The Art of Ad Hominem

I receive criticism on a daily basis. The overwhelming majority of it is not in any way constructive. There is a hard-wired bigotry that seeps from the pores onto the page and is promptly redirected to the spam file. There are those who claim that they know where ‘my’ sister works as they take their false leads from the state-aid fantasist. They think they can close down this site by hurting a woman I don’t know and I have never met. As the RSL unequivocally stated they don’t know who I am. I use ‘burner’ accounts and proxies to evade individuals who wish to pursue me. This will come as a surprise to many but I’m not a Rangers ‘hater.’ I was as seduced as many others when the spine of the England team turned up at Ibrox. I was astonished when Maurice Johnson signed for Rangers, breaking a ‘tradition’ that was an unwritten rule for 58 years. I noted that one of founding members of the RSL, Bill McMurdo, brokered this deal which delivered a real slap in the face to Billy McNeil’s Celtic. No-one at that time knew that the galaxy of stars that delivered nine-in-a-row were bought by money which was borrowed from the Bank of Rangers a.k.a. The Bank of Scotland. What David Murray did next, tax evasion, led to the demise of the club. However this salient detail will be excluded from the BBC Scotland series on the last thirty years of Scottish football. The narrative they will present is that Murray was duped by Whyte. This site has pointed out in detail that this is a falsehood.

Image result for a photo of blind leading blind

In many ways I envisage this site as a translation service. I take the lies, the puff and the spin to deliver the unvarnished truth. I did not intend to run this site for any more than a year, but if donations continue to support this site, I will continue to inform and hopefully entertain. I will provide a forum for intelligent debate. As I look at the comment pages of The Herald and Scotsman I am appalled by the knuckle-dragging tit-for-tats of a C2DE demographic who probably have not even read the article that they are commenting on. The comments section on this site will not allow individuals to play the man by engaging in ad hominem pejoratives. Someone new to this site turned up yesterday. His user name, Cherries & Cheese was apposite, as is evident in the following:

“Oh my. I began to once more lose the will to live when your latest offering nosedived after an uncharacteristic interesting start. I’m pretty certain this is where your own thoughts dried up and once again you reverted back to copying and pasting, copying and pasting… Need I say more? Now pay attention old thing. I can see you’re not one of the totally inept hacks that still believe blogging is a political platform to polish and caress just before you pop it back under the stairs in the cupboard normally reserved for the upright vac. Admittedly you’re not far from the aforementioned reference above, so here’s a friendly tip. Take the stick out of your arse and stop believing that you are better than you actually are. Humility and forethought is where the game is won and lost. Respect your readers. Some of your throwaway remarks are rather crass. It is far more rewarding to make allies than it is to gain rancour amongst the growing number of people who quite rightly see you as a “bit of an obnoxious cock”.Moving on… One would suggest that you contact someone within the city who has access to the ‘original’ report in regard to the current state of the roof at Ibrox. If you dig deep enough in the right area don’t be surprised to find that inspections are not usually undertaken “over the phone”.There is a real story available, all you have to do is uncover it.Ciao for now.”

The cherry is in the last point of this comment which is inelegantly phrased. Is one to assume that the insurers of Ibrox treat the stadium like a car and are happy to pick up premiums until it crashes? Is the safety certificate delivered by a nod, wink and bare-nippled handshake? There are fundamental structural problems at Ibrox that are not being addressed by the makeshift board.

As for the cheese, the unseen work I do correcting typos in comments and salvaging comments that have crossed the line, would suggest that I work tirelessly in the best interests of those who comment. I’m not here to put them down or in any way adopt a superior position. I am often informed by the comments. I was not aware that Lynsey Sharp was an unalloyed bigot who is a disgrace to athletics. I will be quick to refer to her bigotry should she win a medal in the next Commonwealth Games, which is the height of her ambitions.

I touched on Regan, the deficit, Salmond, Sturgeon and a Brexit Squirrel. My words. I looked at the ‘intersex’ situation in athletics using my words. When I looked at the American Presidential race I used my words (I referred to Trump as a draft – dodging privately educated white-collar punk) and discussed his polemics. All my own work. I looked at the electoral college and pointed out that with two exceptions it’s the first past the post system in 48 states. When I chose to cut and paste I did so judiciously to reinforce my position that the richest candidate invariably wins Presidential elections. Note the trade delegations and their block votes. Also of note is the S.Daniel Center for Middle East Peace (www.centerpeace.org) which supports my preferred two states, one nation solution. Have you read my other articles?

