It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One

779
11144

This headline is a quote by George Washington, but it is also friendly advice to Keith Jackson of the Daily Record in response to his ‘exclusive’ today on the reasons Derek McInnes turned down Rangers.

May I begin by drawing people’s attention to two statements by the same organisation on what was essentially the same subject matter:

Aberdeen FC Statement 14th June 2017:

https://www.afc.co.uk/2017/06/14/club-statement-management-team/

“The club can confirm that early this afternoon Sunderland FC agreed to meet all the contractual obligations for both Derek McInnes and Tony Docherty and they have, reluctantly, been granted permission to speak with both of them about the vacant managerial position at Sunderland.

Aberdeen FC will be making no further comment at this moment in time.”

Aberdeen FC Statement 5th December 2017

https://www.afc.co.uk/2017/12/05/club-statement-18/

 

“Aberdeen Football Club has announced this evening that Rangers have contacted the Club asking for permission to speak to Derek McInnes and that permission has been refused.”

 

It is clear from the first statement there are contractual obligations that, when met, mean the club must allow their manager the option of dialogue with interested parties, however reluctant the club may be.

Although money is not mentioned, contractual obligations can only relate to the commitments on either side to terminate the agreement and these are usually financial. In the case of an interested suitor, it would be expected of them to pay this on behalf of the employee.

There is no mention of contractual obligations in the club statement on 5th December, from which one can only infer that Rangers either refused, or were in no position to meet, the financial commitments required. Aberdeen FC therefore exercised their right to refuse permission to speak to McInnes, a position they are perfectly entitled to maintain until such time as Rangers agree to meet all contractual obligations, just as Sunderland did.

The story for the press to pursue is obvious yet Keith Jackson wants to have us believe that the McInnes decision -and ultimately it was his decision – has nothing to do with money. Jackson even suggested that an offer of £1m up-front was on the table in a piece that was published on Wednesday:

In it, Jackson states;

“Dons chairman Stewart Milne made his hardball position clear last night after booting out an official approach from the Ibrox club – and turning down a cheque for £1 million in compensation.”

I’m not entirely sure what Mr Jackson means by an ‘official’ approach, I would have thought ‘formal’ to be more apposite but it’s a moot point in the grand scheme of things. Fact is, Jackson didn’t think long and hard enough about this statement because it contains not one, or two, but three glaring inaccuracies.

  1. Mr Milne did not ‘boot out’ any approach – official, formal or otherwise. If Rangers had met the necessary contractual obligations then Aberdeen FC could not have refused McInnes the opportunity to speak to Rangers – that would have been a breach of contract on the club’s part and McInnes could sue.
  2. Mr Milne is not ’playing hardball’. Playing hardball is about getting what you want. Mr Milne already has what he wants. He doesn’t need to play hardball – it is Rangers who, if they cannot afford the compensation or wish to alter the terms of the compensation, would need to attempt to play hardball. Jackson has this the wrong way around – a common failing when trying to justify a lie and pursue a biased narrative.
  3. I don’t dispute that Rangers offered to pay £1 million in compensation, but I do not believe for one millisecond that it would be paid in a single instalment either by cheque, cash or bank transfer because the audited accounts published last month prove that such a commitment would not be possible. A shortfall of £4m was required in soft loans to see out the current season, with monies required immediately, and a further £3.2m after June 18. Furthermore, these figures did not consider the additional cost of a change of management at the club/holding company/engine room subsidiary/call it what you will.

It’s rather telling that Mr Jackson makes no mention of this £1m cheque in his ‘exclusive’ today. Instead, he offers another inaccuracy. He says’;

“When Milne made it clear he was unwilling to grant the move his blessing – and that McInnes would have to rip up his contract to pursue a return to Ibrox – the ex-Rangers player was boxed into a corner.”

Mr Milne is in no position to grant a move, whether with his blessing or otherwise. There is a binding contract in place and only if contractual obligations are met then – as is glaringly obvious from the Aberdeen Club Statement of 14th June – Mr Milne would have to, albeit reluctantly, allow the manager to speak to the other club, just as he did in the case of Sunderland. He cannot box his manager into a corner. There is no decision for Mr Milne to make if the requisite compensation is agreed to be paid in full to terminate the manager’s contract with Aberdeen FC.

More plausibly, Rangers could box McInnes into a corner. The job is his if he wants it, but he will have to resign his position to take it because Rangers won’t meet the contractual obligations. Once again Jackson has it the wrong way around because he is lying and pursuing a biased narrative.

