 2019 at 23:18 I have to say that the accounts are much worse than I had anticipated. I thought that they may have turned around their first half profit of £5.2m into a loss of similar magnitude, but certainly not as much as £11.3m. Chris Jack's £14.3m EL windfall mostly disappeared with a £10.35m increase in wages. Those wages won't have gone down any this season, but they have incurred massively increased liabilities in terms of future transfer payments.

    _____________

    Could it be that the veracity of those unaudited interim accounts was as dubious as many bampots predicted? And weren't they used to support TRFC's Euro Licence application?

    View Comment

  9. Anyone owed cash would be wise to ring fence that amount immediately, nobody could look at that going concern warning and not be alerted to the very real possibility that this company could go bust . The problem is are there any moneys in the bank to ring fence? Another issue will be next years accounts ,the last 2 years losses already total  €29.4m , even if they did win the league would they be awarded a licence for Europe. There needs to be a firesale in January for even the slightest possibility of survival but everyone is now alerted to their desperate situation which equals lowball offers and players sitting tight . Buying Kent and Helander was utter madness , no surprise the DoF wanted to spend more time with his family. What Dave King desperately needs now is a scapegoat , anyone know what wee Craigy is up to these days?

    View Comment

  10. Timtim 2nd November 2019 at 11:11

    even if they did win the league would they be awarded a licence for Europe.

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

    They could openly admit they owed £200m to a Colombian Drug Baron and the SFA would still put them forward for a licence. For me the real worry now is they HAVE to win the league and get a crack at the CL to break the cycle. We have been here before. 

    View Comment

  11. upthehoops 2nd November 2019 at 11:39

    '..For me the real worry now is they HAVE to win the league and get a crack at the CL to break the cycle. '

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

    Given the readiness with which  Scottish football  governance abandoned any notion of sporting integrity to accommodate CG,  I feel perfectly justified in being ready to believe that they will be prepared to sink even further in order to avoid TRFC slumping into Administration a mere 7 years after its foundation.

    I have no doubt that the hyenas in the murkier end of the business world  are already circling, sensing the wee opportunity of buying TRFC out of Administration ( no big Tax debt to inherit?)

     

    View Comment

  12. easyJambo 2nd November 2019 at 09:21 

         The bottom line for RIFC is that they appear to have gone all in in the hope of stopping 9IAR and getting access to the Champions League qualifiers. It's the most risky "speculate to accumulate" model I've ever seen in Scottish football, even worse than Murray's "for every fiver ……" strategy. Their only escape would seem to be the sale of their most marketable players, which is likely to damage their prospects of wining the league.

        ———————————————————–

        Eff their escape EJ. What about our escape from them and their crooked cohorts. Now that CFC PLC have put their cards on the table, officially joining the rest of the yella-bellied clubs, our only weapon left is our ticket money.

        League member…Ludge member…..is there a difference?….Whatever…It would appear its a brotherhood CFC PLC are a member of.

    View Comment

  13. Another issue is with King issuing more loans then converting the debt to equity will be him breaching the 30% limit again  and requiring him to make an offer to all other shareholders but he is banned from doing so for 4 years so will he give money he knows can't be repaid but has to be repaid or they fall foul of ffp for a euro licence they need to stave off insolvency! Kings' been so busy trying to run rings round everyone he has ended up running rings around himself . 

    View Comment

  14. Ex Ludo 2nd November 2019 at 13:02 https://twitter.com/rpmcomo/status/1190597373610930178?s=21 A long thread on Twitter via Roger Mitchell from Fans Without Scarves but au point as they say in the Common Market.

    ____________________

    And from that Twitter thread we find proof of just how well versed the bears are in matters fiscal. It appears that a football club is in fine shape as long as it doesn't have (because it can't get) any 'bank debt'. We must be reading these accounts wrong, then, as must the Auditors… As for 'full control of their retail potential…'! Didn't we read something similar at some time in the not too distant past?

    True Blue 1982 @1982TrueBlue 'Only club in Scotland with zero bank debt and still have full control of their retail potential to come. Mike Ashley at this moment in time is owed not a penny.'

    View Comment

  15. Allyjambo

    Here is the main points made by Fans with one interjection by myself on Moral Hazard.

    Auldheid

    Informative Tweet From an Accountant Fans Without Scarves

    It can be read with graphics in support beginning at

    https://twitter.com/FansScarves/status/1190590288194101250?s=20

    but you can get gist from this if not on Twitter.

    @FansScarves

    Had a bit of a mooch at the Rangers accounts this morning. Here’s some thoughts on the picture it paints and what it means for Scottish football. The first thing that catches the eye is the £11.6m loss. Privately I’d been expecting £9m so it’s a little worse than I feared /1

    That loss brings the total accumulated losses to an eye watering £46.8m around half of which relates to the last 2 years. That’s not sustainable long term which means tough decisions need to be made and the crunch time is approaching. There’s a little good news too though /2

    Revenue is up considerably by £20.5m (around 63%) largely boosted by a decent Euro campaign and around 12 more matches than in previous season. It must be disappointing that hasn’t translated to the bottom line though. That increase in revenue could’ve turned losses to profits /3

    Turning to what happened with it, the major extra expenses were operating costs and finance costs. Of the OC it’s clear staff costs are up by around £9m to £22m (about 69%) meaning substantially increased spending on employees helped drive that 63% turnover increase. /4

    Despite that the wages to turnover ratios look a lot better. Down to 65% which isn’t really that far from 60% that is seen as sustainable. The “bang for buck” is probably facing a steep drop off though. It’s tougher to make revenue gains at the sharp end of Europe /5

    It’s clear from the previous figures for example that every 1% extra spent on wages isn’t proving a 1% turnover increase. Beyond current levels better performance very hard to achieve consistently and costly to improve the chances. It becomes even more risky /6

