We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.


Some of us are old enough to remember the days when we played football in the streets with lamp posts for goals. The “baw” in my day was a plastic “Hampden Frido” (with wee studs that left yer forehead looking like a golf ball when heading it – see picture) and a “Wembley Mettoy”.

Cue memories of MouldMasters and days of pain and glory

But I digress.

The plastic ball was prone to bursting and on a good day or evening a replacement was secured by the original version of crowd funding.; However, the Calton then was a poor neighbourhood and sometimes the “baw” depended on the generosity of a single provider.

This came with risks because generous folk can still be bad losers and if the provider’s team of rags, taigs and bluenoses (remember when that didn’t matter)  was getting  a drubbing or a high shot was deemed a goal but he protested because he was only 4 feet 6  tall and ,with no crossbar ,height is but a subjective perspective, hence argumentative, or perhaps the goal that created a 10 goal  gap occasionally saw the baw ,metaphorical if not physically, land on the slates, at which point the provider and now owner, out of his sense of entitlement as owner, grab the baw and threatened to storm off in the huff.

As long as the game was everything and in the Calton then EVERYTHING was fitbaw, the bawless plebs were only too willing to reduce the imaginary cross bar height or take their foot off the gas, hence the derogatory saying of those who capitulate too easily “they hivnae any baws”.

Memories! Wit are they like and what is the connection to modern day Scottish professional football?

I’m indebted to this article by The Battered Bunnet first posted on CQN on 30 June 2012 at  https://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/abject-failure-of-leadership/comment-page-2/#comment-1479329  since reproduced on other blogs including SFM but worth reproducing here:

“Senior Hampden source tells ch4news cannot see how RFC were allowed to play lastseason at all. Doesn’t believe they met finance criteria…”

Alex Thomson – Twitter

Alex Thomson’s tweets yesterday re ‘senior Hampden source’ casting doubt on Rangers’ eligibility to obtain a Club Licence last year were rather intriguing.

We have by now a clearer picture of the failure of governance at Rangers through the David Murray/ John McClelland/ Alastair Johnston/ Craig Whyte years, albeit we await further definitive details from the judgement of the Tax Tribunal. Essentially, over a period spanning 2 decades, the means that Rangers used to sustain its football operation utterly disregarded the requirements of both corporate governance and football regulation. While the scandal related solely to payments and procedures within Rangers, we could hope that it was contained internally.

However, the revelation that Rangers paid former manager Souness via EBT while he was manager at Blackburn Rovers confirmed for the first time that the scandal had become external. I understand that RangersTaxCase and Alex Thomson have further information on the extent of payments to Souness and also to Walter Smith, and look forward to the details being revealed, but it is now clear that the Rangers ‘toxin’ had leached out of the club by 2001.

The compelling question now is: How far did the toxin spread?

Was it contained within the ‘outer circle’ of former Rangers employees, however inexplicable such payments may appear? Or did it extend beyond that outer circle, and contaminate senior figures in the Game in Scotland. The contamination does not relate solely to payments from Rangers’offshore trust, but more subtly perhaps, the behaviour of individuals in positions of influence.

We know that Rangers’ Executive Chairman JohnMcClelland was an SPL Board member during the startling ramp up of EBT use from 2003 to 2005, and was himself a beneficiary of the scheme.

We know that Rangers’ Chief Executive Martin Bain was an SPL Board member 2008 to 2011, coinciding with the receipt by Rangers of the HMRC assessments on the EBT scheme, of which he was himself a beneficiary.

We know that current SFA President Campbell Ogilvie was simultaneously an SFA Director and Executive Director and Company Secretary of Rangers, and was a beneficiary of the scheme.

These parallel functions of course present a profound conflict of interest for each man, at once implementing a scam on the Game to disguise a fraud on the Revenue, while owing specific legal duties of care to the Game being scammed.

So far, so shabby.

Thomson’s tweets yesterday indicate a doubt on the part of a ‘senior Hampden source’ that Rangers were eligible to hold a Club Licence last season, thus disqualifying them from participating in European competition, and perhaps Scottish Football too. Is this doubt grounded in a retrospective review of the licence qualifying criteria given what has emerged recently? Or was there a ‘blind eye’ turned by the SFA’s Licensing Committee to information in the public domain at the time of the Licence application? In this respect the ‘Wee Tax Case’ represented a fundamental failure against at least one Licence criterion.

The proposals to the SFL clubs this week make it plain that should the SFA conclude the outstanding Disciplinary issues against Rangers with either suspension or expulsion of Rangers from the SFA(perhaps the only sanctions remaining available to the SFA following Lord Glennie’s Judicial Review) that the Game will face ‘financial meltdown’.

Concurrently, the SPL has adjudged Rangers to have a prima facie case to answer in respect of SPL rule breaches on player registration, the outcome of which will confirm that the club fielded ineligible players in upwards of 400 SPL matches. The only possible disciplinary outcome given such a sustained breach of SPL rules, corrupting the completion as it did from its inception in 1999 to 2011, is expulsion from theSPL.

As a consequence, the SFA, as the authority responsible for implementing FIFA’s Rules on the Registration of Players, will be required to act on these breaches of FIFA rules. Again, expulsion for what amounts to Championship fixing is inevitable.

Curiously, the SFL, this week asking its members to vote to admit the Sevco Rangers club into their top tier, has the same issue given that its League Cup competition featured dozens of ineligible Rangers players through the years, and further claims by Hugh Adam that its‘Premier Division’ competition during the 1990s was similarly bent through the use of ‘off the books’ payments to players by Rangers.