Any reasonably minded follower of Scottish football knows why McInnes is not going to Rangers. It’s all about the money – or the lack of it – and no amount of lying or high-level fantasy by award winning journalists will alter that prosaic fact.

779 COMMENTS


  1. In fear of contradicting myself from my earlier post on agreeing to disagree, I would say yes the titles should be attributed to the current team playing out of Ibrox. The same way Fiorentina’s were. 

    And the whole ‘my gran died and I live in her house’ type of argument does nothing to change the old club new club debate. It’s not one person pretending to be another. It’s a football club which I don’t define as a ‘thing’. And in my point of view there has been no difference  

    That at doesn’t mean I’m right. It doesn’t mean you are right. It’s just an opinion. And if I wanted to be like Ernest I could try and list every single reason or quote I could come across to justify by my argument, and you would respond to every single reason and argument to justify yours but what would that achieve? Apathy from another 3 pages of repetitive points scoring?

    View Comment

  2. Re: the current / latest firefighting efforts down Govan way…

    You would think that it could be a sensible idea fro the Blue Room to reassess this season, and perhaps to communicate that this is now a ‘transitional’ season: i.e. effectively write off this season?

    Bears won’t be happy without a new manager or new signings next month.
    But, this season’s ST money has already been banked / spent, so focus could be on building optimism…for when next season’s ST renewals are due.

    So, keep Murty in place to the end of this season, [and assuming he will agree].
    Mibbees with Kenny Miller as an assistant ?
    No new signings next month, only departures.
    A big announcement that a new policy to give increased game time to the youth players – and this will be a basic requirement for the team for rest of the season.

    If TRFC loses games – but with several youth players involved – the bears might be more forgiving / patient…and it is helping to develop these players for next season onwards.

    Alternatively, fingers crossed that TRFC goes bust for Christmas!
    Absolutely!
    09

    View Comment

  3. INCREDIBLEADAMSPARKDECEMBER 14, 2017 at 15:18
    Correct. Other clubs could only use the ebts RFC used  if players signing were prepared to accept a payment via a trust, on trust. Thus an indemnity which was in effect a contract between RFC and the player that if using the trust route were to backfire RFC would meet the costs (tax owed) and not the player, was needed.
    Thus the indemnity was part of a players contract and had RFC wanted to test the strength of their belief that they were using ebts lawfully, all they had to do was tell the SFA from the first point they used them and then in 2005 when they lied to HMRC about the existence of 2 side letters whilst sitting on another 29.
    Without such indemnity a player would not sign (or in some cases RFC would not sign players who were not prepared to be paid via an indemnified trust) and since SDM admitted that ebts gave RFC an advantage in a competetitive  wage market and since it is generally accepted clubs who pay higher wages than rivals have an advantage over them that translates into an advantage on the field of play where sport takes place, then RFC did have a sporting advantage using a method NOT open to other clubs thus it was unfair and dishonestly so.
    As you say it wasn’t that ebts per se were unlawful, it was the way RFC used them that was and had there not been such a rush to sanction RFC on breaking registration rules and everyone had waited for the BTC to run its course, the false narrative of no dishonesty created by LNS simply would not exist.
    Of course Rangers supporters will cling to LNS (an exercise the SFA refuses to revisit or was it the SPFL and if the SFA why don’t the SPFL revisit because they as SPL set up the Commission) and I can understand that, but in setting out the above I hope those Rangers fans who cling to the false narrative will at least appreciate the anger of folk who did not come up the Clyde on a water biscuit.

    View Comment

  4. I’d like to add I’m not a naive follower. I know my club have huge huge problems that the MSM are terrified to report. I know my club is run by genuine businessmen with no real financial clout and governed by a crook and a charlatan. I know we have massive financial problems and are trying to live outwith our means. I don’t believe a word I read in the media. Just so you know not every Rangers fan who believes it’s the same club is a brainwashed Keith Jackson follower. 

