Stevie G – The Real Deal?


Steven Gerrard’s slip in 2014 against Chelsea cost Liverpool the league and extinguished Brendan Rodger’s chances of having his name written in Liverpool folklore. Now Steven Gerrard stands in his way of becoming a Celtic legend, by stopping the Ulsterman from claiming an eighth successive title for the Hoops.

But how realistic is that? Can this Anfield great transform the beleaguered ‘Gers into title contenders? Or like his pursuit for a Premier League title, will it ultimately end in failure? Here we take a look at Gerrard’s chances of breaking Celtic’s dominance next season.

Is he tactically astute?

During Sven Goran-Erikkson’s reign as England manager, he was blessed with midfield greats such as Frank Lampard, Paul Scholes, David Beckham and Steven Gerrard. Lampard consistently netted 20+ goals a season for Chelsea and Gerrard seemingly won games on his own for Liverpool.

Yet the two couldn’t play together, and one of the reasons for that was Gerrard’s tactical ineptitude. Whilst Lampard had shown himself adept at following a tactical plan under Mourinho, Gerrard only flourished when partnered with Xabi Alonso – a canny operator with a sharp footballing brain.

All too often Gerrard would abandon his responsibilities and scupper England’s attacks with predictable ‘Hollywood’ passes. If his disregard of tactics from his playing career is anything to go by, then his time at Ibrox will be short-lived.


Much has been made of the expected wave of Liverpool loanee’s at Ibrox, but so far the new manager has opted to find most of his talent from elsewhere. Scott Arfield, Allan McGregor, Connor Goldson and Ovi Ejaria have all joined the ‘Gers.

Jon Flanagan is the only incoming player with links to Gerrard’s former club, and whilst signings from Brighton, Sunderland and Burnley might not be inspiring, they seem more astute than bringing in second-rate Liverpool rejects. The signing have ensured that Rangers are now 12/1 for the title, second favourites to Celtic.

The transfer market is a crowded place at the moment and Rangers, like Celtic, simply do not have the allure or the money of most Championship clubs never mind Premier League outfits. If Rangers are to be successful they need to maximise the transfer market as Celtic did when David Moss was the head of recruitment.

Moss was the man responsible for bringing players such as Victor Wanyama, Virgil Van Dijk and Moussa Dembele to Parkhead, with the Hoops making substantial profits on most of their player purchases.

Gerrard needs to bring the right scouting team into Ibrox in the hope of emulating Celtic’s transfer success. If he doesn’t, then he won’t stand a chance of challenging Brendan Rodgers as Rangers’ current squad isn’t up to much.

The odds

As much as analysis of Gerrard’s history and style is helpful, it doesn’t give any clear indicators. With the notable exception of Leicester City, the bookies have always tended to get things right in football.

Manchester City and Celtic were the bookies favourites for their domestic leagues last season and Real Madrid were the favourites for the Champions League.


  1. In the passing, and on this day, can I say that although I have lived quite a long time, and although I'm reasonably well read, and the son of  gravely wounded soldier of the Second World war,I have only just learned the story of the Unknown Warriorr, and how well kept was the secret of which field of action the six sets of remains were chosen , and of how these unidentified remains, in their coffins, were taken to a shed, draped in Union flags, and guarded until a  or 'the' General came, entered the shed, and at random, placed his hand on one of the coffins. That coffin was then shipped to England and placed in Westminster Abbey. 

    I learned this from a wee programme on BBC Radio Scotland, which described the involvement of a senior Army chaplain who alone, apparently, knew the detail.Absolutely no one knows name, rank, serial number, unit, regiment or whethere he was a sailor or soldier or any other detail of the chap.


    View Comment

  2. bfbpuzzled 10th November 2018 at 23:07 

    This of course is all theoretical to those of us who are …. strabismic…'

    Older posters and readers of the better days of the 'Daily Express' will affectionately remember Dr Strabismus(whom God preserve) of Utrecht,who, as a keen fan of his local team, USV Hercules, developed a pair of spectacles for their centre-forward [yes, it was in the old days!]which lent to his eyes the characteristics of the eyes of a hare. Peripheral vision was increased by some staggering percentage in trials.