The scale of it all is breath-taking and were the rules of the Game to be applied, Rangers FC would be expelled from each Governing body in turn, before we even consider the extraordinary breaches of faith and duties by co-serving Directors.

But according to the SFL/SFA/SPL circular to clubs, “Rangers Terminated or Suspended’ will cause “Financial Meltdown”.

To avoid this meltdown, it is proposed by the Executives of the combined SFL/SFA/SPL that the rules of the Game are not applied to Rangers, and that the clubs effectively rewrite the rule book to permit what remains of the club to compete at the top of the SFL.

In effect, according to the Governing Bodies,the Rules of the Game CANNOT be applied to Rangers or the Game’s finances will‘meltdown’.

The corollary question this raises is: For how long have the Governing bodies been so unable to apply the Rules of the Game to Rangers? Is this a new epiphany, or a longer standing recognition?

When Rangers submitted their allegedly ineligible application for a Club Licence in 2011, did the SFA recognise that Rangers failing to participate in Europe would cause the club to fail, as it subsequently did? Were the Rules ignored to avoid ‘financial meltdown’ then?

How far did the toxin spread?

Did this recognition extend back to the period following the disintegration of Murray International, hitherto Rangers’ source of continuing funding? Was the season of ‘Honest Mistakes’ some absurd, dutiful reaction to the recognition that should Rangers fail, Scottish Football would melt down?

Was the ineligible status of so many of Rangers’ first team players noticed prior to the SPL’s Inquiry commencing on 5th March? Was it noticed in an Audit as part of the SFA’s Club Licensing process some years ago? Was it noticed by the recent SFA Chief Executive Gordon Smith, who as an Agent had represented players on Rangers’ books through his Directorship of Prostar Management and other Agencies?

Beyond the duplicity of Ogilvie, McClelland and Bain, were Rangers’ irregular practices known to others at the SFA and SPL,others who chose not to address the matter, thus further contaminated the Governing Bodies with the Rangers toxin?

It is heartening that the Liquidators of Rangers plc will be instructed to examine all of the circumstances surrounding the failure of Rangers as a corporate entity. Equally, perhaps the detail contained in the Tax Tribunal judgement will reveal further connections,hitherto unknown.

What is likely to remain hidden from view though, is the full extent to which key influencers at the Governing Bodies were aware of Rangers’ conduct and circumstances, and how this affected their behaviour and their decision making in applying the rules of the Game to that club.

What we can say with certainty now though is that the people holding office at the Governing Bodies are unable or unwilling to apply the Rules of the Game to Rangers, despite the breaches being fundamentally and profoundly corrupt. The SFA and SPL, despite having outstanding disciplinary cases against Rangers that will, in all other circumstances see the club expelled from the Game, are intent to delete the cases provided the SFL clubs accept the Sevco Rangers into the SFL’s top division.

The Rules of the Game cannot be applied to Rangers.

When the rules cannot be applied, the Game itself is broken, and we can say now with some certainty that the Rangers toxin has spread beyond the club, its former employees and Directors of the Governing Bodies, and contaminated the very Game itself. The Office Bearers of the SFA,whose FIFA mandate requires them to “protect and foster the Game” in Scotland,and “protect it from abuses”, have contrived to do the contrary, to the point where the Game is stricken.

It is for this reason that a thorough clear out of the Office Bearers in the Governing Bodies is now a prerequisite to the Game recovering from the poison inflicted upon it by Rangers. The dissolution of the Governing Bodies is perhaps appropriate.

Clear your desk Gentlemen, the bus to ignominy departs shortly.

The position that the SFA and then SPL found themselves in is perfectly clear from the foregoing. Desperately keen for commercial reasons to hold onto the “baw” they changed the rules, but never took ownership of the baw from the owner and so are still beholden to him.

Hence the blog title “We Are Going To Need Another Baw “ because the one currently in play is burst, stuffed with £14M worth of share vouchers.

What was done in 2012 was understandably commercially necessary, but the price to be paid was twofold:

  1. Not just to the integrity of our game then but the ongoing price now, where all energies are directed at continuing to pretend that the rules are followed without fear of favour.
  2. The idea that the Scottish game cannot survive without a “ Rangers”  is one that most folk would accept but the danger arising, which is unacceptable, is that because of it “Rangers” think they can do as they please as a result which requires rules to be reinforced. And seen to be reinforced.

They clearly aren’t under the SFA’s own rule enforcing process called the Judicial Panel Protocol  https://www.sfm.scot/jpp-perverting-justice/   not to mention Club Licensing processes that have so far manged to avoid the scrutiny that, had Resolution 12 been acted upon in 2013,  would have resulted in changes that would protect the game from all those who think it is still their baw.

The general perception of supporters is that lessons have not been learned from past behaviour.

Until there is evidence that they have, for example: the Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal investigating at snail’s pace the process followed in 2011 that allowed a UEFA licence to be granted to Rangers FC without question, coming to conclusion or providing reasons why it cannot by the spring, the perception will continue to be   “Its all about Rangers”  followed by what is the point?.

Is it not about time now that the fear that drove thinking in 2012 was faced and recognised by all clubs as unfounded and a new integrity filled baw was used?

What is there to fear now from restoring integrity to its rightful place, unless of course you were party to the thinking that kicked the integrity of our game to death in 2012 and are still in a position of influence?


  1. Just wonder if the Glasgow derby – with the away bus allegedly pelted with smoke bombs, the number of incidents missed allegedly by all 4 match officials – had been a European tie… what action would UEFA have taken?


    And rather than strain their necks to look the other way, should the SFA / SPL not aspire to UEFA standards?

