Comment on We’re Gonny Need Another Baw. by Bogs Dollox.

    StevieBC 22nd February 2019 at 14:12   10   0   Rate This From SFA website; "Notice of Claim | Daniel Bachmann, Kilmarnock FC Friday 22 February 2019 Player: Daniel Bachmann, Kilmarnock FC Match: Rangers FC v Kilmarnock FC on Wednesday 20 February 2019 Competition: The Scottish Cup Offence: A2 – Violent Conduct Claim: Wrongful Dismissal Fast Track Tribunal Hearing: Friday 22 February 2019" ========= Well, with the SFA CEO's recent, staunch defence of Scottish Refs, I'm guessing this ridiculous red card will be upheld?   However, if a red card is rescinded is there AUTOMATIC demotion or action against the ref? (I don't know.)   And as an aside, I had a few wee bets on the TRFC v Killie game.  I thought it would be a close game, but sending off a goalkeeper in only 25 minutes following a highly contentious off the ball incident changed the game completely. Whether a red was justified or not, I think everyone would agree that the ref's decision materially influenced the outcome of the game.   My perspective is: why bet on games at all when the results are not solely dependent on the teams’ performances? [Agreed, betting is a mug’s game, but you have to have some vices…]  



    Not if your a Scottish referee it's not.

    Bogs Dollox Also Commented

    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    Last night I was listening to Fraser The Blazer, the players union rep. He says that every player in the PFA is against the plastic pitches.I am too. 

    We should do what the Dutch Eredvisie top teams have done and fund the wee teams to replace them with grass. In Scotland only the SFA & SPFL and Celtic have the real money but the others could chip in according to their means.

    Thoughts please.

    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    easyJambo 15th February 2019 at 22:12

    I'm sure that many Rangers fans will see that result as a great success and a vindication of King's m.o. of stalling the regulatory processes at every turn.


    Don't always make that assumption. I speak to many Rangers fans these days and they are either scunnerd with his inability to deliver the glory days again or they just don't go and have no interest in a "Scottish Football because it is shite" and have moved over to the EPL (this I think was a trend anyway)


    Acceptances for 18.9m shares with the old share base would have easily met the 50% threshold, so the gerrymandering has saved him around £3.78m, offset against the legal and other professional costs incurred in avoiding compliance for so long.


    Those legal and other costs would have been the thick end of £2.5M. So for money he can apparently afford to spend or was skint he has put himself before the Scottish Courts as a confirmed Liar. Does he really believe the judges don't talk to each other and that his card isn’t marked?

    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    Timtim 15th February 2019 at 00:09

    I think what Williams is trying to say is that the undertakings are not legally enforceable.


    Recent Comments by Bogs Dollox

    Accountability via Transparency.
    One for the lawyers. Do Bonnyrigg have any legal case they could pursue.

    Effectively they and the other clubs who lost their bond money have been the subjects of a scam.

    It cannot be acceptable that the rules can be changed retrospectively as it's contrary to natural justice and legal convention.


    Accountability via Transparency.
    John Clark 6th May 2019 at 23:39


    Bogs Dollox 6th May 2019 at 23:12

    '..They facilitated the process of letting a club back into the league that..'

    Steady, Bogs Dollox!  They admitted a new club into Scottish Football.



    Accountability via Transparency.
    John Clark 6th May 2019 at 23:10


    On the Pinsent Mason 'investigation',  there is this 


    I love this wee bit " The Investigation Committee is satisfied that a thorough investigation was conducted despite the inherent limitations of a private inquiry."

    I have referred on this blog ( geez, a bloody age ago!) to the staff appraisal report, in which the Reporting Officer writes" Mr X has performed all his duties entirely to his own satisfaction".

    'Thoroughness' and 'inherent limitations' are not quite comfortable bedfellows, wouldn't you say?

    Honest to God.



    The point being of course that Sevco were allowed to "whitewash" themselves by appointing a firm to report to them first and not to the SFA direct. Why? (I know we know the answer but our clubs don't appear to care).

    Like I said above I spoke to a PM partner at the time who was less than impressed by his firms output. But pay the piper call the tune.




    Accountability via Transparency.
    easyJambo 6th May 2019 at 18:43


    Bogs Dollox 6th May 2019 at 16:05

    torrejohnbhoy6th May 2019 at 10:27
    My take on this is that the switcheroo was necessary for the benefit of the SFA because it had been brought to their attention that Whyte was behind Sevco 5088 Ltd.


    I think you'll find that the SFA put their collective fingers in their ears, closed their eyes, while singing la la la la la, as a club known as Rangers was resurrected.

    The SFA's eyebrows were only raised to the possibility of Whyte still being involved maybe 9 months after the switcheroo.

    That led to the SFA allowing TRFC to seek an independent inquiry into themselves. The inquiry was conducted by Pinsent Mason during April/May 2013. That report has never seen the light of day, other than an extract that was published by TRFC to the effect that there was no connection between Whyte and TRFC (Sevco Scotland), which was self evident from day one.  That was enough for the SFA to say "Aye, OK that's good enough for us. Keep calm and carry on"

    Who knows what other information about Sevco 5088 and the switcheroo was uncovered in the investigation that remains confidential.


    The SFA did the opposite of putting their fingers in their ears and shouting Lalafukinla. They facilitated the process of letting a club back into the league that under any laws of the game in any other country they would have been Sine die. Such was the scale of their cheating.

    Not convinced the SFA didn't know Whyte was Sevco 5088 at the time. Why the switcheroo –  followed by a public confession that Green had shafted Whyte?

    If Whyte was involved 9 months after the switcheroo when the SFA raised an eyebrow then he was in on the switcheroo. No?

    What made them raise an eyebrow? (look at the money being invested in Sevco 5088 Ltd – it was all switched to Sevco Scotland Ltd. Whose money was it? Why did they allow it to be switched?). Was he about to be declared personna non grata in Scottish football. A timeline would be useful here.

    I spoke to a PM partner at the time. His opinion was that their report was a whitewash and even though they were paid handsomely he wishes they had never been appointed.

    Lawyers Eh? Always seeking justice?

    Accountability via Transparency.
    torrejohnbhoy6th May 2019 at 10:27
    My take on this is that the switcheroo was necessary for the benefit of the SFA because it had been brought to their attention that Whyte was behind Sevco 5088 Ltd.