    On wearing them for the first time in a competitive league match, however, rushing like a hare to the opposition's goal area in anticipation of a flighted ball from behind and concentrating on the flight of the ball, the player's dead ahead vision, like that of  a hare being pursued, was zero.

    Sadly, he never fully recovered from his whole body smash at speed into the old wooden goal-post.

    Dr Strabismus (whom God preserve) abandoned his experiment. 

    View Comment

  3. Anybody else think Mr Morelos got away with being disrespectful at the sending off ? I thought TRFC were the better team both before and after the decision , but I can't help but think he brings the opprobrium on himself .

    View Comment

  4. paddy malarkey 11th November 2018 at 16:17

    '…Can't wait for Motherwell's club statement wrt refereeing .'


    I neither saw nor heard the game, paddy malarkey, but I imagine that were any 'statement' to come from Murrerwell, it would be

    better written,

    make its point tellingly in moderate language 

    and refrain from the rabble-rousing that can be such a boring feature of the statements that emanate from PR chaps who ,having no  idea of how to win hearts and minds,have to fall back on the sleekit Coisty-style rabble-rousing rhetoric that was seen some years ago.




    View Comment

  5. Suppose with inflation, Minty would punt the TV rights for about £1.25?

    This 'journalist' Gannon is merely validating why he is employed by The DR: he needs help, not vitriol…  broken heart

    View Comment

  6. I think we are being a bit hard on Michael Gannon here . He is not advocating that the SPFL should consult with David Murray . He is simply using one of his quotes from 2009 to illustrate a basic business truth – you need more than one bidder in an auction . 

    Many wise words are spoken by fools and many truths are uttered by liars and villains .

    ” For there is one thing we must never forget – The majority can never replace the man . 

    And no more than a hundred empty heads make one wise man will a heroic decision arise from a hundred cowards “

    Adolf Hitler 

    View Comment

  7. Paradisebhoy 12th November 2018 at 11:18

    "Many wise words are spoken by fools and many truths are uttered by liars and villains"


     Hitler ( I spit on his accursed name)also made this statement  'Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it'

    a statement taken on board by our Football Governance people and the SMSM and put into practice in manufacturing and propagating the myth that the arch-cheat's cheating football club did not die when it lost its entitlement to play football.





    View Comment

  8. Paradisebhoy 12th November 2018 at 11:18

    "Many wise words are spoken by fools and many truths are uttered by liars and villains"


     Hitler ( I spit on his accursed name)also made this statement  'Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it'

    a statement taken on board by our Football Governance people and the SMSM and put into practice in manufacturing and propagating the myth that the arch-cheat's cheating football club did not die when it lost its entitlement to play football.

    View Comment

  9. Ex Ludo 12th November 2018 at 15:06

    According to the blurb one of the semi-finals will only be shown on Premier sports so if it's your team and you ain't got a tacket you are going to have to pony up to watch it 

    View Comment

  10. exLudo @ 15.00 12 Nov 2018

    Thanks for that link & the thought-provoking article – I'm not a Man City fan but i love good football so I am old enough to remember the Man City team when they were in Div 2 (old leagues) then they hit upon Malcolm Allison & his team of Marsh,Summerbee,Lee,Bell etc & what a team to watch that was for a couple of seasons – & now with Middle East money pumped in they & the ground are a whole new entity & success –  basically bought with oil money .

    Would I still feel the same way if my team (DUFC) were bought over & millions pumped in & look at them the same way as I looked at Jim McLean's team of the 80's – I'm not sure .

    What about a really strong Arbroath with oil millions pumped into Gayfield – the mind boggles – does Scotland need a really , really , strong Arbroath ?

    View Comment

  11. John Clark 12th November 2018 at 15:03

    Well said JC.

    Hitler’s lies were exposed in the end . Hopefully, the same fate awaits Scottish Football’s Big Lie . 

    The peculiar thing is I don’t think anyone really believes the Lie . 

    It’s more of a “ Stance”

    They declare Rangers didn’t die – arms folded , legs apart – staunch and proud . What are you going to do about it ? 

    Keep telling the truth – that’s what . 

    View Comment

  12.  Paradisebhoy 12th November 2018 at 16:52

    '..Well said JC.

    Hitler’s lies were exposed in the end . Hopefully, the same fate awaits Scottish Football’s Big Lie . ____________________________

    Oops, well or otherwise,I seem to have said it twice!