I get it. You wanted to rain on my six million hits parade. You refer to an alleged growing consensus that perceive me as a ‘bit of an obnoxious cock.’  If these individuals are bigots,  or those masquerading as journalists, or probably closer to the mark Wings Over Scotland, then I’ll accept that as a backhanded compliment.

 

 

A One in Six Million Shot in The Dark To the SFA

Mr Regan,would you care to comment on Andrea Traverso’s letter of 8th June which asserts that TRFC Ltd is a new club/company?”

I sent the aforementioned tweet to Stewart Regan, the Chief Executive of the SFA, this morning. I don’t anticipate a reply. Could this be due to the fact that my voice is not relevant and with only 3,925 followers on Twitter I’m not on the same page as Mr Regan with his 4,855 followers? I could point out that this site that has called out the charades at the SFA has today breached the 6m hits milestone.  This figure represents six weeks of the Daily Record’s sales from Monday to Saturday, but despite this Mr Regan will not respond. If Gary Ralson from the Record sent an e-mail to Mr Regan, would he call him back ?  The evidence uncovered in what became known as the 3Rs omnishambles (Ralson, Robertson, Regan) points to the fact that he would. Mr Regan was prepared to host an informal meeting with Stewart Robertson of Rangers and his head of security to discuss the aftermath of the Scottish Cup Final.  So why did I choose to write to Regan? My rationale was that my tweet is an aide memoire to Regan to remind him that some of us are paying attention in regard to his decision to confer 33 historical titles to a club deemed to be new by UEFA.

This site deals with other topics. My interest in current affairs has touched on the law and politics. Many who read this site and now donate to its upkeep support the SNP. However having crunched the numbers I came to the conclusion that had independence been achieved Scotland would have been on its economic knees. A £14.8b deficit on the generous provisions of the Barnett formula proves incontrovertibly that an independent Scotland could not come even close to balancing its books. Those who advocated that North Sea Oil income would offset this deficit should note that this has dropped by 97% from £1.6b to £60m. If we had listened to Salmond the austerity and poverty in Scotland would have been overwhelming. Of course, Nicola Sturgeon, whom has never been elected but is the savvy figurehead of the SNP, got in front of the story with an £11b Brexit Squirrel. This is the politics of spin writ large. Should those who applaud me when I crunch the numbers at Ibrox condemn me when I crunch the numbers at Bute House? I can assure readers that I don’t have a political agenda. If Sweet Brent Crude surged to $300 a barrel and a a billion barrel reservoir  of accessible crude was discovered off The Shetlands Shelf, I would be quick to promote an economic case for independence.

Other topics have piqued my interest.Lynsey Sharp was reduced to tears when asked about intersex athletes in the Olympic women’s 800m final, after Caster Semenya had picked up the gold medal in Rio. Let’s leave aside any prejudices we may have for a second (Sharp is a Rangers supporter) to take an objective look at the ‘intersex’ classification. Mr/Ms Semenya has no womb, vagina or penis. He/she has a pair of testes that have not dropped. He/she has an ‘intersex’ condition called hyperandrogenism which results in her having testosterone levels that are three times those usually found in women and approaching those of a man.

If Lynsey Sharp engaged in a systematic regimen of testosterone injections and patches she could get close to the testosterone that naturally occurs in Semenya’s body. If she did so she would be banned for blood doping.

Sharp, 26, finished sixth in the 800m final while Semenya – who was once forced to undergo humiliating gender testing to prove she was female – took gold, setting a new national record

Sharp is an intelligent young woman. She has written a thesis on hyperandrogenism in athletics as part of her Doctorate programme. If someone has access to this thesis please send it to me as I would like to write expansively on this topic. My heart goes out to Semenya. However if intersex athletes are allowed to compete in women’s events what’s to stop some enterprising Russian surgeons from creating an intersex athletics elite?

Nigel Farage is in the headlines this morning. He turned up at a Donald Trump rally to lend his support. In a previous article I was asked by two of my North American readers to cast my cynical eye on the American Presidential race.This is a contest that affects everyone. The following tables are from The Center for Responsible Politics.