    View Comment

  5. DarkbeforedawnDecember 14, 2017 at 14:30 
    With regards Ernest, surely the problem is because both sides have polar opposite views and no one is willing to meet in the middle? Why not agree to disagree and move on instead of trying to each force your viewpoint as if gospel? Regards the single biggest debates on here with him seem to be NC/OC and whether Rangers gained a financial advantage. On the first, most on this site would class Rangers as a new club while a few such as Ernest and myself would class it as the same. I can’t see it from your viewpoint as I’ve said many times before I still go and watch a team in blue called Rangers every week, and the adverts, news, water cooler chat and a lot of the cast have not changed one bit. So for us it’s no different regardless of the legal ins and outs, a football club is more than a registered number. But I wouldn’t waste time arguing with you as I know you would disagree. On the second point I agree we had an advantage by using the scheme BUT at that time anyone else could have used it although they too would have been hit when the tightening of tax avoidance loopholes came into play. Was it morally wrong? Yes. Should they be stripped titles? No. Morals don’t really have much place in football (look at Qatar, look at FIFA, look at all the teams in England buying outwith their means). Again that’s my opinion on the matter and I won’t berate anyone for disagreeing with me. If everyone would stop trying to disagree with Ernest and agree to disagree there wouldn’t be this same repetitive drivel every single day. Just my tuppence worth
    _______________________

    How convenient it is that, when suggesting that ‘anyone else could have used it’ (and by anyone else, I assume you mean any other club), you do not tackle the awkward (for you) matter of deliberately mis-registering the EBT soaked players, a ploy absolutely necessary to conceal the true nature of the payments. These actions were not just linked, they were locked together as part of the conspiracy.

    Each of the two factors – sorry three when you include deliberately hiding, then denying, the existence of side letters – are not just morally wrong, they are deceptions of the basest order and require the morals of cheats and criminals (cheats against football, and criminals in their lies and deceit towards HMRC). The idea that everyone else could, or would, cheat Scottish football and deceive HMRC – and so Rangers are somehow exonerated – is as repugnant as it is ludicrous.

    View Comment

  6. DARKBEFOREDAWN, again a very sensible post and a good read. I don’t think looking abroad for examples is particularly informative. Different countries will have their own set of rules and it’s probably not a one size fits all situation.

    Why not keep it in Scotland and use Airdrionians as an example? They may have got their name back but they were founded in 2002 as Airdrie Utd after the original club went into liquidation. 

    View Comment

  7. Easy Jambo
    Does Hearts business plan depend on playing in the EL Group stages in 2 of the next 5 years?
    Does Aberdeen’s? 
    Hibs?
    If not why are TRFC allowed to plan on that basis with no challenge from club Directors?
    Am I the only one too see the moral hazard this re introduces to Scottish football?
    What happens if TRFC  don’t qualify or progress?  Another insolvency as a result of pursuing a similar policy for CL income to keep that bubble from bursting?
    What about the income rivals lose because they don’t gamble on paying higher wages dependent on football sucess and end up below a TRFC who don’t even qualify?
    Some form of domestic FFP with clear rules on what is allowable to be treated as income and what isnt, and limiting wage budgets to it are a must to protect all clubs from the risks inherent in the policy adopted by TRFC.
    This should become stark if TRFC have to unload high wage earners in January as Phil Mac suggests. How many points did challengers drop playing a team containing players TRFC could not afford?
    TRFC still would have an advantage over every club,  bar Celtic of course who have bigger crowds crowds and the higher acceptable income sources they are able to negotiate.

    View Comment

  8. AuldheidDecember 14, 2017 at 16:55

    I think Hearts, and everyone else’s, business plan depends on a level playing field, and I suppose it’s their own fault if they don’t insist on getting one. Why that should be (that they don’t insist on that level playing field) is beyond me.

    View Comment

  9. DarkbeforedawnDecember 14, 2017 at 16:11

    I’d like to add I’m not a naive follower. I know my club have huge huge problems that the MSM are terrified to report. I know my club is run by genuine businessmen with no real financial clout and governed by a crook and a charlatan. I know we have massive financial problems and are trying to live outwith our means. I don’t believe a word I read in the media. Just so you know not every Rangers fan who believes it’s the same club is a brainwashed Keith Jackson follower. 

    Issue 1.  No club (Club?) has financial problems.  That’s a stupid company thing remember.

    Issue 2.  You (the company that owns the….well you know the rest) don’t have financial problems.  No such thing can truly exist any longer in the parallel universe where liquidation is but a temporary holding company fillip.

    View Comment

  10. AuldheidDecember 14, 2017 at 16:55
    What happens if TRFC  don’t qualify or progress? 

    Some other mug comes in and funds the difference, but only on the basis that they have to get to the group stages…… 

    View Comment

  11. Apologies anyone and DBD in particular if you read my Issue 3 where I queried your assertion that they (this club company thingy) were trying to live within their means.  I see now (and have hopefully edited out) that you said they were trying to live OUTWITH their means.  Not just doing it but actually physically trying to do it.  No argument from me there!