    Supporters and fans can believe what they like: the Governance body simply has to make sure that official records are correct  and state the truth.

    If they are feart to do that, they should demit office. If they refuse to tell the truth because they are themselves closet fans then the sooner they are bumped out of office the better.


    View Comment

  13. Haven't read the articles yet on the SFA deal, but I'll ask the stoopid question anyway.

    During the preparation and negotiations, who was actually representing the fans?

    [Obviously I am disregarding the inept SFA here – as it has repeatedly shown over the years to be fully disengaged with the fans].

    ….you know, the people expected to put their hands in their pockets to pay for this 'SFA deal' ?

    Not talking about fans being involved in any commercially sensitive discussions, but giving constructive feedback – during negotiations – on e.g. kick off times, midweek games, travel issues, etc.

    I know.  smiley


    View Comment

  14. paddy malarkey 12th November 2018 at 21:02

    '…Have I broken the blog again ?…'

    No, pm, I or one went awol and went on a wee scout through the Scotlandspeople website hunting up some of the footballers of the First World War!

    My eye had been caught, purely at random, by the address of the parents of one footballer who was killed in action in September 1915: it was round the corner from the address to which my grandad moved from Motherwell. 

    So I've been trying since you posted that link to find when that move  took place .(My dad was born in Motherwell in 1913,so it must have been some time after that that his dad went to Glasgow).  But whenever it took place, it's odds on that the grandad moved in the same 'milieu' as the soldier's parents, possibly drank with the soldier's sorrowing dad in the same pubs in or around Glasgow Cross.




    View Comment

  15. StevieBC 12th November 2018 at 22:53

    '..During the preparation and negotiations, who was actually representing the fans?.'


    A very pertinent question, StevieBC. 

    But at least in the 'review of policing of football' the SFSA has been recognised as a body likely to have something useful to contribute from those who provide basic cash.

    Members of the SFSA will , according to its latest newsletter, attend a focus group "to consider the review.

    'Report into Policing at Football in Scotland

    It was recently announced that Police Scotland has commissioned an Independent Review of Policing Football in Scotland. As part of this review DCC Mark Roberts (South Yorkshire Police) will conduct various Focus Groups supported by Mr Steve Neill a retired Chief Superintendent from Northumbria Police.

    The Scottish Football Supporters Association has been invited to the Supporters Focus Group that will be held on Thursday 22nd November 2018 at Hampden Stadium, Glasgow."

    I have said before that I attach a great value to 'independence' when it comes to representative bodies. It is absolutely imperative that whoever might be representing anyone should not be accepting monies from the organisations to whom they are making representation on behalf of their members.

    The SFSA is not in receipt of any funding or assistance from the SFA, unlike ( as I believe) Supporters Direct.That means that the SFSA can speak openly and honestly about matters that perhaps clubs, Leagues and the SFA might wish not to deal with, perhaps for valid reasons- but, realistically, because they would be afraid of the cost and/or legal implications of recommendations made by , say, the policing review.

    And I have received no money or other inducement to make this post!winkangry










    View Comment

  16. I have just had a text message from the Clam of Chowdah, a friend and benefactor of the late Dr Strabismus ( whom God preserve) of Utrecht. 

    He points out that the concept of 'peripheral- vision-enhancing' spectacles developed by the good Doctor  was not actually abandoned. It was, on the contrary, refined in more recent times  (and  in great secrecy) by ophthalmologists/optometrists here in Scotland and applied to the development of contact lenses that allowed for a 360 degree field of vision.

    He 'understands' that a certain Football Governance body, which he dare not name, is the sole purchaser of these contact lenses which ( whisper it) are issued to selected referees of selected football matches.

    That made me think. Might it explain anything?broken heart

    And my condolences to the family of Dr Strabismus, and thanks to the great Clam of Chowdah.


    View Comment

  17. Naegreetin@16.20

    Due to the nature of the game and in the long run all the teams need to be strong (not just Arbroath) It’s been said before that the clubs, although they are in competition with one another, are mutually dependent. A monopoly, duopoly or oligarchy as in England’s case, risks turning the game into nothing more than WWF wrestling. 