    There’s also about an extra £9m in other operating costs. I’d assume that the costs of the SDI action are in here. Provision has been made though they won’t say how much. There’s also an extra 12 matches or so

    It seems that the quantum’s provided are substantially less than the £10m reported by media. It’s an estimate of course which might be wrong. The accruals would suggest substantially less /8

    The finance costs are also worth a look. The notional interest on player payables tells that there are increasing amounts due to be paid for players currently on the books. It’s not real interest but tells that there’s substantial deferred payments within the trade payables /9

    So turning to what those payables mean for liquidity risk it’s really quite concerning. A massive £26m needing to be found within a year with £10m needing to come from external sources /10

    Of this quantum Dave King through Laird is providing the £5m short term relief this month according to the accounts. It would seem that it is hoped the remainder would be from player sales in January. That’d give Wilson’s arrival context. Anything over £5m plugs the gap /11

    That suggests to me either Tavernier or Morelos will be actively tried to be sold. Whether King will be repaid from any excess or it’ll go toward forecast future losses is unclear. It isn’t sustainable to keep running losses like this again. /12

    It’s also worth considering the operating cash flows. This kind of highlights the cash burned up from ordinary operations. It’s interesting that it’s positive despite a big loss. On closer examination it’s the high amortisation and increase in payables figures that jump out. /13

    This says that the reason cash isn’t being burned up is that the payments have been kicked down the road a bit. You can kind of see the same picture emerge from the cash flows on investing. This points to a need to downsize operations /14

    This year will be all out “stop the 10” thereafter it needs financial sense to return regardless of how this season pans out. Revenue won’t see these sort of jumps again so to get on an even foot expenses need to be under control – another 5% reduction in wages:turnover /15

    So in summary this is going to be a hell of a season and I’d be lying if I said it didn’t add a little je ne sais quoi to the season. But it’s very risky and likely to be followed by austerity as the balance sheet is tapped out. It’s now all about how much King will fund /16

    (at this point I expanded –

    I’ll name the je ne sois quoi. Its called moral hazard celticquicknews.co.uk/game-intelligence-to-succeed-in-30-successive-cup-games/comment-page-4/#comment-3416137… and it is beyond negligence that clubs have walked back into the conditions that let Green dictate rescue terms.)

    And that’s not a situation I’m comfortable with. He’s just been cold shouldered by the city and has a string of dishonesty convictions. His fit and proper status is up for reconsideration and football finances of all clubs are balanced on his munificence. We’ve been here /17

    When we rely on Milestons and Romanovs it brings risks. In 2012 unsustainable models we’re brutally exposed. It caused the SFA and SPL/SFL to have to make decisions based on disaster recovery rather than sporting fairness. It put Green in a favourable negotiating position /18

    We will never know whether any sporting penalties should have been applied to Rangers Oldco because the 5 way fixed Greens liabilities on admission. No further penalty was then possible. What we could do was ensure sport never again got sacrificed on a mercantile altar /19

    Yet here we are again. Dundee United running wage:turnover ratios of over 130% on a shaky capital base. Rangers walking the same path that brought disaster before. Dumbarton, Falkirk, Livingston all in difficulty and nothing being done to mitigate risks /20

    I asked the SPFL to consider changing things to ensure clubs didn’t risk their very existence chasing on the field success. They wouldn’t even put it to clubs to decide /21

    https://twitter.com/FansScarves/status/1190603267996295169/photo/1

     

    View Comment

  16. On moral hazard, TRFC's accounts and the risk to all clubs of it and why Celtic taking a lead on SFA reform reduces the risk to all clubs in our game. Posted on CQN but applies to all football supporters in Scotland.

    Rangers Accounts.

    Two words.

    Moral hazard.

    The conditions that led to season 2010/11 and the granting of a UEFA licence on what looks like immoral, and actual breach of regulation, grounds have reappeared.

    Going for 10iar? Is it about bragging rights for us but stopping it survival for them in financial terms? How far would the SFA go to rescue TRFC from their self destructive folly with collateral damage to all clubs? How far would Celtic?

    What lengths will TRFC, aided and abetted by a paralysed SFA, go to to stay alive?

    Look what they did in March 2011 to get access to CL money. What has been done to deter more of the same?

    How will other clubs with dependency on there being a TRFC, view matches against them and us? Even if Celtic are stand alone, they are at risk because of moral hazard (apart from natural leanings of those with influence on results.)

    Celtic cannot remain silent on the SFA’s apparent inability to act to save our game. We have every reason to demand reform so why isnt it being demanded?

    Why mess about for 6 years when all the leverage required to make Scottish football honest was there to be used to that effect?

    It is unbelievable that those in charge at SFA and clubs don't seem to realise the current “do nothing” course is steering Scottish football on to the moral hazard rocks.

    If it’s not in Celtic’s interests to take Res12 to UEFA does that apply to not getting the SFA to commit to an acceptable timetable to complete their stalled “investigation” and somehow restore some sense of integrity and honesty to Scottish football

     

     

    View Comment

  17. More for Celtic shareholders but perhaps of wider interest to others  regarding the rear guard action to protect the status quo and in doing so keep moral hazard alive.

    One of the key points with regards to whether a UEFA Licence was awarded correctly in 2011 lost over time is that neither Celtic (nor the SFA ) have ever once voiced an opinion themselves in public in spite of opportunities to do so at every AGM since 2013 as to whether an overdue payable existed or not at 31 March 2011.

    It has always been about the process of uncovering, never any opinion aired on the strength of the case and the prima facie conclusion.

    The argument for silence before charges were made over 2 years ago in May 2018 was that of not wanting to prejudice proceedings and one that had to be accepted for fear of doing just that.