    I know…

    Regardless, Happy New Year to Internet Bampots everywhere!

    …and here's hoping for a more competent and honest SFA/SPFL in 2019. 

    God loves a trier.  heart


    View Comment

  2. Happy New Year to one and all! Let's hope 2019 is a year of reckoning and justice.

    Scottish Football needs strong clubs competing on a level playing field.

    View Comment

  3. Did anyone watch Only an Excuse last night? I have long thought this programme should have been ditched many years ago. Last night did nothing to change my mind. Like everything else in the Scottish media its happiest days appeared to be when Rangers were funded by the Bank of Scotland way beyond what they should have been, followed by them stealing money from the taxpayer to fund success. 

    View Comment

  4. I noticed that Hibs lost to Hearts on Saturday and had 3 players on duty with Australia. I thought a game could be postponed if a team had 3 or more players away to play an International. Has this rule been changed or did Hibs not bother to apply? Does anyone know?

    View Comment

  5. Ballyargus 1st January 2019 at 23:08






    Rate This



    I noticed that Hibs lost to Hearts on Saturday and had 3 players on duty with Australia. I thought a game could be postponed if a team had 3 or more players away to play an International. Has this rule been changed or did Hibs not bother to apply? Does anyone know?


    Postponement and International Selection

    G7 A Club shall be entitled to apply to the Board for the postponement of any Official Match where three or more of its Players who would otherwise have participated in such match are unavailable through international selection and, following receipt of such an application, the Board may postpone and rearrange the relevant Official Match in accordance with Rule G3.

    G3 Subject to Rule C42, the Board shall have discretion to schedule and to reschedule the date, time and/or venue of any Official Match as it shall consider appropriate.


    Maybe they just got told no.


    View Comment

  6. Ballyargus 1st January 2019 at 23:08

    I noticed that Hibs lost to Hearts on Saturday and had 3 players on duty with Australia. I thought a game could be postponed if a team had 3 or more players away to play an International. Has this rule been changed or did Hibs not bother to apply? Does anyone know?

    Hibs could have asked for a postponement under FIFA rules, but chose not to do so. None of the three had played in Hibs last win (v Celtic). Neil Lennon probably made a decision to go ahead with the game in the knowledge that Hearts had been struggling of late and that it might be better to play them now rather than in a few weeks when Hearts squad will be boosted by players returning from injury or new signings.

    Martin Boyle was injured in a warm up game for the Aussies and will now be out for what has been described as an "indefinite period".

    View Comment

  7. Happy New Year Guys, Jean and all the ladies. I mean that sincerely. 

    On a green field, 11 v 11 with a decent display of refereeing (under the circumstances), in my opinion, it was a fairly contested game. The result embarrassed the visitors.

    Can’t really say much more than that; the game was lost when the team sheet was outed.

    Here’s to 2019. Let’s keep the baw pumped up. 


    View Comment

  8. A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous 2019 to everyone in the SFM community. Here’s to friendships, past, present and future, and to a shared love of a fair and honest game.

    View Comment

  9. upthehoops 1st January 2019 at 19:39

    Did anyone watch Only an Excuse last night?…


    A bit harsh there uth.  I thought that the show had actually improved this year.

    No really.

    Because I did actually laugh at 1 joke… about leaving the Scottish team in a cave.

    Other than that though it was just woeful, as per.


    View Comment

  10. From the ET today;

    "Top Rangers executives enjoy salary boost as losses DOUBLE"

    By Martin Williams @Martin1Williams …"


    An article NOT written by the resident TRFC cheerleader, Jack.

    This article MUST have been sanctioned from RIFC/TRFC.

    King looking to;

    • deflect… away from a lack of cash to buy players?


    • get rid of Directors… mibbees for not being 'loyal enough' towards King?


    View Comment

  11. I’d like to wish a happy new year to everyone on SFM! I hope 2019 brings you all good health and good spirits. No matter our differences in football aligencies and opinions, I get the impression everybody on here is good at heart  


    On the footballing front it makes a nice change to be able to come on having actually had a good result against Celtic. However, I am far from the gloating type within the Rangers fan base. Yes we got our first old firm win in 90 minutes since 2012, and yes we controlled the game better than I expected. However with all that possession and attack we managed only one goal. This in a game that was probably the worst I have seen Celtic play, and yet was a few inches of an offside position away of a draw or defeat for us! We were also lucky to keep Morelos on the pitch as I felt each of his four petulant kicks or punches were deserving of yellow cards! I fear now the hyperbole in the media and fan sites will start getting out of hand and add much pressure to a very mediocre squad who have shown they can’t handle pressure! As always the SMSM are doing us absolutely no favours. 


    If rangers are to win the title this year it will be due to how badly Celtic have been playing and nothing to do with our own team have played. 


    On a final note, I don’t know if there are any Kilmarnock fans on here but I’d like to congratulate them on their incredible performance, and a manager who must surely be on the radar of some of the big clubs down south! They have easily been the team of 2018, and whilst you always want your own team to win the league I would certainly not begrudge Kilmarnock if they win it! In fact I think it would be the perfect fairytale football story!


    My predictions: league: 1st. Celtic, 2nd. Kilmarnock, 3rd. Rangers. Scottish Cup: Rangers. I hope I’m wrong about the league but not convinced! 


    All the best to everyone on here!