    View Comment

  18. It seems that UEFA doesn't trust clubs to tell the truth.

    FFP is a framework which clubs that wish to play in UEFA competitions agree to abide by. It relies on the cooperation of clubs to declare a complete and genuine financial position. While UEFA can test the information it receives, it relies on that information being fair and accurate reflections of a club's finances.

    They have just issued a statement on FFP that includes the above quote.

    Given that we are approaching the Celtic AGM, it is perhaps an opportunity for the club to fully take on board what the Res 12 guys have been telling them for the last five years.

    View Comment

  19. EJ


    With that in mind ,how likely is it that sevco 2012 will meet the FFP criteria for next season .

    Some have mentioned that they think the regular rants from statement o'clock for the most trivial gripes are more of the distraction plan to keep people's eyes of the real issues over Govan way .


    What if ?,,,,,,,

    a new club that had to abide by the rules of FFP would not be able to realise their high risk business plan .


    the club tried to circumvent the FFP rules by say ,inflating other costs ,say sponsorship or maintenance costs that could then be used to pay wages they could otherwise not afford ,would that be breaking the FFP rules ?.


    I am sure though if a club  spent say ,over 4,5.or £6m on maintenance people would notice it ,you could expect maybe heavy machinery ,major works lots of workmen on site ,work possibly staggered over an extended period as to avoid disruption to customers .


    Then again I know nothing of building costs or plant hire so maybe there could be expensive  MAJOR works done with behind the scenes . Although if it were my club ,I think I would be shouting it from the rooftops as a good news story of my commitment yo upgrading my ground 


    View Comment

  20. One effect of the UEFA news, whilst it may not yet be a tipping point, is that the wiggle room for the SFA is becoming ever more constrained.

    There has to be a recognition by now that fans are not forgetting the corruption at the heart of the RFC/TRFC saga any time soon.

    As we know the main reason for that is the truth that lies at the heart of our concerns.

    Easy to swat away a flight of fantasy, but not so easy to move on from proven wrongs.

    View Comment

  21. Ex Ludo 12 Nov 15.06

    Apparently £3 million a year over six years is the figure being mentioned. No idea how this compares with the current deal.with Sky/BBC.

    View Comment

  22. Ex Ludo 13th November 2018 at 00:57

    "..It’s been said before that the clubs, although they are in competition with one another, are mutually dependent. A monopoly, duopoly or oligarchy as in England’s case, risks turning the game into nothing more than WWF wrestling. "


    It is this mutual dependency that made the football cheating of that blasted knight so destructive in football terms, as well as severely damaging to the public welfare at large in terms of tax loss to the Exchequer.

    Who among our club presidents/CEOs would willingly welcome the likes of Murray back into their presence any more than Elliot Ness would welcome Capone into his?

    And Murray was not ever even accused let alone tried for crime, or had charges of contempt of court brought against him by the TOP!

    The continuing acceptance and propagation  by our Governance body of the Big Lie is as damaging to football as a sport as any financial chicanery, because it created and continues to encourage the belief that the Governance body is, basically, in cahoots with a card sharp  dealing from the bottom of the deck. 

    There is no fun in playing with cheats and /or suspected cheats. 

    It is certainly encouraging that UEFA's statement suggests the possibility of retrospective action.

    I'm not getting my hopes up just yet, though: I'd be happier if UEFA were to open a direct line of access to them by ordinary members of the football supporting public by means of which suspicious actions bordering on the criminal could be reported to them for investigation.

    View Comment

  23. paddy malarkey 14.26

    Tragic news Paddy.  28 is no age at all and thoughts go to his wife and family at this difficult time.

    Puts everything else we discuss on here into perspective.

    View Comment

  24. Wednesday 14th November


    Judgment (No appearance of counsel necessary)

    P341/17 The Panel on Takeovers and Mergers for orders under s955 against David King – Dentons UK – Lindsays


    I guess this is the formal publication of the judgement on the competency motion put forward by counsel for King last month, and what is being appealed to the Inner House on Friday.

    View Comment

  25. Listening to Clyde SSB this evening whilst preparing fajitas I was stunned to hear a sensible point being made by one of the callers. It was pointed out that retrospective 2 game bans on players can later prejudice one team from the game where an incident was missed as other teams get the benefit of the ban. Unfortunately the caller was identified as a Celtic fan who had brought the point up in relation to Livingston playing *Rangers. Wagons were immediately circled and the point was dismissed as “Oldfirmism” My term not theirs. Oh well.