    However after 2 years of supposed investigation is it not time Celtic aired an opinion rather than hide behind a process that has been demonstrated carries no authority to investigate of itself hence the stall in proceedings?

    The Res12 Archive at https://www.res12.uk carries some interesting information, one such, possibly overlooked as it refers to the 2012 Licensing Cycle and the application for a UEFA Licence by RFC just weeks before entering administration is in a letter dated 1st February 2012 from the SFA to Rangers.

    It addresses the still unpaid wee tax bill from 2011 and it can be read at

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6uWzxhblAt9VDkzOU9NQ2J0dDA/view

    The relevant part comes under Article 50 about the overdue tax disclosed at 31 December 2011 (which was the £2.8M owed from March 21st in 2011) where it says such tax had now to be paid by 31st March 2012 or be viewed as an overdue payable if there was no agreement to postpone or was in dispute.

    Significantly it says the Licensing Committee would need sight of any relevant correspondence to be satisfied the amount is a genuine legal dispute.( presumably meaning subject to one)

    The significance is that in the 2011 process the Lic Committee were not told it was a payable at 31 Dec 2010 but a potential liability where there were ongoing discussions giving impression of dispute ( the actual words used to satisfy the Lic Comm in a letter from Grant Thornton RFC Auditors were repeated in more or less the same form in the Interim Accounts) .

    However did the 2011 Lic Comm ask for relevant correspondence that did exist to substantiate the proof RFC offered the SFA to obtain a licence? They did in 2012 so was the difference that RFC disclosed there was a payable in 2012 but not in 2011.(RFC could hardly do otherwise after Sherriff Officers turned up at Ibrox in August 2011)

    That is the detail but as this information is in SFA records where comparisons can be made and conclusions drawn then it cannot be that after 2 years there is no case to answer but it is the fear of facing the consequences that is the reason to stall and stall.

    Seven years have passed, there is still a club playing football at Ibrox and the events in question precedes the liquidation of the club who committed the offence.

    So why not admit what is now clear to the world and THEN explain why its not in Celtic’s interests to push the SFA as well as not going to UEFA and let the SFA then explain themselves?

    Stop treating Celtic shareholders/ supporters like idiots.

    View Comment

  18. I've been trying to work out what RIFC has done with the contingent liability re the SDI claim.

    "…………. the Directors are of the view that it would be seriously prejudicial if it were to disclose the information usually required by IAS 37 (Provisions, Contingent liabilities and contingent assets). The Company has dealt with its estimated liabilities, insofar as it is practicable for its Directors to estimate them at this stage, when calculating its accruals."

    A look at the "accruals" in Note 16 shows them at £7.28m against £4.46m the previous year. That could be an indication of a £2.82m provision, but there is no way to confirm the theory.

    Also in Note 16 there is another figure that is significantly higher than in previous years. "Trade Creditors" (day to day bills to you and me) is at £9.95m, up over £5.1m from the £4.84m in the previous accounts.  The average time to pay bills has gone up a little from 26 days to 30 days, so there may be some "sweating of creditors" going on.  

    View Comment

  19. Auldheid

      "Stop treating Celtic shareholders/ supporters like idiots".

       —————————————–

        I fear that like Sevvies and the survival myth, CFC PLC have now discovered that their shovel is longer than their ladder. Refusing the rope you bhoys have provided will prove a big mistake. 

    View Comment

  20. Things we know that we know

    9.5m needed to pay transfers this season , 3m due to Close this season ,15m in transfer fees due in future seasons, 5m pledged by man who tells lies , Elite have indemnity for any losses 

    Things we dont know that we know

    Legal fees due to SDI – amount unknown , settlement with Memorial walls -amount unknown, settlement with SDI – amount unknown 

    Things we dont know that we dont know

    will Hummel sue for losses- possibly we dont know , will Elite sue for losses -possibly we dont know

    Escape clause – sell all best players for 30m in January ,win league qualify for CL group stages and ensure next accounts have zero losses to comply with ffp

     

    View Comment

  21. EJ @ 16.42

    "I've been trying to work out what RIFC has done with the contingent liability re the SDI claim."

    Have you looked under the carpet? (I don't think they have included them but if they have then it's limited to the £1m  minimum as per the cap stated that the judge actually dismissed)

    View Comment

  22. Timtim 2nd November 2019 at 16:56

    Things we know that we know

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

    They did note that their legal and professional fees had gone up by £3.6m.

    That's £70k a week, or £10k a DAY. cheeky

    View Comment

  23. Allyjambo 2nd November 2019 at 13:40
    …..
    Must have missed the part were the judge said damages will not be limited to £1mill.
    Edit, and now i see Timtim post

    View Comment

  24. Timtim 2nd November 2019 at 16:56
    will Hummel sue for losses- possibly we dont know , will Elite sue for losses -possibly we dont know.
    ………………..
    Retail income of £3.3 million relates to royalties and profit share of the season’s merchandising arrangements.
    …………
    If they made £3.3 million. Just how much profit will Hummel and Elite loose out on?
    How much damage has king done to these brands. I believe they have to sue as the contract they signed with king (can’t remember if it was king who signed off or Robertson or Blair)
    Anyway.. contract they signed has hit a snag.

    View Comment

  25. Homunculus 2nd November 2019 at 20:04

    A common sense look at the Rangers accounts 2019 and what they really mean. https://www.ibroxnoise.co.uk/2019/11/rangers-accounts-and-lies-spun-to.html Or possibly not.

    =========

    The author and accounting qualifications are strangers….

    [and possibly O-Grade Maths].

     

    One quick skim read of the statements and Notes tells you all you need to know: put down the RIFC Annual Report and walk away – briskly.