    Apologies all.  As you were!

    View Comment

  12. AuldheidDecember 14, 2017 at 16:55
    I think Hearts, and everyone else’s, business plan depends on a level playing field, and I suppose it’s their own fault if they don’t insist on getting one. Why that should be (that they don’t insist on that level playing field) is beyond me.

    And me.
    I naively had thought that Mrs Budge would rattle some cages when she arrived on the scene.
    No chance. Despite mentioning FFP in the accounts she sat back and watched the zombie club take a Europa League place off the back of a playing squad that they clearly couldn’t afford.
    St Johnstone too rolled over and died.

    View Comment

  13. Smugas, surely that once again is a reason why petty point scoring is pointless? Ernest gets slaughtered for supposedly trolling, but is he or is it because when he responds people like yourself try and argue by making points like yours? I made what I believe to be a perfectly fair and honest representation of the type of fan I am, yet the best you could come up with was sarcastic digs? I’m not sure what you were looking for in terms of a response, as if I were to argue your points I’d be no worse than a troll in everyone’s eyes so I won’t even rise to it. For the most part this site is an open forum for all view points and people like JC are very fair in their inclusion of every viewpoint. Yet a large majority like yourself would rather hound out anyone who doesn’t support your view. 

    View Comment

  14. Its not sarcasm.  You cannot argue on one hand that a club can miraculously escape liquidation and then turn around and plead that the (same) club has massive financial problems.   

    View Comment

  15. EASYJAMBODECEMBER 13, 2017 at 18:53
    £3,373,170  ……………………. if you believe D&P’s figures.
    ——-Thanks for reply.Sorry i took so long to get back to you.
    At this point in time then i guess they don’t even have as much in the bank, as they are a loss making business with no credit line from a bank

    View Comment

  16. The only people wanting to move on from the liquidation and the effect is the ones who have more to lose.
    This was and now is a company. The old company that died took with it its incorporated structure which was Rangers thats how the creditors lose in business liquidations they share the booty. like when Scrooge witnesses his own liqiudation in the ghost of things to come.
    To re-emerge and pretend to be as the same would mean the whole shooting match the incoprporated would come with it, rise as one and  like Marleys chains you have to carry these around as reminders and creditors would be following you around haunting you.
    When you change you will see that life goes on freer from the burdens and brand new without the lies and free to tell the RRM to go take a Feck to themselves.
    Live the lie and you live the reminding, you help forge the chains and, bond the forgery that the club is the same and TUPE and all those things were not connected, they were seperate.

    The Myth livers get what they deserve. 

    View Comment

  17. HOMUNCULUSDECEMBER 12, 2017 at 22:15
    9
    0 Rate This
    CLUSTER ONEDECEMBER 12, 2017 at 20:35============================
    The Berlin Wall is down … aye right. 
    —————–
    I hope so, as i seen Roger waters perform the wall when it came down19

    View Comment

  18. BUT at that time anyone else could have used it although they too would have been hit when the tightening of tax avoidance loopholes came into play.
    ———————————————————————————–
    Rubbish, when Juninho went to Celtic he had an EBT from Middlesborough, Celtic approached HMRC and asked about them (they were unkknown to Celtic at the time) to be told that HMRC regarded them as illegal and tax evasion, as such Celtic paid the tax due.

    View Comment

  19. A couple of tweets for those not on twitter.
    David McArdle@davemcardle Just heard Lord Hodge speak on the Rangers tax case. Lots of v experienced tax lawyers literally open-mouthed; me at the back, chuckling.

    He was careful not to go beyond the judgment, but a lot of folk were surprised at the lengths Rangers and the wider Murray Group had gone to.

    View Comment

  20. TheGamesABogeyDecember 14, 2017 at 20:06 
    BUT at that time anyone else could have used it although they too would have been hit when the tightening of tax avoidance loopholes came into play.———————————————————————————–Rubbish, when Juninho went to Celtic he had an EBT from Middlesborough, Celtic approached HMRC and asked about them (they were unkknown to Celtic at the time) to be told that HMRC regarded them as illegal and tax evasion, as such Celtic paid the tax due.
    ______________________________________-

    That is something I was thinking about when I wrote on the same point earlier, it kind of makes the point. Whether it be honesty, or just fear of the consequences, not many people are prepared to take the risk that Rangers, and the Murray Group, took. I suspect that Murray felt protected by the Establishment, a protection far greater, even, than his Masonic membership gave him (though the two together would have made him feel positively untouchable). I think he misjudged the honesty of the, as he might view them, little men of HMRC, who just go into work each day looking to do their job to the best of their ability, with a determination to catch the dignified multi-millionaire tax dodgers of this world.