    View Comment

  26. Ex Ludo 13th November 2018 at 19:21


    Imagine a player commits what should have been a red card offence but stays on the field, and has a huge influence on his team winning the game. A panel of anonymous ex-Refs then decide unanimously he should be banned from the next two games, one of which is against the closest rivals of the team he should have been punished against, and who previously suffered due to his remaining on the field. 

    The system as it stands is wide open to abuse, especially given the secrecy the SFA seems to utterly thrive on.  

    View Comment

  27. UTH,


    I wondered about the two game suspension.  I got this reply on CQN which gave me food for thought.


    "Not sure I agree with the withholding a ban until the player comes uo against the team he was sent off against, imagine playing against a team at the tail end of the season that look odds on to be relegated especially up here, there you go son a free kick at everyone and you wont be banned for 2 nearly 3 yrs,



    Or someone knows hes for the off at the season end, same scenario."

    View Comment

  28. I was reading the statement issued earlier by UEFA regarding FFP. One thing I have never been able to establish a definitive answer on is whether a member association has to report one of its clubs to UEFA for suspected non-compliance, i.e if the association simply decides to issue a licence it's highly unlikely any questions will ever be asked. Does anyone know if that is actually the case?

    View Comment

  29. If I recollect correctly, DCK boasted to the Perth(Australia) 'Rangers' Supporters Club that one of the best things he had done was to ship Carlos Peña to Cruz Azul, because as well as getting rid of him , his wages would be picked up in full by Cruz. (I subsequently read somewhere that it would only be half of his wages that Cruz would pay?) 

    I read this morning that the Mexican Piddler has had his loan agreement with Nexaca torn up, and that Cruz Azul are banging him back to Ibrox next week.

    If DCK was telling the truth ( hard to discern, sometimes) that's a good few bob to be found unexpectedly over the next 18 months. How much exactly?

    View Comment

  30. UTH, Jimbo et al


    I'd do away with the retrospective review system as it's entirely driven by fans with microphones and/or newspaper columns.

    I'd also suggest doing away with suspensions for orderings off and accumulated bookings.  This would be replaced by fining the clubs the amount of the guilty players wage (or a multiple thereof) for one week/two weeks. *

    The money raised would be used to implement VAR staffed by foreign referees. This would lessen the impact of the afore-mentioned MSM fans, and also those with whistles or flags and, hopefully raise standards in the long term.

    * Assuming that all players are correctly registered.

    View Comment

  31. John Clark 14th November 2018 at 10:36

    If DCK was telling the truth ( hard to discern, sometimes)

    As a rule of thumb, I always assume Dave King is lying, regardless of what subject he comments on.

    As Judge Brian Southwood noted, "he is a mendacious witness whose evidence should not be accepted on any issue unless it is supported by documents and other objective evidence”.

    It still amazes me to this day that this is the man the Ibrox hordes trusted to "get them back (cough) to their rightful place" and it amazes me even moreso that he was welcomed back into the fold by the utterly inept Scottish football authorities despite all the red flags, alarm bells and klaxons that preceded him.

    May they all reap what they sow.  

    View Comment

  32. Hearts have published their accounts for 2017/18

    Key 2017/18 Highlights:

    ·       Turnover over £12m

    ·       24% increase in gate receipts

    ·       8% increase in income from Commercial activities

    ·       Over £400k gain on sale of players

    ·       Strong balance sheet with net assets of £14.7m


    The club has again received donations from "benefactors" of £3m (2017 £2.5m) which has created the paper profit. I say paper profit, because the cash has gone straight out the door in helping pay for the Tynecastle redevelopment.

    FOH has also contributed £1.44m over the year, which has gone towards the redevelopment and starting to repay Ann Budge's original £2.4m loan to fund the CVA.

    At the financial year end, loans outstanding to Ann and her company stood at £4.08m. More than half of that is scheduled to be repaid from FOH contributions up to January 2020, but I suspect that further FOH funds will be used to repay debts beyond then.

    Overall, I'd say that the accounts show the club in a good place, but still a few years away from being debt free and being able to invest more money directly into the playing squad.  