     

    In saying that though, following Club 1872's recommendation to buy RIFC shares, [and at a premium], there is no feedback on the RIFC accounts contained on either the Club 1872 website – or on its Twitter feed.

    One might regard that as simply not the best investment advice…

    indecision

     

    View Comment

  26. To briefly deviate from the RIFC car crash numbers…

     

    What about that handball at the beginning of the Hibs v. CFC game?

    In real time, and watching a small TV in a pub – and from a distance – my own, immediate reaction was to shout out "Handball!"… along with several others.

    Not for the first time, it seemed that the ref was the only person in the stadium who didn't see the blatant infringement, and a penalty was not awarded.

    And not for the first time, we are left wondering what the hell was the linesman looking at?

     

    I think a VAR replay would have been conclusive – and a very quick correction and penalty award would have resulted.

     

    And IMO, the continued lack of VAR reinforces the fact that the ref decides everything: his assistants are not to impartially assist – but to follow the ref's lead.  And nothing more.

     

    When was the last time you saw an SPL linesman raise his flag, (or Buzz?), the ref – during play – to point out an off the ball incident, or an error unseen by the ref?

     

    When was the last time you saw an SPL ref decide to walk over to consult with a linesman e.g. over a penalty?

     

    The automatic reaction of several of the CFC players to the handball should have indicated an infringement – even if the ref did miss it himself.

    The sensible, impartial action would have been to go over to consult the linesman.

    But, then again, the linesman didn't have his flag up either…

     

    Yesterday's missed handball just reinforces the ref's unquestioning control of a game, IMO – and just how much resistance they will put up to avoid losing this influence to VAR.

     

    View Comment

  27. With the first tranche of the 10m funding required NOW does that point to the cash reserves as threadbare? It would certainly explain the rush to push through the 500k from club 1872 . The promise of 5m from Laird (King) til 2021 is a drop in the ocean required til then but of more importance is the lack of guarantees from other Directors indeed it talks of having to seek out new investors.

    How much revenue is generated from home games ? with 45k STs it cannot be much at the gate and the 3m a month cost of staff wages will certainly eat into any monies generated rather quickly , this goes for the 2 home games left in the EL as much of the ticket money has already been accounted for via the 3 game package. Lairds 5m could be swallowed up very quickly but it should be enough to get them to the January window. The future all seems to rest on the ability to punt a couple of players nobody  so far has shown much interest in . Then there is the queue of creditors just waiting for the opportunity to get their money back . Looking at Kings previous form I suspect he will avoid putting up any money ,try to limp on til January, look to Park and Co to cover the shortfall then cross his fingers that they get a call from Beijing.If not it's game over 

    View Comment

  28. StevieBC 3rd November 2019 at 11:02
    …………………
    Bobby Madden makes penalty prediction as new handball rule implemented in Scottish football.
    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bobby-madden-makes-penalty-prediction-18783321
    ……………..
    Bobby Madden expects Scottish referees will award more penalties next season as a new handball rule comes into force across the SPFL .

    The SFA whistler believes the updated law provides more clarity over what constitutes an offence.

    The old rule was based on the handball being deliberate but there will now be more focus on a player’s body position as well as any intent.

    The International Football Association Board have dictated a free-kick or penalty will be given if a player makes his body an “unnatural silhouette” or if the arm is above shoulder height.

    And while Madden insists refs will still use a level of discretion, he says the issue is now much less ambiguous.
    Asked if the change will result in more penalties next term, he told STV : “I think so, I really do believe it will.

    “In terms of ambiguity, the new criteria really clears that up.

    “It’s about unnatural position and enlarging the body, so there’s clear definition there of what should be considered handball.

    “There will still be a degree of interpretation there but I think it’s clearer.”
    …………………….
    Maybe he just had a moment;-)
    Or maybe it shows refs do need help.

    View Comment

  29. Timtim 3rd November 2019 at 11:17
    …………..
    Will Mr Gerrard be happy with a sell, sell policy in January? most clubs will be looking to add strength for a push. I suppose if it all goes pear shaped he can claim that he could not strengthen in the jan window.

    View Comment

  30. On further consideration…

     

    that property and land across the road from Ibrox which has now been leased – with clear usage restrictions – at a peppercorn rate to the 'Rangers Charity',

     

    will indeed become an all singing, all dancing – and fully licensed – Fans' Zone,

    …but before the current season has even finished!

    View Comment

  31. As a rule when I am presented with Accounts (or anything with numbers) my instinct is to leave it to those who know of what they speak to provide analysis. My only contribution when numbers are added/subtracted and reference is made to mathematics is to pettily quibble by pointing out it's arithmetic. Others on this site; easyJambo (and for once I hope I've spelled that correctly- I'm forever writing his name with a capital initial) Homunculus, StevieBC, Timtim and more are in a better position to highlight parts of the most recent financial statement from T'Rangers and the conclusions or inferences that can be drawn therefrom.

    Without having to bother about things like Profit and Loss Accounts, Balance Sheets and other things which I will readily confess make my eyes glaze over like a Ming vase the things that catch my attention are things which simply cry out for attention and answers.

    Some, if not all, of these things have been commented on but they're worth repeating.

    Why are we still being told the Thoughts Of Chairman Dave? That's Club Chairman Dave? Didn't the same Club Chairman's last Statement following the Cold Shouldering say he didn't hold any shares in his own name? I recall MASH going to the Court of Session about GASH not being a fit and proper person and the case ended when the SFA belatedly said he had no connection to the Club so they hadn't decided one way or another. Do the SFA not read or follow what is being said by or on behalf of its members? It's binary; either GASH is involved with the Club or he isn't. If he is his forty-odd criminal convictions raise obvious questions about fitness and propriety. Factor in his conduct with the Take Over Panel and the decision that followed and you answer those questions. Not F&P then, not now and should never be. To say otherwise is tantamount to saying there might be a future place in Scottish football for Craig Whyte. We know that's not going to happen and compared to what GASH has done and is continuing to do Craig Whyte was a rank amateur.

