Folks This is an absolute must read by BRTH on Scottish – The Scottish Football Monitor

Folks This is an absolute must read by BRTH on Scottish …

Comment on LNS – A Summary by Auldheid.


This is an absolute must read by BRTH on Scottish football and why it wanders into the wilderness.

Auldheid Also Commented

LNS – A Summary
RPMcMurphy 17th December 2015 at 11:14 pm #


Well nearly 🙂 but I’m less bothered with the past than I am securing a safe future for the game.

If TRFC supporters think liquidation does not mean the end of RFC then not recognising the voiding of titles is a minor mental hurdle for them.
However if the SPFL were to say officially that those titles were won unfairly and are part of the history of RFC and not TRFC which starts from 2012 and leave it at that,  does that in the absence of actually voiding those titles make a mark more telling than voiding them?
Damaged goods from a time TRFC cannot be proud to hold on to if it is to have a future in Scottish football?
I think that if what we all believe to be so is recognised officially, then titles should be voided, but if not voiding is being used as a defence against a full investigation into the SFA then marking them as damaged goods would do me as long as governance reform was the main aim.

LNS – A Summary
johnnymanc 17th December 2015 at 10:42 pm
In the narrative BRTH sets out the actual mechanism is not known, but throughout the whole saga one thing stands out a mile – keeping information that might damage their case out of sight was key.
It can be identified with the first ebt and side letter to De Boer not registered in 2000 and subsequently in 2012 when it was kept from SPL lawyers.
In 2005 when HMRC asked about side letters for De Boer and Flo their existence was denied (by that time there would have been another 20 to 30 ebt cases with side letters.)
In 2011 the arrival of the tax bill was kept quiet, which facilitated the retention of the UEFA Licence and in 2012 the HMRC letters of 2011 and attachments were kept from SPL lawyers.
Unless there is evidence of a metanoia we have to wonder how such a mindset can be accommodated in our game.
To be clear I don’t want them excluded but I want evidence of a metanoia before any steps are taken to restructure the leagues .
Such evidence would be admission:
They did try to gain sporting advantage for 12 years,
They breached UEFA FFP rules in 2011
and tried to cover up their behaviour since 2012,
They realise the titles are worthless as a consequence and give them up,
They accept no TRFC official in any position of influence at SFA or SPFL Boards or Committees for 5 years
They sign up to a domestic version of Financial Fair Play that can be easily monitored.
Removal of any TRFC officials involved in any of the foregoing since 2000.
Heads would need to metaphorically roll at the SFA and SPFL too and an investigation mounted to facilitate reform but that is beyond TRFC’s control but not the clubs.
If those conditions are met it would be churlish not to move on.
If they are not it would be suicide for the game if restructuring were pushed through.

LNS – A Summary
John Clark 1.03

You set out the conditions necessary to begin a process of moving on but how much better would the chances of that  be if those responsible for the crimes against Scottish football were to meet with each other rather than Chairman of other clubs to meet the conditions you set out?

An awakening moment, the first of 12 Steps towards recovery, for real recovery can only come internally before the benefits manifest themselves externally.
It’s not Club Chairmen DK and his fellow Directors need to meet its the RST, The Sons of Struth and their ilk to confirm what the rest of Scottish football believes to be so.
A self surrender of titles an acceptance that RFC and the traditions and thinking that killed them no longer work in modern day football and that any future the club of their allegiance has depends on an absolute rethink of who they are and their place in modern society.
The 12 Steps are difficult enough but made even more so when the basis on which they stand is surrender, but with encouragement who knows what miracles can happen?

Recent Comments by Auldheid

To Comply or not to Comply ?
John Clark

I blame Regan, Petrie etc. They allowed DK a role in Scottish football based on  fear.
They have a lot to answer for, particularly a charge of lacking moral courage.

To Comply or not to Comply ?
Stevie BC
Deflector sheilds set  to max Captain.😊
TRFC statement sounds like a death rattle and my bet is DKs departure will be put  down to the TOP rather than why Comp Off prepared to drop end of March 2011 proceedings from JPDT scrutiny.
Better DK gets hung for a lamb than a sheep.
“Containment” is paramount to enable a version of Rangers to continue in our game, but confession would cleans souls.

To Comply or not to Comply ?
Paddy Malarky
It’s been nearly 3 weeks since the JPDT met to consider the non compliance charges levelled at Rangers.
E Tims are suggesting why at 
It might explain the silence.

To Comply or not to Comply ?
FAN OF FOOTBALLJULY 13, 2018 at 19:32
You could not be more spot on than had you walked  up to a dartboard and stuck the dart in the bulls eye.
DK’s strategy of blaming problems of his and RFC makings on  Tims would not be necessary if he did not fear the truth, a stranger in his strange land.
The problem the game has is that if the truth came  out, there would be no sanction available under the rules to provide the justice that the truth would demand.
When the rule book is based on trust and a club chooses to break it to the degree RFC did, then that rule book is not up to the task.
A new one under a different governance process where the role of the SFA is significantly reduced in  terms of governance of the SPFL is required.
Hopefully the truth will provide such an overwhelming argument, that Celtic will not need to be alone in demanding it.
Who knows maybe the smsm will wake up and realise that the slice of bread on which their butter is spread has  hit the ground butter side down.

To Comply or not to Comply ?
TheLawMan2July 9, 2018 at 12:51 (Edit)

I was making two points

1. The guys named by me are known to have known about both types of ebts used by RFC, in what is now recognised was an unlawful manner that was not open to other clubs to use, destroying the logic of LNS when he judged no sporting advantage because ebts were there for clubs to lawfully use. That was only made possible by the timing of his Commission, but the failure of Dickson and Ogilvie to disclose (allied to the failure of Duff and Phelps to provide the requested documentation) is about actual misuse of power not potential.
2.If we are to take the line that any official in a position to influence decisions should not do so on the same basis as McLennan which at base is that he is a known Celtic supporter, then why not seek reform of the governance arrangement that puts SFA/SPFL decision makers in that invidious position?
Had The Rangers come out with a statement that recognised the inherent conflict of interest in the way Scottish football is governed and requested a feasibility study on how that might be changed, using events over the past 5 years and earlier as in how not to do it, then The Rangers and their point about potential as opposed to actual conflict of interest might have been taken seriously, but for some reason that is not the way they, or you , want to do it.
So forgive us if you are not taken seriously.

SSL Certificates