    View Comment

  33. I wonder what Henry McLeish, in the concluding part of his 3-part analysis [in the pages of 'The Scotsman]of the problems facing our national game means by "The SFA must re-establish its authority, power and provenance within the game and once again become a powerful and unifying voice when football is increasingly fragmented"?

    It had power enough to think of creating a huge lie and to bully and badger weak members and a complicit SMSM into agreeing to 'believe' it,  and there are serious grounds for believing that it felt it had power enough, a number of years ago, to betray every value of Sporting truth and respect for business truth and governance transparency.

    Whatever he may think is wrong with present structures and relationships between the SFA and the SPFL will not be sorted until the full truth of the UEFA licence award to  RFC 2012(IL) formerly RFC plc. is investigated, and the Big Lie that TRFC Ltd is the Rangers of 1872 is openly declared to be a lie.

    View Comment

  34. OttoKaiser 14th November 2018 at 12:09

    CoS "competency" judgement now up:

    Result: Glib’s argument “repelled”


    No surprise there, but as is his M.O., King is spinning out the process by appealing the decision.

    I will be interested to see if the "proof" hearing of the contempt will still go ahead at the end of November as previously scheduled.

    King will be in the country at that time as the RIFC AGM is scheduled for 27 November.

    View Comment

  35. Headline from The Scotsman today;

    "Henry McLeish: We can fix Scottish football – and here’s how"


    Positive, optimistic headline… followed by a bland, uninspiring and over lengthy article, IMO.

    His main points, with my rebuttals added;


    Are you having a laugh?!  No, do the exact opposite.

    Disenfranchise the SFA: to try and drop all the historical baggage of corruption, bias, incompetence, etc. start again with a genuinely, all new organisation – and a new brand.



    … A different attitude will bring bigger benefits to the game."


    The main SPFL clubs are businesses first.  Their commercial self interest motivates them. 

    Managing attitudes and creating benefits for the game is/was the SFA's remit, which it has spectacularly failed to do for at least as long as I have lived.




    How's about just focusing on the simple things – like getting more boys and girls to play football, and proactively encourage their attendance at senior games?

    Up to the '80's when boys' played football in all weathers as their main hobby, there was a healthy conveyor belt of kids for the senior clubs to cherry pick.

    Don't think that scale of youth involvement will ever return but increased participation, involvement and attendance 'should' help to increase the throughput of decent players: boys and girls.

    View Comment

  36. OttoKaiser 14th November 2018 at 12:09

    '..CoS "competency" judgement now up:'


    Thank you, OttoKaiser-very timely.

    I have not by any means read the full thing , but I smile at seeing, after 45 pages of detailed discussion and lengthy quotes from past judgments and so on, the actual decision of Lady Woolffe is a one liner!

    Looking forward to the appeal.

    View Comment

  37. John Clark 

    14th November 2018 at 12:53


    Would there be any process to appeal a ruling like this.

    Maybe the crook could ask her husband what he thought. 

    View Comment

  38. In other thoughts.

    Its difficult to see how he can be found anything other than guilty.

    The Court of Session ordered him to do something. He didn't do it.

    I don't see how it could be much more straightforward. His only recourse was to question the Court's right to make the order. 

    View Comment

  39. John Clark 14th November 2018 at 12:53

    Looking forward to the appeal.


    Confirmed in the rolls today.



    Friday 16th November

    Single Bill at 10.00am

    P341/17 Pet: The Panel for Takeovers and Mergers for orders under section 955 – Dentons UK – Lindsays

    View Comment

  40. easyJambo 14th November 2018 at 16:25

    '..Confirmed in the rolls today…Friday 16th November"


    Thanks for that, eJ.

    I plan to be there.

    ( and I'll be in tomorrow for the Administrators' business)

    View Comment

  41. Homunculus 14th November 2018 at 16:11

    '…The Court of Session ordered him to do something. He didn't do it.'


    Aye, Homunculus, but the point about it being in the realms of 'criminal' contempt means that all the conditions necessary to establish that a crime has been committed ( including the 'mens rea'-deliberate guilty intent) have to proved as in any ordinary trial.

    I'm with eJ in assuming that this is King at it, to kick this into further appeal….

    I think it's part of his defective personality, while having to acknowledge that as an accused he has every right to use whatever legal means there may be to defend himself against any charge.