This page shows contributions grouped by contributor to the candidate’s campaign committee plus any super PACs or hybrid PACs working on Hillary Clinton’s behalf:

Saban Capital Group $10,036,238
Renaissance Technologies $9,518,800
Pritzker Group $7,873,257
Soros Fund Management $7,044,600
Paloma Partners $6,108,400
Newsweb Corp $5,013,500
DE Shaw Research $3,053,601
Center for Middle East Peace $3,008,100
Plumbers/Pipefitters Union $3,007,275
Laborers Union $3,006,610
Herb & Marion Sandler/Sandler Foundation $3,002,700
Carpenters & Joiners Union $2,505,400
Fair Share Action $2,255,000
Barbara Lee Family Foundation $2,099,604
American Federation of Teachers $2,073,717
DreamWorks SKG $2,015,700
Operating Engineers Union $2,010,000
Bohemian Foundation $2,002,700
BLS Investments $2,002,700
Paloma Partners Advisors $2,000,000

Nota bene: Federal-level numbers are for the 2016 election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data released electronically on Thursday, July 21, 2016.”
However this is just an $80m tip of an an economic tsunami of support:

Fundraising Details

Campaign Outside Groups Combined
Total Raised $315,353,001 $120,108,804 $435,461,805
Total Spent $256,881,068 $81,815,823 $338,696,891
Cash on Hand $58,471,932 $38,292,980 $96,764,912
Debts $501,263
Date of Report July 31, 2016
The cash on hand eclipses the $91m raised by Trump. Some of the real heavy-hitters expected to back Clinton have yet to show their hands. Anyone watching American television (I watch NBC broadcasts online) has been inundated with adverts branding Trump as a misogynist and advocating the election of the former First Lady to be the first female President of America.
Despite the money raised to influence public opinion, Clinton is not liked. She represents the political elite and as we noticed with the Brexit vote, those not reaping the benefits of the UK’s post 2008 economic renascence voted against the elite. London is doing well while the rest of the UK struggles to get by with crumbs from a rich man’s table. Most significantly Clinton is not liked by the women’s demographic despite her blanket ‘glass ceiling breaking’ rhetoric.
Donald Trump is a draft-dodging, privately educated, self-financing, white-collar punk. He represents new money and old values. He has managed to upset every demographic in America. His policies, should they exist, are masked by his scattergun polemical arguments. Despite this those disaffected and disenfranchised by the post 2008 American economic renascence, will vote for him. Don’t be misled by Trump’s rhetoric. It’s hardly praise from Caesar but Trump is smarter than former Republican presidents such as George W. Bush and the intellectually-challenged Ronald Reagan. His achilles heel is his lack of experience in foreign policy, however this is offset by the public scrutiny of Clinton’s less than flattering private thoughts on foreign leaders.

The U.S. electorate this year will be the country’s most racially and ethnically diverse ever. Nearly one-in-three eligible voters on Election Day (31%) will be Hispanic, black, Asian or another racial or ethnic minority.While the nation’s 156 million non-Hispanic white eligible voters in 2016 far outnumber the 70 million eligible voters that are from racial or ethnic minorities, the race for the presidency will be decided by how many of the white demographic will vote for Trump. Clinton has a start of 70 million. She only needs to attract just north of 43m of this vote in the 48 states that allocate all their collegiate votes on a first past the post basis.The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President. The state’s entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation: one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for Senators.

Clinton could well be supported by the majority of the American electorate but this in itself does not guarantee success. Her team have spent the lion’s share of $339m in the states with the most electoral college votes and the states where the projections are too close to call. She needs 270 to win. On balance, predicated on money spent, she will succeed. However it wont’t be a landslide. In an article published in the New York Times two days ago, they confirmed their projections that she would prevail but added:

“Data show just how less likely crossover voting is today. Ninety percent of Republicans and two-thirds of independents see Mrs. Clinton unfavorably, according to the most recent McClatchy/Marist poll. And many Trump defectors are choosing to vote for third-party candidates, which has also contributed to Mrs. Clinton’s inability to break the 50 percent threshold in most national polls.” 