    View Comment

  12. I’m not sure why the number of thumbs down considering I wished everyone a happy new year and wished them all the best, admitted my team is mediocre and we only won due to an off day by Celtic, and then praised Kilmarnock indecision  I can’t decide if the thumbs down are from Rangers fans, Celtic fans, haters of new year or those with a dislike of Kilmarnock cheeky

    View Comment

  13.    DBD

       Don't worry aboot the thumb-dooners. Your contributions are always welcome. All the best to you and yours. 

       Equally, a happy new year to all 
    (Except the thumb-dooners who offer zero explanation why they thumb-doon….I suspect they don’t know themselves)

    View Comment

  14. The daughter's man showed me this . It appears some TRFC fans are raging at Craig Gordon for not being in place for the minute's silence , and raging at some coughing during the 30 second silence , whch appears to me to be broken by shouts from TRFC fans . From the Bears Den .


    View Comment

  15. For my own satisfaction, not having had any kind of response from Mr Ray Gatt of 'The Australian' newspaper, I have sent the following email to the Editor of that journal.

    • to:letters@theaustralian.com.au

      ‎2‎ ‎Jan at ‎22‎:‎53

      Dear Editor,

      Interesting to find from his reference today to the defunct' New Zealand Knights' that Ray Gatt understands the concept of a soccer club ceasing to exist as a soccer club when it has its licence withdrawn by the FAA.


      It would appear therefore that it is not ignorance , but perversity of mind, that causes him to assert that the 'Old Firm' still exists, even though one of its two members is in Liquidation and ceased to exist as a professional football club entitled to participate in Scottish professional football.


      The football club now playing as 'Rangers' is a club founded in 2012, with no football history going back further than that year. It   therefore has no title to be regarded as the 'Rangers' that was founded in 1872, or as the club that was the other half of the pair that a generation of more professional sports writers was honest and cynical enough to dub 'the Old Firm' in the early 20th century.


      Gatt's willingness to trot out the self-evident nonsense that 'The Rangers Football Club founded in 2012' is the same club as the club that was founded in 1872 and has been in Liquidation since 2012, stripped of its membership of the Scottish Professional Football League and therefore of membership of the Scottish Football Association, mirrors the deceitful nonsense printed by the Scottish main-stream media, which , after banner headlines six years ago proclaiming the 'death of Rangers' and an end to 142 years of history, soon began to propagate the myth that:


       'Administration' , followed by the failure of the Administrators to find an outright purchaser, 


      followed by their failure to prevent Liquidation, 


      followed by an abject application by 'Sevco Scotland Ltd'  to the then Scottish Premier League  for membership as a new club( application refused) 


      followed by an even more abject application for membership of the first division of the then Scottish Football League (refused) 



       followed by a yet more abject application for the second division (refused) 


      followed by a the reluctant admission of the applicant club to the third division  in  heinous betrayal of principle  aptly described by the late Turnbull Hutton ( then the club chairman of Raith Rovers FC) as 'corruption'


      was simply an everyday 'change of ownership' !


      Anyone who knows anything knows that there was no simple 'change of ownership' of a club. Rangers of 1872 died because it went bust, as other clubs (such as New Zealand Knights) have done. 


      And journalists who deny that certain fact are no better than ..  ( fill in the blanks yourself).

      My advice to you as editor of 'The Australian' is to check Mr Gatt's capacity/willingness  to check his facts. 


      And also, perhaps, to learn at least to acknowledge correspondence.


      I am posting this email on the blog  sfm.scot, for the information of its readership. 


      I am in Birkdale, Queensland at the moment, on holiday from Edinburgh, so I will sign with my blog pseudonym, but of course if you request it, I will happily give you my real name and real address, on condition that as a result I will not be exposed to risk of physical violence from the deniers of liquidation! Or from Ray Gatt himself!Emoji


      Yours sincerely,

      John Clark"






    View Comment

  16. The daughter's man showed me this . It appears some TRFC fans are raging at Craig Gordon for not being in place for the minute's silence , and raging at some coughing during the 30 second silence , whch appears to me to be broken by shouts from TRFC fans . From the Bears Den .

    This is why I hate minutes of silence at football games. 39,998 fans can respect the silence impecibly but all it takes is two or three idiots on both sides to ruin it. 

    View Comment

  17. Ex Ludo 

    2nd January 2019 at 16:13


    There's no need to ask, everyone already knows the answer.

    The club which employed him was placed into liquidation and as such his contract of employment no longer held him. Given that he was an international in his prime (about 28 at the time) he was able to move to England and write his own ticket. He allegedly earned around £60,000 a week at Southampton. 

    He is now 34 and moving into the last 6 months of his contract, presumably not being offered another one. A move to a lower standard of football, on a free transfer, will probably extend his playing career. Which in turn may extend his international career. 

    The supporters will ignore the fact that he "walked away", the same as they have already done with McGregor and Lafferty. 

    View Comment

  18. Davis must be desperate to choose to return to Ibrox.

    He must have received a huge amount of personal abuse – and threats – for simply exercising his employment rights in 2012.

    The bears must now be desperate to welcome Davis… and when they are probably expecting a decent- money player purchase, from "all that extra Europa League cash".

    A perfect match then.


    View Comment

    • 13:03, 29 JUL 2012UPDATED06:06, 1 AUG 2012

    “STEVEN DAVIS last night admitted he had to escape his Rangers hell to rescue his career.

    The former Ibrox skipper, who joined Premier League new boys Southampton last month, said: “It was all doom and gloom at Ibrox.


    “It was sad to be part of that and it’s also sad to see what is still happening.

    “It’s a real shame because it’s a great club.”

    The above might help him Homunculus.





