Comment on We’re Gonny Need Another Baw. by John Clark.

    StevieBC 23rd February 2019 at 13:51

    '..JC, go on, go on, go on… burn your bus pass and apply!..'



    You know, it's been a wheen o' years since I saw a job application form, so I might be wholly wrong in considering the SFA's application form wholly out-dated and possibly (at least unconsciously) potentially prejudicial to certain applicants.

    Have a look at it and see if you agree.

    I don't think I'd be too happy to complete such a form.


    John Clark Also Commented

    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    I don't know how long this vacancy ad has been on the SFA website. Has someone quit very recently, or is it a new post?

    "Referee Administration Manager

    Closing Date: Monday 4th March 2019


    Job Title         Referee Administration Manager

    Reporting to    Head of Referee Operations"



    p style=”margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px”> 

    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    Finloch 22nd February 2019 at 08:45

    '….there is an unspoken nod and a wink realisation that the divide has been and is indeed still good for differentiation/polarisation and hence business at both of our two biggest clubs


    Not to mention being still good for the SMSM! – which, instead of hounding out all of the financial rogues who brought Rangers of 1872 to ruin ,and ripping apart the rottenness at the heart of Scottish Football governance made manifest first by the UEFA licence scam and then by 5-Way Agreement , bent and continues to bend every effort into propagating untruths and myths.




    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    Cluster One 22nd February 2019 at 11:04

    '..nor will the Scottish FA countenance such a notion,” Maxwell said in a statement'


    If there was no discussion of the possibility of utilising the services of referees from outside Scotland, on whose authority does the  CEO speak when he makes such  a definitive statement which rules out  future discussion?

    What if there were to be another referees' strike, or other sudden circumstance which reduced the number of Scottish referees available at any given time?


    Recent Comments by John Clark

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    dpj 21st November 2019 at 08:39

    '...will revert back to full Thistle ownership after 10 years…'


    Thank you, dpj : I was reading it as meaning the land would be handed over ten years from now!   

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    easyJambo 21st November 2019 at 13:16

    '..the Accounting Period for LBJ Sports Apparel Ltd (trades as Elite Group) has been extended from 21 November 2019 to 31 March 2020.'


    I gather that one set of circumstances in which  a company might wish to change its accounting year end is when profits are falling. The Companies House guidance  gives an example:

    Example: Your profits for the 12 months to 30 June 2014 are £50,000.  The Corporation Tax on this will be £10,000 (£50,000 x 20%), payable on 31 March 2015.  For the 6 months to 31 December 2014 the Company made a loss of £20,000.  If the Company extends its reporting period to 18 months to 31 December 2014, then total profits will be just £30,000 (£50,000 – £20,000).  Two thirds of this will be taxed in the 12 months to 30 June 2014 and one third in the 6 months to 31 December 2014 (tax periods cannot be any longer than 12 months).  This will result in Corporation Tax of only £4,000 being due on 31 March 2015, compared £10,000 if the year end was unchanged.

    This is not an illegal fiddle, but if a company was feeling the pinch it might find it helpful to defer paying tax due. [A company can do this only once in 5 years, though]

    Is LBJ  Apparels finding things difficult?

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Just in from my wasted trip to Parliament House and a mere 800  metres in the Commonwealth pool.

    It must be quite difficult to schedule available work to match the expected availability of judges so I wouldn't want to be too critical of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service for perhaps hoping that a judge might become free earlier than thought because of last minute withdrawal or settlement of a case.

    And there was a wee bonus: a courteous step-aside by Lord Brodie as we met head-on going round a corner in the corridor.

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    "Weir, 71, has purchased a majority shareholding and a holding in land at the club's Firhill Stadium.

    The life-long supporter will immediately give the land back to the Scottish Championship club…

    ..The land purchased from Firhill Developments is the south terrace area and main stand and it will revert back to full Thistle ownership after 10 years under the terms of the deal."

    I am confused. What does that mean? 'immediately give the land back..' and 'the land purchased …….will revert back to full Thistle ownership after 10 years…'

    Is it just lousy reporting by someone as fundamentally ignorant of these things as I am? 

    Can any Thistle fan tell me. 

    And I remember with fondness my personal, if sort of family second-hand links with Thistle, so I am not being critical or unappreciative of the generous gesture by Colin Weir.

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Not to wander too far off topic , can I say that I do actually have many other interests.

    One of these is in looking into the local history of the place where I grew up. [ The internet is wonderful] 

    This evening , exploring the history of Dalbeth , I found that the lands of Dalbeth came into the hands of the Hopkirk family in 1754- the family fortunes were made in tobacco, and the Hopkirk chap was a plantation owner (and we can presume, a slave owner).

    One or other of the Hopkirks was connected with, or founded, or owned the Glasgow Arms bank.

    That prompted me to look up the City of Glasgow bank which I knew had gone bust in 1878.

    I was led then into an account of the trial of the directors of that bank

    And all of a sudden, I bethought myself of the trial of certain other directors. 

    And of how murky that interface between 'business' and 'law' and right and wrong and guilt and punishment can be. 

    At the trial, the Dean of Faculty defended the accused in a 4-hour speech. 

    The accused were nevertheless found guilty. And Lord Moncrieff passed sentence.

    And I was struck by this observation in what I suppose was a newspaper of the time :

    [ Curiously, the illustration of the Court proceedings seems to show a jury box with only 12 jurors?]

    The Statist agreed. ‘So far as the sentence goes, it would appear to be a safer thing to make away with six or seven millions of money, and thereby to filch from thousands of affluent families everything they possess in the world, than to pick a pocket of a few pence.’ It would have been interesting to know what a Dundee mill girl, whom Moncreiff had sentenced to eight years in prison back in 1870 for stealing a silver watch and some clothing from her landlady, might have thought of this outcome."

    And I for some reason found myself thinking " plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose"

    Bast.rds with money/influence  get away with things 

    Edit: well, maybe there's a certain up-his-own-royal-.rse personage who might not entirely get away with things.

    Truth is the great leveller.