 

When this site breaches a one million hits milestone, I traditionally publish a John James World article. This has been roundly criticized by those who contribute by subscription to the Scottish Football Monitor. On this site everyone has a voice, irrespective of donations. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the one hundred or so donors to this site. Four weeks have elapsed since I made my first tentative steps to raise funds via html code. I would hope that those who have supported this site in August will continue to do so in September, and those who have not contributed will consider doing so.

 

This article showcases the breadth of topics that I’m prepared to tackle with your unstinting support. In a nod to the JJ’s World posts of old, I welcome readers from Botswana, Cameroon, Libya, Rwanda and St. Kitts & Nevis to this site. As the latter is known as a tax haven, I wonder if Dave King dropped by to receive some casual invective. I guarantee that Chairman Charlotte, the only man in living memory to fail an SFA fit and proper test, will be getting it tight when a new source enters the fray at the beginning of September.

 

Could The Detail Be In The Advertising Retail?

I did not watch the Hapoel Be’er Sheva v Celtic game last night.I anticipated that the Israeli hosts would not score three goals without reply. However they took it to the wire. CFC proved yet again that their away form in UEFA competitions leaves a lot to be desired. On the balance of probability one of the four qualifiers from this evening’s ties will have a higher coefficient than Celtic, hence my decision to allocate them to pot four.

Pot 1: Real Madrid (ESP, holders), Barcelona (ESP), Leicester City (ENG), Bayern München (GER), Juventus (ITA), Benfica (POR), Paris Saint-Germain (FRA), CSKA Moskva (RUS)

Pot 2: Atlético Madrid (ESP), Borussia Dortmund (GER), Arsenal (ENG), Sevilla (ESP), Porto (POR), Napoli (ITA), Bayer Leverkusen (GER), Manchester City (5-0 from first leg).

Pot 3: Tottenham Hotspur (ENG), Dynamo Kyiv (UKR), Lyon (FRA), PSV Eindhoven (NED), Sporting CP (POR), Club Brugge (BEL),Basel (SUI) plus one from remaining four ties to be played this evening (excluding Man City). Borussia Mönchengladbach look most likely. 

Pot 4: Monaco (FRA), Beşiktaş (TUR), Legia Warszawa (POL), Ludogorets Razgrad (BUL),Celtic (SCO) plus three from remaining four ties.

The draw will occur on Thursday, 25th August at 5 p.m.local time.The ideal draw would be Leicester City, Seville and Basel. The most difficult would be Real Madrid, Manchester City and Borussia Mönchengladbach. A guaranteed £30m is on its way to Celtic park, with £1.3m on offer for a win and £0.43 for a draw. Irrespective of how they perform they have the money to ensure that they will have the best squad in Scottish football for the forseeable future.This is the real bonus from securing a place in the group stages. The odds for this season’s Scottish title, and next, will have shortened. If Brown and Janko continue to play as poorly as they did last night, with Toure, Sinclair and Gordon the best of a bad bunch, group stage points will be at a premium.

I was not planning to write about CFC today but it would have been remiss of me not to refer to them as a preface to this article. I should point out that I wrote to Grant Russell of STV with a request to comment on his article on UEFA and Rangers. He did not respond. Mr Russell is of the firm conviction that Rangers continue unabated to this day. He and Neil Doncaster are liquidation deniers. Stewart Regan is more cute. He is of the view that Rangers can be perceived as the same club in the eye of the beholder. An article of faith if you will. Russell, Doncaster and Regan are advocates of The Old Firm, which to many is both an anachronism and an irrelevance. The following document will not play well at Hampden, Pacific Quay or Edmiston Drive.

 

 

It is important to stress that this is not the original document. The name of the addressee, whom is believed to be a solicitor acting on behalf of a group of CFC shareholders, has been redacted. This is a sensible security precaution. As Jonathan Brown QC stated at The Court of Session, some perceive the concept of continuation as a matter of life and death. The history underpins the pervading sense of supremacy, which is reinforced by TRFCL’s marketing strategies. Neil Lennon was the subject of assaults when on club duty at Tynecastle, an attack in Glasgow’s West End from two dentistry students, and the recipient of parcel bombs and bullets for his association with CFC. Proving that Rangers are not the club/company that was incorporated in 1899 could be considered an act of ‘treason’ by the more excitable in the Rangers support. One should also consider what has been redacted prior to the concluding paragraph. However Mr Traverso clearly states that as far as UEFA are concerned, The Rangers Football Club Limited are a new club and company. Mr Traverso’s office provides the final word on this matter.