    View Comment

  21. Smugas I would argue that’s exactly the case. It’s called the same directors and the same mindset not learning the lessons of old. Whilst we may not agree on the continuation aspect, I think we both agree that Rangers are not run in a sustainable means and are trying to bring back past glory with a business model that is unsustainable. 

    View Comment

  22. Lest we forget.
     
    https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/2011/03/29/lies-damned-lies-and-scottish-football-journalism/
     
    “About rangerstaxcase I have information on Rangers’ tax case, and I will use this blog to provide the details of what Rangers FC have done, why it was illegal, and what the implications for what was (updated) one of the largest football clubs in Britain.”
     
    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2854899/Charities-claim-vast-majority-people-think-avoiding-tax-immoral-s-legal.html

    View Comment

  23. I’m not sure that the Rangers support will be happy to learn that the directors of their football club were paid more this year that last.

    Stewart Robertson (Total) £281,000, up from £233,000

    Andrew Dickson (Total) £174,000, up from £158,000

    So Mr Robertson got an additional £48,000 and Mr Dickson an additional £16,000. 

    One is forced to ask why. What is it they are doing to justify the payments they were already on, never mind getting a decent whack more. What is it either one of them does. 

    BFB, I’m not sure what sequence you were using so I’ll go the other way and say Matt, Wullie, Pat. That is the genetic source of the characteristic after all.

    View Comment

  24. Total guess on my part as I don’t know the answer.  Guessing Juninho arrived with an established sub trust and asked CFC to top it up thus avoiding tax on the payment.  Celtic took one look and thought ‘Naw.’  
    Warm?

    View Comment

  25. DBD

    we’re never going to agree as to whether ‘Rangers ARE doing anything.’  I’m not too bothered about the lazy media shorthand –  11 men in blue etc etc but in this specific context no, can’t agree with you there.  

    Funnily enough though I’ll cut you more slack than some re sustainability.  Your model is sustainable as long as some mug wants to fund it.  The problem with your search for an investor though is that he now understands the investment vehicle (the company), the Club and the asset are three apparently distinct things.  You could add the fans emotional involvement as a fourth.  He wouldn’t be entirely sure what he was investing in.  Of course this isn’t a problem as long as you’re winning.  Whilst EBs ‘growth’ is occurring.  Just so long as you’re winning…

    View Comment

  26. As Zebedee of ‘The Magic Roundabout’ used to say, “Time for bed”: a visit to the place of abode where there perchance may,allegedly, have been  b a magic circle  requires a relatively early jump!

    View Comment

  27. one cannot expect the biggest club in Scotland to just sit back and accept mediocrity,
    —————–
    The biggest club in scotland (Celtic) don’t accept mediocrity.That is why they brought in BR and gave him money to spend

    View Comment

  28. Here is a message for everyone who is not a Rangers fan. Find something else to do on a Saturday because there is nothing left your team can achieve in football.  The reason being that no team, anywhere in the history of football, has ever won four games in a row except Glasgow Rangers. You are simply wasting your time and hard earned money chasing rainbows!

    © The Scottish Media 2017

    View Comment

  29. The inquiry set up by the SPL into the EBT schemes used by Rangers between 2001 and 2010 is headed by Lord Nimmo Smith.
    He has set a hearing date of November 13 with an outcome expected by November 21.
    If found guilty of breaching SPL rules the Ibrox club could be stripped of league titles.
    New Rangers owner Charles Green has refused to take any part in the inquiry and called it a “Mickey Mouse event”.
    —————
    And yet all the ibrox supporters the smsm the spl and SFA take the LNS enquiry as gospel.
    They believed charles Green when he said he bought the history but they don’t believe charles Green when he said the LNS enquiry was a mickey mouse event….how strange.
    A bit of selective memory from all. choose to listen to the parts that suit the narrative and disregard the parts that don’t.
    How long before the ibrox fans focus on wins only and disregard a defeat ? if CG was still there and stated we never got beat 3-0 we won the game.the ibrox fans are so gullible they would swallow it, and why wouldn’t they.enter jim traynor….the club was not liquidated that is a lie.
    now jim does not have the charisma of CG to fool the ibrox fans but he does get paid a lot to try