    We will not be the first to think that the 'Law' can sometimes depart from sanity.heart


    View Comment

  42. Candeias second yellow card explained.

    The Referee provided a statement confirming the nature of the offence in respect of which the Player was cautioned for a second time. He confirmed that he issued the caution to the Player as at the time he believed that the Player had been involved in two incidents, making gestures towards the opponent, the St Mirren FC No 35, after the scoring of a goal and becoming further involved with the opponent as he made his way upfield after celebrating the goal.

    View Comment

  43. John Clark 

    14th November 2018 at 17:42


    I'm not sure I agree with you.

    Firstly I don't see where they would go with lack of mens rea. Is he going to claim that he didn't know that failing to carry out a Court order is an offence. I doubt any Judge would wear that.

    Secondly, as I understand it what is actually required is to show that he intended to interfere with justice. Again, I don't see how he could argue that.


    View Comment

  44. Homunculus 14th November 2018 at 19:04

    Firstly I don't see where they would go with lack of mens rea.


    I can't see anyway out for him either.

    I suspect that he will say that he has been willing to make an offer all the way along, but that TOP and the SA authorities have made it impossible to comply.  He will attempt show that he made steps to comply but the TOP insisted on the cash being in a UK account etc. etc.

    An alternative could be that he will comply at the last minute before the proof hearing, thus testing the TOP's and CoS' resolve to follow though with the contempt charge, or will they be satisfied with compliance on its own.

    A further option remains that he sells up to one of his HK investors and walks away (from the UK), but leaves his loans in place and still to be repaid.

    View Comment

  45. easyJambo 

    14th November 2018 at 19:44


    Has he not already tried the "I cant comply because of other people" option when it went to the Court in the first place.

    The Court then ordered him to get on with it and he has so far failed, leading to where we are just now.

    Surely it would be pointless to try that again, or did I make that up in my head.

    View Comment

  46. Homunculus 14th November 2018 at 19:04

    '..Is he going to claim that he didn't know that failing to carry out a Court order is an offence.'



    I think he was claiming that whatever it is it is not a criminal offence, and that if it were, then the TOP did not have what he considered is the necessary concurrence of the Lord Advocate and that therefore their 'Minute' was not competent and their whole approach was wrong. The concurrence of the Lord Advocate would be needed because of the possibility of a penal punishment (jail or fine or both)and the form of approach to the court would be by way of petition supported by the L.A. 

    What will be interesting will be to see what happens on Friday.

    Lady Woolffe's opinion was only about whether the TOP's approach was correct. The Appeal judge(s) will either agree with that, and remit the case for hearing by the 'lower' house; or disagree, and leave it open to the TOP to seek the Lord Advocate's concurrence in a Petition which might mean going for a full blown criminal trial in a few months' time.

    There can be no way that King can avoid the question of whether he is in contempt either in civil contempt or criminal. That would require the TOP to abandon any pretence that it is  Regulatory body with teeth to deal with folk who do not comply: they could not put themselves in such a ludicrous position. The matter simply must be resolved.

    View Comment

  47.  Homunculus 14th November 2018 at 20:20

    '…Is the Court of Session not a civil Court, why would they be dealing with a criminal matter. 


    The problem seems to me to be that 'contempt' is sometimes criminal and sometimes not: it is 'sui generis'- each is a unique 'genus' as it were, a one-off to be decided on the whole circumstances.

    Under Sec 955 of the Companies Act 2006, which is what the TOP are using, conviction would carry the possibility of a prison sentence. 

    I imagine that that automatically would require that the charge would be viewed as a criminal charge: and therefore all the protections given to an accused would  have to be in place- fair trial, access to legal advice, no compulsion to give evidence, and so on. (Not even I would try seriously to argue that anyone, even DCK, should be imprisoned without having had a fair trial)

    I think the fact that it took Lady Woolffe 45 pages to try to get to an understanding of what 'mechanical' procedure should be used in a case like this before even the actual question 'is he in contempt' can be properly asked shows how (ridiculously?) complicated the question is. 

    Roll on Friday. I assume ( or I hope) that it will become clear whether this alleged instance of contempt falls into the 'criminal' or 'civil' category, and that the possibility of  a jail sentence is not anyhow removed.


    View Comment

Comments are closed.