By contrast, STV have arrived at a conclusion which many consider to be self-serving. If they chose to confirm that Rangers are a new club it could have serious consequences for their advertising revenue. The following timeline is instructive:

1.8th June: UEFA reply to Resolution 12 solicitor.Traverso refers to new club/company. His communiqué was copied to the SFA and Celtic.

2. 16th June: STV try to establish if there are any developments at Res12 end.They are informed that no statement will be issued at that time. They contact UEFA to solicit a response. On the balance of probability STV liaised with the UEFA press office.

3.20th June: STV publish an article. There is no mention of TRFCL being deemed to be a new club in it. 

4.8th July:  Statement on Res12 appears on Celtic Quick News containing Traverso’s paragraph of 8th June verbatim.

5.21st July:  Grant Russell wrote: A UEFA spokesperson told STV: “As a consequence of decisions taken against Rangers FC in 2012 as well as the administration of the club and the events and measures that followed (including the club being ineligible to apply for a licence to participate in UEFA competitions for three seasons), there is no need for UEFA to investigate this matter any further since the club was not granted a licence to participate in the 2012/13 UEFA club competitions, the club entered the fourth tier of Scottish football and it was not able to play in UEFA competitions for the next three years in any event.”

6. Mr Russell’s quote reproduces Mr Traverso’s statement almost word for word, however he excludes the  new club/company reference in Traverso’s text.

If CQN and the requisitioners edited Traverso’s words to suit an agenda, Mr Russell could prove this by contacting Celtic, the SFA, or both. What one should also consider is that Traverso’s statement on the new club/company was unsolicited. The requisitioners were soliciting answers as to why Rangers were allowed to participate in UEFA tournaments in July/August 2011.

I have always had a high regard for Grant Russell. Some of my sources who have met him outside the Royal Courts of Justice speak highly of him. A simple explanation could be that he liaised with the UEFA press office who did not have access to Traverso’s forensic analysis. Those looking for a conspiracy might suggest a judicious edit by Mr Russell of his own volition or by instructions from someone higher up the STV food chain. Could the detail be in the advertising retail?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An Illicit Banner

I invite readers to have a close look at the following photograph. A Panathinaikos supporter’s attempt to confiscate a Maccabi Tel Aviv banner is thwarted by Greek riot police. The Maccabi flag is a variant of the Israeli National Flag. It makes a political statement.Were Maccabi sanctioned by UEFA for displaying this flag? Most certainly not. So if you fly a flag in support of Israel you face no sanctions, but if you raise a banner in support of Palestine you will face the full disciplinary might of UEFA.

 

As Hapoel Be’er Sheva host Celtic on the fringes of the Negev Desert in Israel, the Rangers supporters with laptops in the SMSM have stated that any attempt by supporters to raise a flag in support of Palestine will be severely dealt with by local police. They claim that there will be zero tolerance.

A demonstrator waves a Palestinian flag as he looks over the wall during the weekly protest against the wall and the occupation in the West Bank village of Bil’in, January 4, 2012. (Photo: Hamde Abu Rahma/ Activestills.org)

In 1993, following negotiations with Israel, long-standing restrictions on flying the Palestinian Flag were removed. It is not illegal to fly this banner in Israel. Unlike some other Israeli teams, notably Maccabi Tel Aviv, Hapoel Be’er Sheva is inclusive of Palestinian citizens of Israel in its squad. Could one not argue that raising a Palestinian flag supports the rights of Palestinians to play professional football in Israel?

UEFA’s Respect  campaign aims to see European Football promote “diversity, peace and reconciliation, football for all, health, respect for the environment and the campaign against discrimination, racism and violence.”  So what’s their position on Maccabi Tel Aviv’s policy of refusing to sign players of Palestinian origin? This is redolent of the time when Rangers refused to sign Catholics. UEFA did not intervene then and they refuse to intervene now. When it comes to Israel, UEFA kowtows to their American dollar sponsors.

In 2015, the U.N. General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to fly Palestine’s flag at their U.N. headquarters in New York. One hundred and nineteen of 193 U.N. member states approved the resolution. The majority of EU countries, including the UK, abstained. The U.S. and Israel opposed this resolution.