    View Comment

  30. Cluster One.

    OK.  So if I’m reading that right (and it is the DR!) the thought process seemed to be that Juninho’s sub trust got some kind of discretionary release payment on leaving Celtic.  Celtic didn’t fancy the tax treatment, albeit at some later date (I’m guessing they asked for advice) and subsequently paid the tax or at least some tax, it doesn’t say which.  The inference is that if the payment was discretionary a side letter wasn’t required.  Does it pass the sniff test?  Clearly not as their cold feet and eventual tax payment showed.  Did it involve contractual performance based payments, a side letter and the subsequent downright  lying to HMRC  as to its very existence?  Apparently Not.  The only issue I suppose would be whether the release monies should have been declared to the SFA within the contract declaration which is why I think they draw the distinction that the fact he had already left superceded that requirement (that and the taxes potentially outstanding being paid).  Fair summary? 

    I do have one thing in the back of my mind.  Were the big tax case cases that RFC pleaded guilty to (were there 5?) not focused around termination and release clauses?  Neil McCann possibly? 

    View Comment

  31. “As Sir David Murray and a gaggle of his former directors will tell you, there is nothing illegal in EBTs, it’s the undeclared second contracts the football authorities have a problem with. Juninho’s EBT was not subject to any contract or side letter whatsoever. Moreover, our then chairman, Brian Quinn, regarded EBTs with suspicion and instructed the club to declare Juninho’s to the Revenue. Celtic even paid tax on money paid to the EBT.”

    Paul67

    CQN 6 Aug. 2012

    View Comment

  32. SmugasDecember 15, 2017 at 10:22

    I have no idea whether or not Celtic made any contribution into Juninho’s EBT before ending it, but it was an EBT that Middlesbrough FC set up and not Celtic. In fact, it appears Celtic knew nothing about it at the time of signing him, but on learning of it, clearly decided that it might cause them problems to continue with it without clarification of it’s legitimacy from HMRC. They got that clarification and settled with HMRC to the latter’s satisfaction. Only desperate fools (all the bears who mention it) would try to make out that Celtic did anything underhand, or that their actions were in any way similar to those of Rangers.

    It was, after all, Celtic who let HMRC, the SFA and the rest of the world know about the existence of Juninho’s EBT and cleared it up! They hid nothing! On the other hand, had Rangers signed him…

    View Comment

  33. On Celtic’s handling of the Juninho EBT. Surely that is an example of how Celtic, at least, would have viewed the use of EBTs that LNS somehow managed to find as being available to all other clubs (and so RFC hadn’t gained an unfair advantage by their use). Had the SPL been serious in their ‘prosecution’ of the case, they would surely have brought Celtic’s actions up at the tribunal as an example of just how the SFA would expect all clubs to deal with such an untested method of payment – seek advice from the ultimate authority on the matter.

    Every time someone brings up the Juninho EBT, they are unintentionally showing just how wrong Rangers’ use of EBTs, and how wilful their deception, was!

    View Comment

  34. johnjamessite Howling At The Moon

    My detractors, little men who hang on my every word looking for a flaw to spew up their bile like a housefly prepares to eat (Homunculus/Highlander on SFM) are more to be pitied. They are sad old men with too much time on their hands. They desperately insert their fingers in their rectums trying to agitate their prostates, hoping for an erection, but even with an Arab Strap they come up limp. With their man boobs and too much oestrogen in their bloodstream, necks and mouths combine to form a pussy and pussy words. I would invite them to jog on but I appreciate that walking frames may somewhat prohibit even the most gentle of canters.

    I’ve been pondering for a few days whether or not to respond to JJ’s recent child-like temper tantrum, respectful as I am of the SFM mods likely wish to avoid an inter-blog, tit-for-tat, slag fest.

    However, I’ve concluded that unless a spoilt child is corrected, he or she will continue to display the same behaviour ad infinitum. Homunculus is eloquent and erudite enough to defend himself against JJ’s tirade, so I’ll leave him to do so if he wishes.