    View Comment

  19. StevieBC 2nd January 2019 at 10:22
    24 0 Rate This
    Rangers: Concern over chief executive Craig Mather’s salary.
    Rangers chief executive Craig Mather will pick up £500,000 per year at Ibrox – a salary that has angered some within the club, BBC Scotland has learned.
    July 22, 2013.
    Chaos reigns! King’s Rangers return in doubt as chief executive Mather quits
    Dave King’s hopes of a Rangers coronation were cast into doubt following the sudden resignation of chief executive Craig Mather.

    Mather’s departure was confirmed in a statement to the stock market on Wednesday morning, along with the announcement that non-executive director Bryan Smart had also quit the plc board.
    16 October 2013
    He lasted about 12 weeks after concerns about salery were revealed.

    View Comment

  20. Ex Ludo 2nd January 2019 at 16:13
    He’s coming home, apparently. I don’t suppose he’ll be asked to explain why he left “home” in the first place?
    Err…. he left because he never won a trophy as skipper.And he is coming home to that small weekly wage that he could not except 6 years ago, that may be it.
    Or i may just be missing something, i wonder

    View Comment

  21. Of those who left at liquidation, Davis was the one who was least hated (by the Bears Den crew at least). That was because it was reported that Southampton had agreed to pay something (£800k was reported, I think) so that they could get him 'sooner'. This subsequently translated to 'Davis at least got us some money when we needed it' so not as bad as the others who rank from 'Bad' – Lafferty, McGregor, even Gregg Wylde if I remember right! – to 'Hated' – only Naismith and Whittaker, due to the honest interview they gave about it being a new club and meaning nothing to them.

    If the Bears are already so desperate to 'stop the 10' that they've forgiven the 'Bad', they'll have no problem welcoming back Davis. FFS, remember they were willing to accept even the 'Hated' Naismith, when that was touted, if he might help them stop the 10. 

    View Comment

  22. Rangers chief executive Craig Mather will pick up £500,000 per year at Ibrox – a salary that has angered some within the club, BBC Scotland has learned.
    July 22, 2013.
    Managing director Stewart Robertson was the biggest beneficiary. His earnings came to a total of £311,000 in the last year, including a £52,000 bonus, meaning his pay package rose by £30,000. His salary package increased by £52,000 the previous year
    The football board has revealed for the first time that a further £289,000 has been given to an unspecified number of ‘key management personnel’ in the last financial year. That includes £238,000 by way of salary and £51,000 in bonuses.
    Ally, Ally.. Who are these people? These ‘key management personnel’?

    View Comment

  23. Cluster One 2nd January 2019 at 22:26

    Ally, Ally.. Who are these people? These ‘key management personnel’?


    Will almost certainly be Mark Allen, their Director of Football, who was appointed in June 2017. That means his full year's salary will be in that set of accounts.

    View Comment

  24. Cluster One 2nd January 2019 at 22:26

    "Ally, Ally… Who are these people? These 'key management personnel'?

    I think it's fairly obvious who would be included in the 'unspecified number' (one? two?).

    Ze List has to be kept up to date and those Statements don't write themselves. Even the Sevco number crunchers aren't daft enough to put these payments through Club 1690.

    One thing I don't get is how bad would the Statements have to be in order for the 'bonus' not to kick in? The last Statement resulted in a six grand fine.

    As for 'Ally, Ally…' I'm pretty sure he won't care considering he was paid about four times as much per year for being such a good manager that he hasn't managed since.

    It's likely 'Ally, Ally…' will be concentrating more on the chances of receiving a twenty fold return on his penny shares when/if GASH makes that pesky Court ordered offer.

    Happy New Year to all.

    Well, nearly all.

    View Comment

  25. My post at 2nd January 2019 at 13:53 refers:

    I am happy to report that Ray Gatt of 'The Australian' newspaper emailed me at 11.44 this morning ( it is now 22.40 on 3rd January, and I've only just accessed my emails : busy, busy, busy all day with the granweans).

    "Dear John


    I refer to it as the old firm Derby because that’s what many people still refer to it as

    I’m not bothered about the politics and religious implications of Scottish football "


    Ray Gatt "

    My reply to that was :

    "Dear Ray,

    I very much appreciate that you have taken the time to reply.

    I also  appreciate the fact that, of course, you  have to write for your audience.

    Be that as it may, I believe that truth ought to be told- and is easily told when  not many of  one's audience are likely to be all that hellish much more interested in Scottish football or football teams than I am in cricket or Aussie rules football!

    To tell those in Australia who might read about UK or Scottish football that Rangers FC of 1872 is no longer in existence should not expose one to the fury of massed ranks of 'Rangers' fans ( which is what your counterparts in Scotland fear-and with good reason)

    Anyway, thanks for your reply, and I wish you well for 2019.

    Yours in the beautiful game,



    View Comment

  26. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46721277

    No action to be taken against Morelos because the referee saw the incidents in their entirety.

    In my opinion at least two straight red cards would have been issued in any match anywhere. Which means, in my opinion, that Beaton is probably guilty of match fixing, particularly since one of them was in the second minute.

    Someone from the SFA needs to make a statement on this. Fans of all clubs are watching.


    View Comment

  27. macfurgly 3rd January 2019 at 13:52


    Don't you just love it when you read a response that is not, 'no rule was broken', but, 'the referee saw it, so there's nothing to be done about it, so let's move on'?


    So, are they saying the referee saw all four (or was it only three?) incidents clearly enough to make a call, and took no action, yet the TV evidence shows all incidents were cardable? Even if each was not cardable in their own right, surely, like repeated fouls, a card should be issued. Players get booked for a number of non-violent fouls, often genuinely making an effort to get the ball, but, somehow, Beaton, who saw each incident in it's entirety, decided no wrong had been done.