In UEFA statute 16.2 clause(e) they prohibit:

“ The use of gestures, words, objects or any other means to transmit any message that is not fit for a sports event, particularly messages that are of a political, ideological, religious, offensive or provocative nature”.

Flag procession during the observance of Jerusalem Day outside the Old City of Jerusalem, on June 5, 2015.

So what is UEFA’s position on the Israeli flag that to many Palestinians is the flag of their oppressive overlords? Is it not considered to be politically provocative? Five hours ago a report emerged in Haarez that a bill is being presented to the Israeli parliament (the Knesset) which seeks to legislate the compulsory flying of the Israeli Flag at every public event, including  football games. The Bill stipulates a 5,000 Israeli New Sheqel fine ( $1,300) for event organizers who do not comply.

Prior to the Celtic v Hapoel match on the 17th August activists from the group Palestine Alliance handed out flags and leaflets on the Nakba, or Catastrophe, the 1948 war that led to the creation of Israel and rendered millions of Palestinians as refugees. Would stewards or police be within their rights to  confiscate a Palestinian banner? How can UEFA proscribe one banner as illicit when it flies with 193 other banners at United Nations Assembly?

 

Celtic, St Johnstone and Dundalk FC were penalised by UEFA in 2014 for the flying of Palestinian flags by supporters. UEFA confirmed a new charge on Friday 19th August, asserting:

“Disciplinary proceedings have been opened following the UEFA Champions League play-offs, first leg, between Celtic FC and H. Beer-Sheva FC (5-2) played on 17 August in Glasgow (Scotland).”

As we have seen in regard to the SFA running roughshod over their rules to accommodate Rangers, Celtic were not prepared to challenge any of their illicit actions. Their officers are first in the queue to suck vigorously of the blue pound teat. They will probably take any UEFA sanctions lying down. However if they had a spine could they not argue that if the Palestinian flag can be flown at the United Nations Assembly, why should it be banned in the East End of Glasgow?

 

 

 

 

Shark Jumping & Acronym Trumping

As I have stated on numerous occasions, Rangers are Scottish football. They are too big to fail. The gaming sponsors that have infested Scottish football like a plague of betting-slip locusts require a viable Rangers. Stewart Regan, of the SFA, requires a viable Rangers to justify his £250,000 per annum annual salary. Neil Doncaster, sucking on the teat of the blue pound, is happy to swear blind that the team playing at Ibrox is mother’s milk; the one, only and inimitable Rangers. Showbusiness is back and he wants a larger slice of the broadcasting pie to justify his salary that this year will be fast approaching £300,000, excluding broadcast negotiation bonuses. The SMSM require a viable Rangers as they find it difficult to write about Celtic as they are a team that they despise. If you attend Ibrox you are inculcated with the belief that Rangers ‘are going for 55.‘ You will watch a team with a  5 stars crest to signify more than fifty league title wins, five of which were won by cheating, as acknowledged, but not enforced, by Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster as they attempted to sweeten a deal to expedite a new Rangers club’s access to the top tier of Scottish football.

Every possible means of reinforcing the myth of  continuation is played out by a series of three letter acronyms.We have had ECA, ASA and my personal favourite, STV. As Grant Russell is quick to assert, as soon as the SFA transferred the old licence of Rangers Football Club to Charles Green’s The Rangers Football Club Limited, they were one and the same. However the Rangers Football Club plc, incorporated in 1899 as RFC (1a) is being liquidated. The club at Ibrox is a phoenix club that has been allocated 114 titles by the SFA and SPFL. These are the facts. To sell TRFCL to as wide an audience as possible, those that govern Scottish football have decided that Charles Green’s new club must be seen to be the most successful club in domestic world football. Those looking on with an agenda-free eye are astonished at the SFA/SPFL sleight of hand. They are astonished that their clubs are so drunk on ‘Blue No-Nuns’  that they are active participants in the deception. Why don’t we just award the titles to Rangers this year and let the other clubs play for second place? We might as well as TRFCL managed to pick up 114 titles on its four year ‘journey‘. I’m surprised that The Guinness Book of Records has not been on the phone to Neil Doncaster and Stewart Regan.

