Comment on One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All by John Clark.

     I've been re-reading Lord Malcolm's September 6th 'opinion'


    He referred to previous authorities, and cited one authority ( in the case of guy done for reset) in which is expressed  what I hope and believe is the truth about our legal system:

    "Lord Guthrie expressed the view that the arguments addressed 
    in support of these pleas raised “questions of importance in constitutional law and in the 
    law of reparation.  It is, perhaps, unnecessary to add that, although the pursuer admittedly 
    comes before the court with his scutcheon liberally blotted, and invokes the aid of the law 
    which he has frequently broken,
    his case must be considered as raising questions of 
    principle, and as if it were presented by an innocent citizen who had been unwarrantably 
    imprisoned following upon proceedings which were a nullity.”

    That is, even a guy with a criminal record and no regard for 'the law' is absolutely entitled to be dealt with fairly under the law.

    I, of course, have my own opinions about Duff and Phelps and the whole 'saga' ( including my opinion about the whole feckin shambles that the COPFS made of their 'prosecution'. In truth, I would nearly be ready to believe the unthinkable- that the shambles was engineered!)

    But that's just me and my 'prejudices'.

    But I take comfort in the fact that whatever the court case and however badly, insincerely and incompetently presented, the Court will deal with it as presented, strictly in accordance with law and legal precedent.

    And I find it interesting that today the Court asked that 'authorities' outwith the USA and Canada and the Uk should be included in the list of 'authorities' to be adduced by parties for the Hearing in September.








    John Clark Also Commented

    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    Cluster One 3rd April 2019 at 06:58

    "..New “Res 12”, website.



    Thank you for that important link, Cluster one.

    I have said before that I was not and am not one of the 'Res 12' group, but I am wholeheartedly behind them.

    The authors of this thoroughly researched and excellently drafted and presented account of what the Res12 issue is all about are to be congratulated and applauded. 

    No one reading that account could honestly assert that  there are not major questions to be asked of the behaviour of the now dead RFC , its owners and directors, and of the SFA.

    One can very well understand the anger many people feel at:

    the point blank refusal by the SFA to have the matter fully and independently investigated, and the suspicion that this raises as indicating that they fear what may emerge from an investigation

    the meek acceptance by Celtic plc that  they and their shareholders may have been cheated out of millions, and their readiness to kick a shareholders' AGM-resolution into the long grass rather than insist on a full investigation .

    And one can very well understand why a reference to the COPFS/Police Scotland seeking a police investigation into criminality is being held as a backstop.

    I am quite ready to believe that the apparent success of the dirty work involved in the granting of the UEFA licence to an unentitled club encouraged  black hearts and dishonest minds some years  later to believe, smugly, that they could get away with the utterly disgraceful 5-Way Agreement.

    Scottish Football supporters owe it to themselves to try to save Football in Scotland by getting to the truth. And a thorough reading of   https://www.res12.uk/     will convince them of that fact.

    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    finnmccool 2nd April 2019 at 16:49

    '…That is the problem that the SFA created when they failed to censure Gerrard over his referee comments and rescinded Morelos's red card..'


    The SFA, by cobbling up the 5-Way Agreement to accommodate cheats lost all moral authority, and has  several times been given the finger with impunity by the chairman of RIFC plc. 

    The SFA supped with the devil, and is now seen for what it has become- in  effect, a bent cop, with no moral authority over the baddies they so eagerly aided and abetted and continue to aid and abet in the deceit of the Big Lie.

    (As for BBC Scotland, I wonder whether Chris McLaughlin's recent promotion was the beginning of an attempt to appease TRFC Ltd by discreetly removing McLaughlin from the list of reporters who would be sent to Ibrox , thus giving in to TRFC ?)


    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    paddy malarkey 2nd April 2019 at 16:26


    The link has this:

    "Rangers: Ryan Kent offered ban for lashing [ my bold]out at Celtic captain Scott Brown

    Rangers' Ryan Kent faces a two-game ban after being charged for shoving [ my italics]Celtic captain Scott Brown.

    Footage showed the winger, 22, lash out at Brown in the aftermath of James Forrest's late winner for the hosts at Celtic Park on Sunday."

    What kind of garbage reporting we are now getting from BBC Scotland!

    There is no way Kent's swing at Brown could be construed as a 'shove' , and it was some crass idiot of a sub-editor who let such a contradictory report leave the keyboard.

    Recent Comments by John Clark

    Bad Money?
    Life is full of more or less remarkable coincidences. 

    looking at the High Court of Chancery rolls list for tomorrow I came across this entry:

    "The Rolls Buildings,

    Hearing Room 2


    Tuesday 16 July 2019

    At 12:00 PM


    BL-2018-002250 DESMOND v Whyte and another "

    Please someone tell me that these are not Dermot Desmond , majority shareholder and Board member of Celtic ,  and Craig Whyte last owner of the original Rangers Football Club of 1872?

    That really would be a coincidence!


    Bad Money?
    "Always being honest, that is the most important thing."- so says that diving, cheating Neymar, who no more would understand the concept of fair play in sport than our unprincipled  SFA.

    But at least he's only a player, not the Governance body of a sport.

    Bad Money?
    easyJambo 13th July 2019 at 23:49

    '..Is Edusport seeking to transfer its SFA membership to a new club/company?'


    Naughty, naughty, eJ!.broken heart

    I think it must simply be that while the Edusport Academy Ltd is an incorporated business  it's spin-off football club was an unincorporated body, which I believe is permissible. Certainly, it's as 'Edusport Academy' that the club will be playing its fixtures in the coming season.

    It presumably makes sense now to think about separating the football club from the Academy by becoming a distinct legal entity by incorporation ( as it did for many of our venerable clubs which played competitively for some lengthy periods of time before they wised-up to the desirability of becoming limited companies). 

    Since incorporation cannot be backdated, I imagine the club will seek incorporation as 'Edusport Academy' and simultaneously change its name. It would be the same club, and entitled to its full history and record of sporting achievements. 

    I wish it well, even if  I don't much like the new name!


    Bad Money?
    easyJambo 13th July 2019 at 23:49

    '..I'll put out the possibility of a "new club" participating in the Lowland, South of Scotland and U20 leagues this season…'


    By Jingo, eJ! 

    You must be the 'go-to' guy when it comes to the world of Scottish football!

    Hands up anybody else who knew of Edusport!

    Is it just me who's feckin ignorant of these things?heart


    Bad Money?
    OttoKaiser 12th July 2019 at 10:57

    '..Now, when did the bold Craig sell those shares!?'


    Round about 22/02/2012 according to 

    "Rangers owner Craig Whyte sells off 102 years of Ibrox history by dumping shares in Arsenal

    James Traynor

    • 07:22, 22 FEB 2012
    • Updated02:36, 3 JUL 2012"

    So, without a legitimate licence (in my opinion) and in breach of other UEFA club competitions (like holding shares in another club) it's only right that Maribor denied them any more money from their cheating.