    I'd say that if Beaton saw each of these incidents in their entirety, he had to be cheating to not produce at least one yellow card, though players have been, and will be again, sent off for doing similar in each case.


    It actually beggars belief that a referee is prepared to say he saw these incidents and took no action – whether that says something bad about the man, or something worse about Scottish football (that he should know it's OK to say that), is hard to decide.

    View Comment

  28. John Clark 3rd January 2019 at 12:52


    I’m not bothered about the politics and religious implications of Scottish football 


    What does Rangers being liquidated and a new club being formed have to do with religion or politics.

    They spent too much money, got into massive debt, went into administration and their CVA proposal was rejected. Someone bought the assets from the administrator (bizarre enough in itself) and formed a new club.

    No politics or religion involved.

    View Comment

  29. Saw a post elsewhere making the point that a referee sees an incident in a game and awards a penalty. That, is, the referee saw the incident in it's entirety, for how else could he award the penalty, but when the game is shown on TV it becomes apparent that the player took a dive, and on review the player is issued with a retrospective yellow card.


    Can anyone see a difference between this and the Morelos examples, other than in the eventual judgement?

    View Comment

  30. macfurgly 3rd January 2019 at 13:52

    '..because the referee saw the incidents in their entirety.'


    There is always a lovely ambiguity in the comments on BBC radio Scotland when, during a live commentary, the commentators and pundits remark that 'the referee had a clear view'.

    In the absolute abstract, and prescinding from comment on any particular case,the fact that a referee may have had 'clear view' may make his wayward decision suspect, rather than sound,because he knows that a) he will get his bribe money or b) be favouring a particular team ,from personal allegiance motives ,free from challenge!

    Sadly, Scottish Football has had experience of biased referees, and biased 'Secretaries' of the SFA and unprincipled CEOs who foisted a monstrous lie , etc etc.

    It gars me greet.



    View Comment

  31. "The three flashpoints were studied by the Scottish FA’s Compliance Officer Clare Whyte, but match referee John Beaton said he had seen all three incidents and had decided against taking any action at the time."

    Courtesy of The Scotsman

    There, written in one tidy sentence, is proof that Scottish football governance is all about the furtherance of one club and one club only.

    I have never been moved to post here before, although I follow the debate and am heartened to see contributors from so many clubs, but it saddens me to see that depsite the efforts of all on this site and RTC before it, very little progress has been made towards bringing the SFA anywhere close to a change in its ways. 

    I have not set foot inside a football ground in Scotland since 2012 and I don't see this changing in the foreseeable future.

    View Comment

  32. Homunculus 3rd January 2019 at 14:23


    I think it's just the old assumption that 'it's all about Rangers (sic) and Celtic' and so politics and religion must be the driving force behind anything and everything critical of 'Rangers'!

    View Comment

  33. John Clark 3rd January 2019 at 12:52
    “Dear John


    I refer to it as the old firm Derby because that’s what many people still refer to it as

    I’m not bothered about the politics and religious implications of Scottish football ”
    How much is many?
    The corrupt SFA as they want a lie to continue
    in order to get their bonuses.
    The SPFL,they want the lie to continue for sponsorship and advertising and so they can get their bonuses
    The tribute act at ibrox, they want the lie to continue just so they can be seen to be the same club.
    Everyone else knows and even the SFA the SPFL and the ibrox tribute act know there is now no old firm.
    So in reality not much is many unless there is money to be made.
    My question to Ray Gatt. is there money to be made for calling it the old firm.
    When the many now don’t call it that unless there is money to be made from it.
    Will we fit you into that bracket Mr Ray Gatt?

    View Comment

  34. This is perhaps not the forum but just how bad does it have to be before Mr Beaton takes any action in respect of behaviour such as that which Morelos was responsible for last weekend? I would sincerely hope that Celtic Football Club would be making representations behind the scenes if not making any public statement about both the leniency shown by the referee towards Morelos and the Compliance Officer failing to see what the whole world can see. Again I apologise for referring to all of the above on here however this season is shaping up to be another season of honest mistakes favouring only one club. 

    View Comment

  35. I don’t think any of the Morelos incidents were straight red cards on their own, but each of the four should certainly have been a yellow and he was a very very lucky man to remain on the pitch. Poor refereeing again and evidence VAR needs introduced. And this coming from a Rangers fan! That said it was one of the better refereeing performances in an Old Firm game of late. He let the game flow and other than missing the obvious fouls by Morelos he got a lot right. 

    View Comment

  36. Chances for referee Bobby Madden to see Scott Mckennas challenge on Edouard…..1.  Corroboration with apparent ‘foul’ via media playback to compliance officer ….1.  Number of games banned (having had no foul or card awarded)….2.

    Chances for referee John Beaton to see Morelos’ challenges on Brown Christie and Ralston (think?)….3.  Corroboration with apparent ‘foul’ via media playback to compliance officer …definitely 2 and arguably 3 (Christie’s).  Number of games banned having had no foul or card awarded)….0.


    number of games that Mr Beaton won’t be reffing at Ibrox a la Collum….tbc but suspect won’t take a lot of counting.




    View Comment

  37. I think the Morelos decision(s) has set a benchmark for what is allowable as a tackle in Scottish football  and confirms why no action was taken in similar incidents earlier in the season . Open season on skillful players , with a wee video taken along in your defence should you be sanctioned . We all lose by this cowardice .

    View Comment

  38. Darkbeforedawn @ 15:24

    He allowed the game to flow like a river. In one direction only.

    And, just like a river, the direction the game is currently going in is remorselessly downhill.

    View Comment

  39. Ex Ludo 3rd January 2019 at 15:17

    This is perhaps not the forum but just how bad does it have to be before Mr Beaton takes any action in respect of behaviour such as that which Morelos was responsible for last weekend?


    I think it is one appropriate forum. The kick at Brown and the stamp on Ralston go even beyond the "honest mistakes". I have acknowledged on here before that I am a CFC fan and it is easy therefore to accuse me of bias, or sour grapes, but I invite fans of other clubs to decide whether, in their opinion, they were blatantly violent conduct and would have incurred red cards under normal circumstances or not. This is not a CFC / TRFC thing.

    The worrying thing for me really is that there is no questioning of the referee's decision and if in other circumstances there was, it is down to an anonymous panel of former referees who need not make their rationale public. Usually there can be some debate about red or yellow or nothing. I cannot see that here. We need transparency and quickly.

    For what it's worth, had I ever thought that my team was benefitting from decisions such as these, and I did not use the term "match fixing" lightly, then I would have been with Redlichtie at Gayfield or EJ at the Juniors years ago.

    View Comment

  40. If it wasn't for one really important fact Specsavers would have had a ready-made advert. Picture the scene – the  referee wearing his Specsavers logo on his kit doesn't see anything wrong with 3 decisions that most people saw as fouls and the voice-over says should have gone to Vision Express!

    View Comment

  41. On the early nature of the first offence non Celtic sevco fans will need no reminding of the Special “too early for a booking” rule that seems to exist only in certain games.


    on John Beaton demotion?  Was Madden?  Or Collum (officially)?

    View Comment

  42. Question for the blog. Are referees knowingly turning a blind eye to Morelos type incidents and leaving it to the CO.?  This takes the heat off them as they are not asked for their opinion and rely on their match report.

    View Comment

  43. Absolutely!

    A straightforward kick to the goolies would now seem to be a perfectly acceptable challenge in Scottish football.

    Ref / linesmen / 4th official / SFA Compliance Officer didn't have an issue with Morelos' challenge.

    Ergo, it's a clogger's charter for 2019.

    The SFA… promoting all that is bad for Scottish football.

    View Comment

  44. Allyjambo 3rd January 2019 at 14:31

    Saw a post elsewhere making the point that a referee sees an incident in a game and awards a penalty. That, is, the referee saw the incident in it's entirety, for how else could he award the penalty, but when the game is shown on TV it becomes apparent that the player took a dive, and on review the player is issued with a retrospective yellow card.

    Can anyone see a difference between this and the Morelos examples, other than in the eventual judgement?


    Such a scenario happened a couple of years ago when Jamie Walker was retrospectively banned for two games for a dive which the referee had allegedly missed. The ref obviously had a clear enough view of the incident to award Hearts a penalty against Celtic.

    The name of the referee?

    You've guessed it.



    View Comment

  45. Beaton awarded a free-kick for the Morelos push on Brown which immediately preceded the kick.  Taking a kick at a player off the ball is violent conduct, a mandatory red card.  Beaton  may have said he dealt with the incident by awarding the freekick and been vague about the kick.


    Steve MacLean accepted a two match ban when the referee panel agreed with the compliance officer that grabbing a player by the genitals is violent conduct.  If Beaton saw the Morelos assault on Christie he needs to explain why he disagrees with 3 former referrees that what he witnessed wasn't violent conduct and therefore a mandatory dismissal.  I don't recall him dealing in anyway with the incident.


    Only Morelos will know if he intended to rake Ralston's back.  But his body position was totally wrong for a natural occurrence.  In this instance I think Beaton  only required to believe there was intent to take action.  I belive the actipn he took was to award a throw in.  The absolute minimum that should have happened is a warning for Morelos to be careful when jumping at/over an opponent.

    View Comment

  46. Darkbeforedawn 

    3rd January 2019 at 15:24


    I take it you base this on the "Morelos Principle" that he didn't kick Brown, or stomp Ralston quite hard enough to have received a card.

    Is it different rules for him, its starting to look like it. Almost like the campaign to have him perceived as a "marked man" is having an effect on referees' decisions. 

    View Comment

  47. The SMSM is reporting that Jermain Defoe is indeed joining TRFC.

    I've always liked / rated Defoe and quite sure he will do a good job.

    …but if he was reportedly on anything between £60K and £80K a week, then what portion will TRFC pay?

    £20K / £30K / £40K / ? a week…

    Looks like the Blue Room is going 'all in' this season to try and stop 10IAR.

    January will be a VERY interesting month at Ibrox.

    Popcorn XL on standby.

    View Comment

  48. I notice some very expensive players arriving at Ibrox on loan , the positive is that no up front transfer fee is required . I would imagine these "loans" are being sanctioned by Mr King with promises of funding their wages .

    My question is ,if this was enough to tip the club* into administration would it interfere with King's requirement to fund the TOP arrangement or is he really going to open that warchest .Those of us who remember a previous admin event also remember the attempt to sign players the day before admin was announced.

    I'm sure everything is above board this time, well almost sure.

    View Comment

  49. Timtim 

    3rd January 2019 at 17:24


    I think I would be waiting to see how many are moving out before thinking about contrived insolvency.

    It could be this is his way to raise the funds required to keep the business afloat. Remember there is at least one £20m+ player on the books just now. Selling his registration would fund a lot of loan wages as well as bridging the gap caused by trading at a loss.

    The club and its holding company (the PLC) have a limited number of ways of raising funds.