Scottish football is corrupt to the core. It is run by self-serving individuals on behalf of a criminal at Ibrox and a cute businessman at Celtic Park. The officers of the SFA and the SPFL sit on their hands in their well-upholstered chairs and count the days to their next £20,000+ pay day on the 26th of the month. If you want to launder money at Ibrox, you can go right ahead. If you want to destabilise a boardroom using £25,000 of hacked information, step right up. If you want to engage in systemic tax evasion, don’t wrinkle your brow as Campbell Ogilvie, Sandy Bryson and Stewart Regan will subvert the facts to give you a £250,000 slap on the wrist. They will even dress up a retired judge for you in a SFA/SPFL pantomime. If you want to drive a club off a cliff with £168.6m of debts, don’t fret because the SFA and the SPFL will bend over backwards to sweep this under the carpet and introduce the innovation that is Scottish football jurisprudence.

The latest acronym to enter the new club fray is that of UEFA. The following is a statement by Andrea Treviso, UEFA’s Head of Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play:

“To sum up, as a consequence of decisions taken in 2012 as well as the administration of the club and the events/ measures that followed (including the
new club/ company being ineligible to apply for a licence to participate in UEFA competitions for three seasons), there is clearly no need for UEFA to investigate this matter any further since the club was not granted a licence to participate in the 2012/13 UEFA club competitions, the club/ company entered the fourth tier of Scottish Football and it was not able to play in UEFA competitions for the next three years in any event.”

This is quite clear. Many would consider it the incontrovertible truth of the matter. However there are those who won’t accept any truth in regard to Rangers. Rangers must be the most successful club in Scottish football because they are Scottish football. Neil Doncaster has stated that Rangers are the same club and that’s good enough for everyone. Those who oppose the party-line are from an SNP, CFC , IFA conspiracy to discredit the finest football club Scotland has ever seen.

Will a four letter acronym trump the 3-letter acronyms? Probably not.Will the continued club concept that has been openly derided in Scottish courts go forth, prosper and multiply? Indubitably. Anything other than this is unaccaptable to those that earn a living  from the entertainment that is Scottish football.

Playing to Order

One of the more interesting aspects of Principal Sheriff Bowen’s report on the aftermath of the Scottish Cup final, was his reference to police intelligence in regard to a League Cup semi-final between Celtic and Rangers. Those wishing to read my perspective on this report may do so in the August archive under the title: The Bowen Bullseye. The following extract is germane to the case I will present in this article:

3.4.1. A further match is worthy of mention although no pitch invasion took place. This was the Scottish League Cup Semi-Final between Celtic and Rangers held on the 1st of February 2015 at Hampden. On that occasion, the Police had specific intelligence that certain fans intended to invade the pitch in the event of a particular result. Because of that, Police Support Units were maintained in position in the practice area directly under the South Stand. In the event no attempt was made to invade the pitch and the services of the Police reserve were not required.

The specific intelligence was that Rangers fans in the South Stand were planning to invade the field of play if Celtic scored a third goal. A 3-0 scoreline was the trigger to an invasion. The ringleaders of this proposed invasion had bought tickets for the South Stand and were known to police.

Several individuals made comments on this site that stated that Celtic were instructed by police to not find the net in the second half. My cynicism in regard to the ‘entertainment‘  that is Scottish football is well-developed, but I thought at the time that this was a conspiracy theory too far. I had a second look at this game. It was evident in the first half that Celtic were so inordinately superior to Rangers that they could score at will. The CFC supporters smelled blood and wanted the renascent Rangers to be taught a football lesson that they would never forget. However in the second half they were treated to a training exercise where the object of Celtic’s possession football appeared to be the avoidance of goals. The marked contrast between the free-flowing football in the first half and the more sterile approach in the second, was not worthy of note by the Rangers supporters with laptops who masquerade as journalists. Charles Green’s equity salesman, Richard ‘Tricky Dicky‘ Wilson, provided the following reportage for BBC Scotland:

“Celtic eased to victory over Rangers at Hampden to set up a League Cup final with Dundee United. Rangers were more determined in a dreary second half but failed to register a single shot on target.Rangers caretaker manager Kenny McDowall’s game plan was clear enough: the defence sat deep and the five-man midfield dropped off as Celtic carries the ball forward.Containment was their hope. Celtic were more adventurous, although they never lost a grip on their composure or self-assurance. This was an Old Firm game in all but significant competitive tension.”