    What happened to Metro Bank? All that I knew was that The World's Most Successful… banked with an institution which I had only heard of as a free newspaper on the train. So last year/Financial Statement:- Metro; this year:- Barclays plc. What happened? What changed? I assume Barclays keep up to speed with news which might affect them so does this mean Cold Shouldering has zero affect? If it does why Metro no more? The Auditors, Campbell Dallas(?) clearly see no problem with Cold Shouldering or if they do it's not big enough to stop them picking up Audit fees. Ordinarily whenever anything changes down Ibrox way the merde polishers are out, e.g. Close Brothers loans are overdrafts, so why didn't we get a Statement, accompanied by trumpets, bugles, trombones and hautboys, that Barclays are now the Chosen Ones and We Have Always Been At War With Metro Bank?

    Does Financial Fair Play mean anything in Scotland? If it does there's one glaring example of a Club which can be used to explain how the rules apply. If the figures coming out of Ibrox over the last few years don't fall foul of FFP it's hard to imagine what would.

    Mention has been made of the report that legal and professional fees had gone up by £3.6 million. As easyJambo pointed out that's £70,000 a week or £10,000 a day. Think about that. Yesterday down Ibrox way not much was happening but by the time it got dark they had lost ten grand. Not ten grand on players or world-class breakfasts but on legal and professional fees. And the same thing will happen today and tomorrow. Those figures appear pretty striking but what struck me was that those figures are not their legal and professional fees; rather they are what those fees have "gone up by". So ten grand a day is in addition to what they spent on those fees last year; a year punctuated by MASH and Take Over Panel proceedings all of which they lost. This and next year are unlikely to be cheaper as MASH aren't going away and even T'Rangers concede they've lost the Memorial Walls case. Any others? Elite? Hummell? 32 Red? The Wi-Fi case? The owners of the St Enoch Square shop? The Erzyermacaroon Man?

    I await details but am I roughly right thinking they've 'fessed up to +£10 million lost, +£10 million spent since on players and c.£10 million needed to see out this season?

    What's the problem?

    £10 million + £10 million + £10 million= 1 Morelos. Plus change.

    View Comment

  32. It is jaw dropping, but unsurprising, that we all find ourselves, looking in from outside, at the state of finances, of a business, which operates out of Govan. I say unsurprising, because history is destined to repeat itself, unless something fundamental changes,which in Scottish Football, never appears to happen.

    Because, to my eyes, the only thing to stop the tick tock, to an administration event at Ibrox, would be qualification for the CL group stages?

    Yes, though highly, highly unlikely, someone may come in and buy the whole kit and caboodle for a bag of balloons and pencil, the only way for that business to generate a new significant source of revenue is CL qualification?

    This fact, and that the SFA and other member clubs are content to let this gruesome spectacle play out once again, is shameful and corrupt. If the inevitable event happens, where "Rangers" can't pay their way, and "investors" turn off the tap, what happens then?

    Will the SFA be held accountable? Will UEFA become involved in some meaningful way? Who will the supine and craven scottish media hold responsbile for another financial implosion, from a business that simply cannot ever seem to live within its means? 

    We know how this story ends, we've been here before. 

     

    View Comment

  33. From Rugger guys' comments the one thing that stood out was 

    "There is no binding agreement to provide this finance" the words of  Judge Southwood then reverberated around my ears "he is a mendacious witness whose evidence should not be accepted on any issue unless it is support by documents and other objective evidence .In our assessment, he is a glib and shameless liar.” Then we have the TOP view on his character "Mr King is a person who in its opinion is not likely to comply with the Code We remind all regulated firms that they should not deal with the individual mentioned above, or his principals, on any transactions to which the Takeover Code applies. We also expect regulated firms to inform all approved persons at their firms that they should not deal with this individual on such transactions.

    So just how valid are the promises from Laird (King) and why did the auditors not ask for these promises to be made binding before signing off the accounts? He mentions the change in tone from the auditors and of course there is the warning given  " a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern." but is that enough to cover them ? Maybe the 75k in fees was the priority for Campbell Dallas 

    So to sum up with facts , they need 10m (minimum) to see out the season and no binding agreement to provide this finance has been given.

    View Comment

  34. LUGOSI 3rd November 2019 at 12:11
    Why are we still being told the Thoughts Of Chairman Dave? That’s Club Chairman Dave? Didn’t the same Club Chairman’s last Statement following the Cold Shouldering say he didn’t hold any shares in his own name? I recall MASH going to the Court of Session about GASH not being a fit and proper person and the case ended when the SFA belatedly said he had no connection to the Club so they hadn’t decided one way or another. Do the SFA not read or follow what is being said by or on behalf of its members? It’s binary; either GASH is involved with the Club or he isn’t. If he is his forty-odd criminal convictions raise obvious questions about fitness and propriety. Factor in his conduct with the Take Over Panel and the decision that followed and you answer those questions. Not F&P then, not now and should never be. To say otherwise is tantamount to saying there might be a future place in Scottish football for Craig Whyte. We know that’s not going to happen and compared to what GASH has done and is continuing to do Craig Whyte was a rank amateur.
    …………….
    And even after Dave king said “I have given an undertaking to the SFA that i won’t act as a shadow director so i have been very precise in making sure i didn’t get involved in the affairs of the club”
    ………
    Should be brought before the SFA for bringing the game into disrepute. But then again the club claims it is the same club, the most successful club in the world and has won many trophies in it’s 140 odd years. And the fans believe it is debt free.
    There is a whole lot of lies coming from ibrox way and the SFA sit by and do nothing. That 5 way agreement must be killing the SFA now. No wonder Regan got out of dodge.And Craig Whyte is a free man and should have no problem getting back into scottish football if he wanted.(i guess he could make more money if he wrote a book) At one time there was even talk of maybe David Murray getting back in.

    View Comment

  35. Jingso.Jimsie 3rd November 2019 at 11:48

    @ StevieBC & ClusterOne:

    It was a terrible 'miss' by the referee. Inexplicable, in fact. 'Honest mistakes' indeed!

     —————————–

       Around the 12min mark, Celtic had a free just outside the box. I thought I would keep an eye on Boaby….One exaggerated step, when pacing out the wall, was followed by progressively shorter baby steps…..

       It was then I realised he can only count to nine…….Or maybe he just doesn't like ten?. mail

        I understand that, "ten" is a bigger sweery word than, "Wee Craigy", over there, but they do take it too far. 

       

     

    View Comment

  36. I'm just surprised that Campbell Dallas omitted a few caveats before signing off RIFC's dog's breakfast of an Annual Report, including;

     

    • based on the assumption that Brexit doesn't cause unforseen difficulties
    • based on the assumption that a meteor hit doesn't create an urgent need for stadium repairs
    • based on the assumption that the Chairman didn't have his fingers crossed behind his back, when he promised to provide additional funding as necessary

    etc…

     

    I'm also still surprised that King managed to avoid quoting any number(s) in the Notes WRT Big Mike's bill.

    Just how does Campbell Dallas expect readers to assess the numbers with confidence – when there is a recognised and significant liability payable to SDI within 12 months – yet the Auditor is satisfied that RIFC will not disclose even a range of possible values / probabilities?

    Is it £1M

    Is it £10M

    Is it more?

    Is it less?

    IMO, RIFC must have an idea, [or bill?], of what amount Big Mike is seeking.

    Say for example it's £10M.

    That value could be taken as a 'worst case scenario' with mibbees a probability of being payable e.g. @25% = £2.5M

    Say 'best case scenario' is the oft quoted £1M ‘cap’, e.g. @25% = £0.25M.

    A mid point is taken of £5.5M @ 50%= £2.75M.

    This gives a ball park for the liability of £5.5M.

    It adds rather useful context for the reader.

     

    [Of course, the values and probabilities could be tweaked as required, and the calculations wouldn't have to be disclosed in the Note either.]

     

    Yet RIFC declined to quantify the liability, even by rough estimates.

    And Campbell Dallas – apparently – supported this non-disclosure.

     

    View Comment

  37. It's interesting the the impecunious one struggled so badly when he was instructed to make an offer to buy shares. Practically impossible to move money apparently.

    However when it is required to sign off on the audited accounts he can glibly offer up £5m if required, presumably with the permission of the trustees.

    One is forced to wonder how the trustees see this as a good investment and use of the funds they control.

    View Comment

  38. From the DR today, after the TRFC win;

    "…

    But Gerrard's message on his main man could not have been more emphatic when quizzed if he was confident he’ll still be at Ibrox come January.

    He said: "I'm not confident, I'm sure, I'm 100 per cent sure he's not going anywhere."

    …"

    =======

    RIFC/TRFC needs an additional £10M funding to stay in business until the end of June.

    King has promised access to £5M…honest gov'…

    So, if a club offers a 'lowball' bid of say £5M for Morelos, what would TRFC do?

    What option does the cash strapped club have?

    View Comment

  39. Still having problems accessing the site.
    …………..
    Cygnus X-1 3rd November 2019 at 12:48
    the only way for that business to generate a new significant source of revenue is CL qualification?
    ……………..
    First they have overspent trying to win the league. If by some miracle they sell most of their best players in January and try and bring the debt down and Mr Gerrad some how wins the league. will they overspend in trying to get through a few rounds of qualifiers to reach the CL. And if they don’t qualify.(and having never played in the champions league they would be in one of the toughest draws ) They are back to square one with players they really can’t afford trying to win the league.
    The whole thing by king is a madness gamble.

    View Comment

  40. StevieBC 3rd November 2019 at 18:25
    He said: “I’m not confident, I’m sure, I’m 100 per cent sure he’s not going anywhere.”
    …………..
    And with that Mr Gerrard has his excuses if he fails to win anything. I was 100 per cent sure players were not going anywhere. but the rug was pulled beneath me. So don’t blame me blame the board.
    kind of thing.

    View Comment

  41. A few people elsewhere have commented that should they go bust then the SFA would be liable for the football debts to other clubs. I have no idea if this is the case or not . However I do remember that Charles Green agreed to pay off the footballing debts as part of the deal to get a licence which possibly gave him bargaining power re the infamous yet still hidden 5 way agreement. As the outstanding 24.5m in transfer fees would constitute football debts it places the SFA in a rather tricky position ,it also makes it extremely unlikely that any purchaser of the club* would be willing to add this quantum to the £1 cost of the club* . It also ironically gives Dave King a gun to hold to the head of the SFA in the "if I go down we all go down" scene . This is inevitably where you end up when dealing with a sociopathic criminal . If the cost of survival for the SFA is for King to win the league and be awarded a licence for europe next season despite being ineligible then going by previous behaviour of the SFA they will not only turn a blind eye to this criminality but be his partner in crime. If it happens our game is finished.

    View Comment

  42. Timtim 3rd November 2019 at 20:24

    A few people elsewhere have commented that should they go bust then the SFA would be liable for the football debts to other clubs. I have no idea if this is the case or not…

    ==========

    Now that would indeed be sweet Karma!

     

    If TRFC bites the dust, and the footballing debts it has recklessly racked up then sinks the SFA Ltd. into liquidation?

     

    And by default, no more SFA.

    A chance to create an impartial, competent, professional governing body – that the long suffering fans have wanted for decades.

     

    And it would be the ideal – and thoroughly deserved – comeuppance for the blazers at Hampden.

     

    Please let it be true that the SFA could be liable…  laugh

     

    View Comment

  43. Timtim 3rd November 2019 at 20:24

    A few people elsewhere have commented that should they go bust then the SFA would be liable for the football debts to other clubs. I have no idea if this is the case or not . However I do remember that Charles Green agreed to pay off the footballing debts as part of the deal to get a licence which possibly gave him bargaining power re the infamous yet still hidden 5 way agreement. As the outstanding 24.5m in transfer fees would constitute football debts it places the SFA in a rather tricky position ,it also makes it extremely unlikely that any purchaser of the club* would be willing to add this quantum to the £1 cost of the club* . It also ironically gives Dave King a gun to hold to the head of the SFA in the "if I go down we all go down" scene . This is inevitably where you end up when dealing with a sociopathic criminal . If the cost of survival for the SFA is for King to win the league and be awarded a licence for europe next season despite being ineligible then going by previous behaviour of the SFA they will not only turn a blind eye to this criminality but be his partner in crime. If it happens our game is finished.

    ___________________________

    I'd imagine that, in the event of an administration, these 'football debts' could be a bit of a killer, for even after a successful CVA the club would still have to settle all football debts. That's an awful lot of debt for any club with a reduced squad and a ban under FFP from European competition. Even if they managed to pull off  pre-pack admin, they'd still have that £24.5m to finance.

    View Comment

  44. As  I said , I have no idea if the SFA would be liable for the debt but they are responsible for allowing an individual with 41 convictions to be involved in our national game. They also ignored the rule that bars Directors of clubs* who have been involved in an insolvency event for a period of 5 years. King as we know was a Director at the previous incarnation for many years , did not resign in protest (like others) at Craig Whytes stewardship , was not pushed out by Whyte (like others) but sat in the corner until the last day. As a Director you have a responsibility to ensure the fair and honest running of the club* , Whyte was adjudged not suitable and barred for life yet this charlatan was ushered back on a bed of rose petals. Claiming he is only involved in the running of the holding company and not involved with the running of the club* is fallacious nonsense when the business of the holding company IS the running of a football club* . Apparently after the cold shoulder they are reviewing his role in Scottish football , well they invited the fox in to guard the chicken coop so who reviews their suitability after they have ignored all the warning signs. If they bar him from the game then they will shoulder the blame for the inevitable collapse of the club* . KING-RIFC-TRFC-SFA is a vicious circle of self destruction , it is the snake eating its own tail . It is time to hang this criminal out to dry and it is his fellow Directors at RIFC who should step up to do so after all they have a responsibility to ensure the fair and honest management at their club*. 

    View Comment

  45. Timtim@19.31

    The Forbes article certainly takes the story out of Scotland with no pesky editor spinning the news. The Twitter profile of the author suggests that there could be criticism coming his way from certain quarters as he appears to be Celtic minded.

     

    View Comment

  46. Cluster One 3rd November 2019 at 13:34

    '..No wonder Regan got out of dodge.'

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

    Regan was in post as CEO when CW's Rangers of 1872 were in questionable circumstances awarded a UEFA licence to which they were arguably not entitled. 

    If /when there is a proper independent investigation by, preferably the Police, into the award of that licence, Regan will undoubtedly face some questions. 

    Among these, I would think, would be one along the lines of: "you were ready, it is said,  to seek CW's clearance  of a letter you proposed to send to HMRC about the tax situation of RFC of 1872. He apparently nearly had a fit, and told you not to send it. What else might you have agreed to do to accommodate Mr CW and RFC's tax situation?"

    Being out of Dodge will not prevent questions being asked of him. No doubt Regan would be able to give satisfactory answers to show that there had been nothing improper. 

    The wonder is that neither he nor the present SFA Board were inclined to show that all hands are clean, by agreeing to an independent investigation.They have nothing to fear if indeed CW's RFC had met all the Licence requirements : the written evidence would be there,wouldn't it? And HMRC , with the permission of BDO, would surely be able to co-operate in providing relevant information.

     

     

     

    View Comment

  47. Timtim 3rd November 2019 at 20:24
    4 0 Rate This

    A few people elsewhere have commented that should they go bust then the SFA would be liable for the football debts to other clubs. I have no idea if this is the case or not . However I do remember that Charles Green agreed to pay off the footballing debts as part of the deal to get a licence which possibly gave him bargaining power re the infamous yet still hidden 5 way agreement.
    ………………
    £3 Million if i remember Green had to come up with. But being Green the clubs he was to pay cash to i believe he arranged friendlies with some and with Hearts he never did pay the full Lee wallace transfer fee.

    View Comment

  48. John Clark 3rd November 2019 at 22:03
    If /when there is a proper independent investigation by, preferably the Police, into the award of that licence, Regan will undoubtedly face some questions.
    ………….
    We all hope he does. What i should have said is Regan has got out of the firing line with what looks like another debacle coming down ibrox way.

    View Comment

  49. Timtim 3rd November 2019 at 21:33

    '..Apparently after the cold shoulder they are reviewing his role in Scottish football , '

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

    Timtim, I think I'm a wee bit ahent of developments: has the SFA raised the question of Kings F &P  person status in the light of the FCA's turning of the 'cold shoulder' to him? They should do, of course,but I haven't seen any item about it?

    View Comment

  50. Cluster One 3rd November 2019 at 22:29

    '….Regan has got out of the firing line with what looks like another debacle coming down ibrox way.'

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

    Yes. And possibly ( if he had had  any common sense at the time of his going) he got out with copies of every minute of board meetings and emails at which or in which  was discussed what to do to help RFC, and who said what, as well as his additional personal notes!broken heart 

    Being bumped as the fall guy cannot be a pleasant experience.

     

    View Comment

  51. @JC 

    I'm sure I have read that somewhere recently but the grey matter on when and where are …….you know how it is . The problem with looking into this soap opera is sorting the wheat from the chaff and remembering who said what where and when. At the moment all I have is a vague recollection that it was said . I shall google appropriately

    View Comment

  52. Corrupt official 3rd November 2019 at 23:17

    '..JC &Timtim, re F&P.'

    Timtim 3rd November 2019 at 23:19

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

    Thank you, chaps.

    I'm relieved to remember that I was swanning about in Pennsylvania at the time of those reports, and reading the New York Times . wink

     

    View Comment

  53. I suppose the misreporting or non-reporting of the RIFC financials across the SMSM, is yet further validation of the value of sites like SFM, Phil and others.

     

    If the Internet Bampots didn't exist, there is every possibility that the general footy fan would be vaguely aware of a loss at 'Rangers' but it's less than last year – and they've got further funding lined up to back their challenge for the title, etc.

     

    We would have the likes of Keevens et al talking – even more – absolute mince and probably talking up TRFC as being 'close' behind CFC in terms of financial clout!

     

    There would be radio silence on all things happening, [or not happening more likely], at Hampden.  Everything is hunky dory with the governance of Scottish football.

     

    But, of course the Bampots know different, and they're better informed than the average SMSM 'journalist'.

     

    In fact it's starting to feel like 2011/12 all over again!

    But this time there can't be any secretive agreement: you know they'll try it on again though…

    View Comment

  54. StevieBC 4th November 2019 at 00:01

    '..But, of course the Bampots know different, and they're better informed than the average SMSM 'journalist'.'

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

    The Bampots actually ask sensible and searching questions , questions that the  succulent lamb eaters either have not the will  or the courage to ask.

    Good God Almighty! There are journalists risking death as they expose international corruption at Governments' level while  our chaps are feart to talk about rottenness at the heart of  the sports governance body of a (let's face it) less than small to middling football association!

    That we should have had to put up with the cheating and tergiversation  of a bunch of small-minded unprincipled 'business men' in the matter of Sport is simply absurd. 

     

    View Comment

  55. The DDos attack against the site goes on. Started last Monday just after lunch and has persisted every day since. Yesterday was the worst of it so far. Sadly there is little we are able to do proactively and we have to react quickly to block the IP addresses used by the perpetrators.
    Sadly we have to wait until they run out of steam. Disruption has been at a minimum thanks to the guys at our hosting company who have been working tirelessly to track and counter the offenders’ moves. The financial cost is a pain but right now it is important to maintain a presence.

    View Comment

  56. Big Pink 4th November 2019 at 08:03

    '..it is important to maintain a presence..'

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

    It certainly is, BP, if the attacks are specifically aimed at the blog by people or institutions that want  to silence talk of the desirability of and/or possibility of criminal investigation into the relationship between the SFA and CW's RFC, or between TRFC and the SFA.

    View Comment

  57. https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2019/11/04/why-sevco-is-repeating-the-fatal-errors-of-the-original-ibrox-club/#more-14552

    The main takeaway of the above is the Ibrox source is insisting that the loan from Close is 7m and not the 3m reported in the accounts. I stated at the time that I didn't think it was as high as 7m for the simple reason that the security given for the loan was not worth close to 7m and that Close wouldn't lend that much unsecured to a risky business like TRFC. Either they have hidden it very well in the accounts or the Ibrox source has got it wrong . Maybe they have a side letter that gives them a cut of the future transfer fee from one or more of the Galacticos ,who knows. Although the recent DOS attacks are a minor irritation it does perhaps indicate that what is being exposed on here is a major irritation for the members of the naughty boys club*. 

    Europa league progression? I actually think their prospects of a top 2 finish are quite good , Feyenoord are woeful at the moment and 3 pts in Rotterdam isn't beyond them then they have 2 home ties . The transfer window in January is looking more and more like the make or break issue and I believe failure to secure substantial funds then will lead to an admin event . If they are still in the Europa League then that no longer makes it a domestic matter and questions will surely be asked of the SFAs due diligence . As Alan Brazil said a few weeks ago "you won't believe what has been going on at the top". For now the media lapdogs are covering Kings' back which indicates his fellow board members are not yet prepared to throw him under a bus ,it's time for damage limitation and the smartest thing they could do is resign and leave him to it.

    View Comment

  58. paddy malarkey 4th November 2019 at 09:2

    '.word of the week..'

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

    Words,Words,Words!  Fascinating things. 

    Back in 1957, the guy that sat at the next desk  to mine in the study-hall passed across the book he was reading, asking if I knew the meaning of a particular word. I didn't. And we could not find it in our Chambers' school-use dictionary.

    So that evening, after supper, when we gathered in the form-master's room to listen to the radio and socialise ( as an alternative to playing five-a-side football or table-tennis) we asked him what the word meant.

    I pronounced it ' dollychockifallick'.  His genial face grew instantly perplexed as he asked where we had seen the word, and even more puzzled when we said it was in a Sherlock Holmes story. Fetch me the book, he commanded. My pal nipped down stairs to the study-hall and returned some minutes later with the book. 

    He found the page , and showed the word to the form-master. The form-master glanced at it, reached for an enormous Oxford English dictionary, found the word and exclaimed with something like relief/amusement  'dollikossefalick'. That was how it sounded. with the emphasis on the 'e'

    It is actually spelled 'dolichocephalic'.

    I'll leave you to look it up, and speculate as to what kind of book he might have thought we had been reading!

    View Comment

Comments are closed.