    1, Normal trading income

    2, Share issues

    3, Loans

    4, Sale of assets.

    We may be at the "sale of assets" stage if the loans have dried up and there is nor real money to be made via a share issue. 

    We will only really know what the plan is at the end of this window, unless there is a major sale before then. 

    View Comment

  50. Maybe just wishful thinking Homunculus , I can't see how an admin could be announced while the transfer window remains open and King is required to comply before it closes. I think that 20m asset is also wishful thinking , Red Bull Barry was a multi million asset before reality cashed in at 500k.


    the important dates in the on going saga are the 11th to transfer the funds into the UK and finally the 25th to make the formal offer. A legal advisor was required by the 14th of December but I have seen no confirmation that was achieved or that it wasn't . King is as the saying goes "flying by the seat of his pants"

    View Comment

  51. StevieBC 3rd January 2019 at 17:23

    Looks like the Blue Room is going 'all in' this season to try and stop 10IAR.


    I think that is exactly the thinking. They are certainly close enough to the top of the league for a couple of marquee signings (for the SPFL) to make a difference.

    The sale of Morelos in the summer would cover the extra costs involved this season, although it would do little to deal with the structural deficit.

    The added bonus to TRFC of winning the league this season would be to deny Celtic the opportunity to play in the next CL qualifiers.

    TRFC are upping the ante in typical style by their speculate to accumulate model, so the next question is "Will Celtic respond using their reserves of cash built up in recent seasons?".

    King is on record as saying that it would only take one season's failure to break Celtic's grip and resolve. He could be right if Celtic don't step up to the plate and meet the challenge head on, as their failure to win the league could be reflected in reduced ST sales next season.

    View Comment

  52. Just a wee thought on TRFC's signing/sale issues.


    With no gate income for most of this month, I'd guess it would be in the interest of most clubs running close to the wind financially to sell at the start of the window, while buying nearer the end, as it would reduce this month's wage bill a bit, maybe even a life saving bit. On the other hand, should King be intending to comply with the TOP/CoS order, he might want to give the bear shareholders, and maybe one or two not so bearish shareholders, the impression that all is well financially by signing now and selling that bit later. He certainly likes to give the impression money is no object from time to time depending on who, or what court, it is he is trying to give the impression to.


    On the other hand, this signing of high wage players at the start of the window might be an indication that King has been dipping into his family's inheritance over Christmasyes

    View Comment

  53. Timtim 

    3rd January 2019 at 18:27


    I was being a tad facetious with regard the £20m+ asset. I think that only exists in the head of the support. Based on him being "as good as Dembele". I think they fail to realise that Dembele was sold based on his European  performances, what he won in Scotland and international call ups. What he, or Morelos have done in Scotland is of less significance I would have thought.

    Re the potential for administration. I will ask the question I always ask, which entity do people think will go into administration and on what basis would it happen. Bearing in mind if done properly administration puts control of the company in the hands of the administrator. Ignore what happened with Rangers, that was a nonsense. Think more Hearts and a proper administrator saving a club, or trying to.


    View Comment

  54. easyJambo 3rd January 2019 at 19:26


    The sale of Morelos in the summer would cover the extra costs involved this season, although it would do little to deal with the structural deficit.


    The issue then would be cash flow.

    The sale of his registration may well balance the books over the season. However where is the money coming from to pay the bills as they fall due. 

    Is the business cash-flow insolvent. 

    View Comment

  55. 2019
    FORMER Rangers players could be forced to pay back millions after George Osborne targeted EBTs in the Budget.

    Ibrox icons such as Barry Ferguson and Graeme Souness as well as former owner Sir David Murray made millions from the tax-free “loans” and experts say some stars could be bankrupted through the clampdown, due to come into force in 2019.

    Earlier this month the Chancellor laid down a pledge to pursue all individuals who have benefited from “disguised remuneration schemes” – of which the Employee Benefits Trust introduced by Murray was a prime example.

    Rangers stars and senior staff during the club’s controversial EBT years between 2001 and 2010 raked in £47.65million from the scheme.
    Osborne’s new legislation means that, even if the court action by the taxman fails to prove the EBTs were paid as a top-up to wages, Rangers oldco and the players can expect massive tax demands to pop through their letterboxes when the crackdown comes into force
    Knock! knock!is that my parcel from Amason?
    No it’s a demand from HMRC….Oh Dear…

    View Comment

  56. Homunculus 3rd January 2019 at 20:17

    easyJambo 3rd January 2019 at 19:26

    The sale of Morelos in the summer would cover the extra costs involved this season, although it would do little to deal with the structural deficit.


    The issue then would be cash flow.

    The sale of his registration may well balance the books over the season. However where is the money coming from to pay the bills as they fall due. 

    Is the business cash-flow insolvent. 


    They could probably keep the lights on with a pay day loan from one or more of their "investors". It's been done before as Sandy Easdale provided short term funding at the end of 2014, until the funds from the Lewis MacLeod transfer to Brentford were forthcoming early in the new year.

    The business is already cash flow insolvent hence the need for additional funding (from the forecast £4.6m) this month.

    View Comment

  57. easyJambo 3rd January 2019 at 20:40
    The issue then would be cash flow.
    They will not have much of a cash flow if they sell Morelos in the summer.
    With the players being linked to the ibrox squad, where is the sell on value of any other player at ibrox.
    All you have to do is look at the ibrox recruitment it’s an all in for dave just now short term with no long term thinking.
    What happens when the pay day loans dry up and they can’t trade their way out of trouble with player sales?
    It is a must win for king this year or king’s house of cards will crumble.

    View Comment

Comments are closed.