    When JJ accused me of “hanging on my every word looking for a flaw to spew up bile” he was referring to two separate occasions on which I pointed out a minor spelling error on his part. What he conveniently forgot to mention was that the spelling errors made by JJ that I highlighted were made in articles where he ridiculed two individuals for their spelling errors. I wouldn’t have mentioned JJ’s spelling mistakes had he not made the schoolboy error of slagging someone else’s spelling whilst simultaneously making the same mistake himself!

    I guess he doesn’t do irony. I guess he does do double standards. I guess he does do rank hypocrisy. I guess he does do ad hominem attacks – just read the article above.

    If my reporting him to the spelling police constitutes ‘spewing bile’, then by applying the same skewed scale and logic we can probably extrapolate that his alleged heroic banishment to foreign lands equates to him living in a bedsit in Govanhill, munching Pot Noodles along with his only friend, his pet poodle, Mensch.

    ps, any spelling mistakes above are entirely intentional in the interests of irony.

    View Comment

  35. I don’t know abut anyone else, but I think that that vile, dirty-mouthed extract from JJ betokens a mind that is seriously warped and possibly in need of counselling.
    Not a chap I would willingly meet or be in the company of, God help him in his affliction.

    View Comment

  36. John Clark
    December 15, 2017 at 12:57  
    “I don’t know about anyone else—“
     
    ——————————-
    I think you have just lost your invitation.101010
     
     
     
    “If the RTC blogger would care to contact me, and work in unison with me, I will initiate crowdfunded legal redress. Should we both continue to be mindful of our anonymity we will require a third party to front our consortium. I would invite John Clark who contributes to the SFM.
    So why not go it on my own? I can barely raise enough money to pay the rent and I have not had a holiday since starting this site and being forced into exile. A kind reader has offered me a coach flight and free accommodation with his family in Buenos Aires, but I would not turn up without the means to buy him a bottle of red wine in gratitude.
    If RTC and JC joined forces with me I have no doubt that we could rip the guts out of this whitewash. I am loath to praise the SFM as they harbour two small-minded guttersnipes who hang on my every word looking for a dipthong out of place. However in the best interests of my readers I have borrowed their latest editorial piece which has many parallels to the article I published on Saturday010101

    View Comment

  37. John ClarkDecember 15, 2017 at 12:57
    I don’t know abut anyone else, but I think that that vile, dirty-mouthed extract from JJ betokens a mind that is seriously warped and possibly in need of counselling. Not a chap I would willingly meet or be in the company of, God help him in his affliction.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    It’s certainly a conundrum.

    He has something to add to the ongoing farce at Ibrox in terms of insight and inside info and writes well about it most of the time. But his obsession with conspiracies, the use of overtly sexualised language and homophobia is a sure fire way of undermining his own credibility. It all seems very self destructive behaviour. I wonder if he understands how it comes across to normal people?

    View Comment

  38. Celtic have certainly stirred a hornet’s nest with their letter to season ticket holders. 

    Season tickets can only be used by the named person on said ticket.  No lending to family or friends when ticket holder can’t make games.

    That has been part and parcel of season ticket use since they became popular.  I don’t know how vigorously this will be policed.  There are some stories going around that it’s part of security measures, to be able to identify seat occupants in case of trouble.  Like the ‘fan’ who invaded the pitch at the PSG game recently.  Apparently he had a borrowed ticket.

    I think I would rather let the police and the stewards worry about trouble makers than have huge amounts of empty seats at games.  Usual over reaction to the few who make trouble for the many innocent fans. 

    View Comment

  39. JIMBODECEMBER 15, 2017 at 14:45
    Might be pertinent to the game v TRFC at the turn of the year ? I imagine that not all of the visiting fans are holders of season tickets . There was (at least) one guy at Firhill who had a football ban and was heard to boast about it later .

    View Comment

  40. Might be of interest to BP:

    Nacho Novo,
    The 38-year-old opened the NN10 Ibrox-themed pub earlier this month and already it has faced criticism (Price of drinks).
    Ahead of the festive season the ex-footie ace is looking for musical talent to play at the boozer.

    (Get the money up front!)

    View Comment

  41. The Scotsman ‘Rumours’ quoting The Scottish Sun, [my highlighting] :

    “…Rangers could make a £1.2 million bid for Brighton winger Jamie Murphy next month…”
    ============

    And so it begins.

    Rangers could make a £X million / billion bid for SPL / EPL / La Liga player ‘Billy Bob’ next month.
    [Edit daily – as per Level42 instructions.]
    01

    View Comment

Comments are closed.