WottpiAugust 24, 2017 at 19:31 I’ve always wanted the question to – The Scottish Football Monitor

WottpiAugust 24, 2017 at 19:31 I’ve always wanted the question to …

Comment on On Grounds for Judicial Review by Allyjambo.

wottpiAugust 24, 2017 at 19:31

I’ve always wanted the question to be asked, even rhetorically by the media, as it seems so obvious: ‘why did the ‘prosecution’ (the SPL) accept Bryson’s ‘evidence’ without question?’

What could possibly make the evidence of a man who had just admitted his office did nothing to correct it’s errors once discovered, reliable? Why was the question, ‘can you give us documented examples of previous cases where newly discovered mis-registrations were treated in this manner’, not asked by the ‘prosecution’? What could possibly be the justification for accepting the evidence of the head of a department that he’d just told the tribunal was quite lax over registrations, without demanding proof of what he said? 

The lack of such questions just shows how much of a sham the LNS tribunal was! 

Allyjambo Also Commented

On Grounds for Judicial Review
Bogs DolloxAugust 31, 2017 at 13:44

One of the greatest unreported crimes of the century – certainly within football – and only beaten (as far as we know) by the, not unrelated, EBT & DOS scams! Oh, and the European licence fraud..! The list goes on, I’m sure14


On Grounds for Judicial Review
WOTTPIAUGUST 31, 2017 at 10:06

Since the outset of TRFC’s ‘bid’ for Walker I have questioned the genuineness of their intent, and believe it all but disappeared with their European Progres (of the Niederkorn type) 15 but, of course, they weren’t going to make the damage that result had caused too obvious by ending their ‘interest’, especially as it was clearly undermining Hearts’ relationship with an important player. The deal, as far as I can make out, was quite ludicrous, and was never going to succeed, though TRFC might, if they were genuinely intent on getting his signature, have improved it if the Europa League had beckoned.

Things might change quickly today, and a deal be done, but it will have more to do with TRFC’s media aided propaganda campaign than Hearts’ need for the sale proceeds (most of which they won’t see for some time), as their only option appears to be to continue to pay for a disaffected player with no sale value after today.

I do wonder why Hearts haven’t made more of this, making it clear how the ‘deal’ was constructed, and showing how the media were helping to unsettle a player – and not for the first time – but, of course, that is the same media that would be free to spin Hearts’ reaction in whatever way they chose, so maybe they thought it wiser to say nothing.

I think we are seeing here an example of how the refusal of our clubs to make it clear that TRFC are not ‘Rangers’ will cost them all (with the obvious exeption of Celtic) as young, impressionable players, continue to believe they have the oportunity to sign for that once mighty club. I am sure the likes of Jamie Walker would believe the media’s published view that this ‘Rangers’ ‘return to glory’ is just around the corner, and sees signing for them will take his career to heights unimaginable at Hearts.

Hopefully Ann Budge will realise this and appraise other, non-Ibrox facing, directors of other clubs of how it’s affecting the minds of young players who have not yet learned to ignore what they read in the papers, especially about themselves and the Ibrox club.


On Grounds for Judicial Review
I am sickened by my club’s refusal to sell Jamie Walker to TRFC at a knock down price – by instalments. How dare any football club refuse to sell to the Govan club at whatever price they offer, they are, obviously, so full of entitlement and are ‘The Peepul’, that we should all bow before them!

I mean, that’s the impression one might get from reading this headline from the Herald:

‘Jamie Walker won’t sign for Rangers before the end of the window unless Hearts drop £1million demands’

The article, itself, doesn’t go on to explain why Hearts might/should let him go, for what is, I believe, 40% less than what they value him at, and doesn’t point out that TRFC have not made a fresh offer; so this article, and others similar, is merely a sop to the Ibrox club’s supporters to give the impression that their club is actively pursuing a player they would like to see playing for them. The headline would have been more accurate, and less of a PR exercise, if it had read:

‘Jamie Walker won’t sign for Rangers before the end of the window unless they make an increased offer closer to the £1 million Hearts are looking for!’

The article could then have made it clear that TRFC have not been in contact with Hearts since their unacceptable offer was made some weeks ago, and that it had been, and still remains, an offer to pay by three instalments over two years!

Think about it, the Ibrox PR machine is putting it out there that TRFC are still trying to buy Walker, despite the fact they have not spoken to Hearts about it since their last offer was rebuffed quite a few weeks ago!


Recent Comments by Allyjambo

To Comply or not to Comply ?
gunnerbJuly 15, 2018 at 15:00 
Just wondering about the engine room subsidiary finances. Is it that the directors of RIFC have loaned money to RIFC who have then provided funding to their loss making football operation? Have Close bros loaned directly to TRFC and this is secured on Hummel Park and other bits and pieces owned by TRFC? What happens in the event of TRFC not being able to meet bills as they fall due and the parent company are in no position/unwilling to offer further financial support.If administration of TRFC is deemed necessary then are RIFC as a company able to control the narrative as they are the largest creditor? (Close Bros position protected by security). It has been mentioned elsewhere recently that there are resignations imminent from the board , is this from RIFC and if so what impact might this have?
_________________

I don’t know the answer for certain, but in a symbiotic relationship like RIFC/TRFC, where each company relies on the other so completely – RIFC provides the funding for TRFC, TRFC provides the income (potential) for RIFC and it’s very reason for it’s existance, then if one falls into administration, the other must surely follow. While TRFC will owe money to RIFC, so RIFC will, most likely, be it’s main creditor, in turn, RIFC owes that money to it’s creditors, who, if they want as much of their money back as they can get, will have a similar effect as being owed by TRFC.

I am sure there will be much effort to divorce club (TRFC Ltd) from company, but it won’t be easy, and will only work if enough of the lenders, of the directors kind, are prepared to wave their money goodbye.


To Comply or not to Comply ?
upthehoopsJuly 13, 2018 at 08:45 
Yet another hatchet job on Murdoch Maclennan by the Daily Record today. The willingness of the Daily Record to do Rangers dirty work for them is appalling. People may not want to click the link but I’ve left it here. I can see no other way for Maclennan other than to resign, if he values his safety and peace of mind. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/missing-murdoch-maclennan-require-cave-12907268
___________________________

A hatchet job, indeed. A squirrel brandishing a hatchet; and for good measure, they link it to the kids rescued from the caves in Thailand. A class newspaper, or what?

They did, though, make a good point, or it would have been if they’d left out the vitriol, and that is, as chairman of the SPFL, he’s been silent throughout his tenure (though the continued attack from TRFC, via Level5 and their poodles in the SMSM might have made that more difficult for him in recent months). Typically, a valid criticism of a member of our game’s governance has been lost in a TRFC plot. A decent newspaper would have used this situation to make it clear that all the game’s governors have been very reticent to comment on anything bordering on controversial for a great many years, and asking why that should be.

But here’s a list, in no particular order:

David Murray.
Craig Whyte.
Charles Green.
Dave King.
Campbell Ogilvie.
Walter Smith.
Graham Souness.

The list is not exhaustive, but if the Scottish Media had been as prepared to do what they are doing to MacLennan to these men for their ‘potential’ conflicts, before the sh*t hit had the fan as a result of their underhand dealings, then who knows how much good that would have done for our game, and particularly both the teams from Govan that the media do so much to protect? In each case things had gone spectacularly wrong before any hack was prepared to write one cautionary word about them.

As to the last two names on that list, imagine if MacLennan had actually done something to compare with their receipt of EBTs after they’d both left Rangers and were working for other clubs with whom Rangers had dealings! Imagine the vitriol that would be flying his way from all sections of the media! Imagine if it was the case that, rather than a ‘potential’ and very unlikely conflict of interest scenario, he’d accepted money from Celtic, even though he had no current working relationship with them. 

Then there’s the hypocricy of these stenographers in saying that when they call out his name all they get back is an echo. Dave? Mr King? Can we ask you a question that’s not on the Level5 list, list, list, ist, ist…?


To Comply or not to Comply ?
macfurglyJuly 12, 2018 at 13:32 
redlichtieJuly 12, 2018 at 11:57——-CCS was Collective Consciousness Society iirc, which sounds like a suitable reference, although Alexis Korner was a Great British Bluesman.Then again,King turns on the money, see the monies flow,Debts now make a forest, watch the forest grow.Nothing there behind you, nothing more to come,Come and ride a squirrel, Rangers on the run.OK, back to my day job.
_______________-

And here you are…if you all want to sing along with Macfurgly’s words 08

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOOpbqs5myI


To Comply or not to Comply ?
JINGSO.JIMSIEJULY 12, 2018 at 11:02
REDLICHTIE
JULY 11, 2018 at 21:58
3. Do Hummel have such a clause in their agreement, allowing them to walk away too?———————————————
Can Hummel (a relatively small company) afford to have money tied up in mullyins & mullyins of replica strips that can’t be sold? What effect will this have on them?
__________________

They will learn to pay more attention to social media (SFM) in future 06

But, perhaps, if they can show a measurable loss on account of the delay, or as a result of any new contract with SDI, then they would, presumably, chase TRFC for compensation. I do wonder, though, if they had the foresight to do a Mike Ashley on them with a clause that makes TRFC responsible for any unsold stock. 


To Comply or not to Comply ?
THELAWMAN2JULY 12, 2018 at 09:55
ALLYJAMBO
‘It doesn’t open the door for me to go and sign more players.’ is another way of Gerrard saying, ‘the settlement payment to Alves means there is no extra money to sign a player as a result of his removal from the wage bill.’ 
________________________________________________________________________
Are they not trying to buy the Millwall defender then ?
___________

Try reading what I said in the post again. Then re-comment on it if you manage to work out the difference between what I wrote and how you mis-read it in your hurry to be critical.

Hint- I anticipated a remark from you that would show your desperation to ‘defend’ TRFC by making out I’d slipped up as you appear to be suggesting.

PS Until, and unless, TRFC do sign this defender, ‘trying to sign’ could be seen as a bit of an exaggeration, like so many so called targets over the years.


SSL Certificates