In this game Rangers failed to have one shot on target. So how did they escape a 4-0 or more mauling?  Did the Police Commander enter the Celtic dressing room at half-time and suggest that Celtic did not go for the jugular? As we witnessed at the Scottish Cup Final, controlling the Rangers supporters in the Hampden West Stand is well nigh impossible. They sang their hate-crime songs and let off flares with impunity. Had Celtic scored a third goal, the police dealing with the unrest in the South stand could have been caught in a pincer movement by West Stand supporters who chose to engage in support of their South Stand brothers.

Despite my initial reticence I’m now persuaded that the Celtic team who participated in this match were playing to a police edict in the second half. A precedent has come to light. John Robertson, a much respected figure in Scottish football, has stated that a plea was made by police at half-time to urge the Hearts team not to score again as they feared a pitch invasion. Hearts had a commanding first half  3-0 lead over Hibs in a September 1990 derby. This narrative will emerge in the BBC documentary which looks at the last thirty years of  Scottish football. If their working title was ‘the cheating years‘ I’m fairly certain a documentary of this nature would not see the light of day. Mark Daly’s ‘The Men who sold the jerseys‘ that lifted the lid on the scale of the EBT tax evasion, resulted in death threats to personnel at BBC Scotland. Choosing the context of an Edinburgh derby suggests that the BBC are playing safe.

John Robertson who played for Hearts, marched with the Hibs fans to oppose his chairman Wallace Mercer’s plans to buy Hibs and subsequently close them down in his desire to create an Edinburgh City club. I’m fairly certain Mr Mercer had one eye on the value  of the land on Easter and Gorgie roads. Mr Robertson told the BBC that a senior officer, accompanied by other officers, entered the Hearts dressing room at half-time and  asserted:

 “We fear another pitch invasion, you know, we’re going to basically say if you score another goal and Hibs fans invade, we may have to stop the game, so you know, if you can help it, don’t score.”

This leads to the following conclusion. If for example you did not fancy Warburton’s patched-up Dads Army squad’s chances against Celtic on September 10, would the swivel eyed loons use social media to promote the prospect of an invasion should Celtic take more than a two goal lead?  Those betting in play may well be advised to cash out at 2-0.

A Rainy Day in Normandy

Is Mr.Warburton aware that his board dodged a £200,000 legal fees bullet?  This ‘bullet’ has been sent to Charles Green. It includes Mr Green’s fees, TRFCL fees and Court of Session costs. It’s important at this juncture to note that Charles Green is not facing any indictments. In thirteen days time, 12 months will have elapsed since he was charged at Glasgow Sheriff Court. In line with the tenets of  The Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act, he cannot be charged with the alleged offences on which he was initially indicted. He will be innocent of all criminal charges.
However the mere act of being charged with offences in Jim Keegan’s Jihad against Protestants, resulted in Lord Doherty ruling that:
“The board of Rangers, who agreed to the legal indemnity, would not have done so if they had known that Mr Green had engaged in serious crimes which included fraud and conspiracy .”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
In the IPO prospectus, section 4.1.2.8 is instructive:
Subject to companies legislation, every director and former director shall be
indemnified by the Company against any liability attaching to him in
connection with:
(a) civil or criminal proceedings in relation to the Company or an associated
company (other than a liability incurred in defending proceedings brought
by the Company or an associated company in which final judgment is given
against the directors);
(b) criminal proceedings in relation to the Company or an associated company
(other than a fine imposed in such proceedings, or a liability incurred in
defending proceedings in which the director is convicted and the conviction
is final).                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
I added the red typeface for emphasis. Mr Green was not convicted. Mr Green will be free of all charges in thirteen days. Mr Green was not engaged in the serious crimes of fraud and conspiracy.I fully expected that the Rangers board would have been liable for Charles Green’s costs. I was castigated on Twitter for being ‘wrong’.  My many critics, who seem to number thousands on Twitter, with one of whom recently coming on to this site to eloquently state that : “I would rather defecate in my hands than donate to your site”,  had a field day. However I was not wrong. But what are eviscerating brickbats when compared to the £200,000 summary justice of the Court Of Session?
Jonathan Brown QC, acting for Mr Green argued that: