One of today’s newspapers did its very best to run with a one’s as bad as the other’ suggestion, saying : “Yes, both sides have justifiable grievances. Celtic were rightly outraged at the state their stadium was left in. Likewise, the Rangers board were understandably disgusted at those mock executions of blow-up dolls draped in red, white and blue scarves.”
This is wholly misrepresenting the situation. Celtic were rightly outraged at the blow-up dolls, criticised the actions at the time while endorsing the behaviour of the fabled “vast majority”. Celtic don’t have a problem with self-analysis; they’ve done it often enough in recent seasons in the face of Uefa fines.
The blow-up doll incident, and the faux defence of it, which Celtic didn’t offer, has nothing whatsoever to do with who pays for tens of thousands of pounds worth of vandalism carried out by visiting fans at Celtic Park. You can make your own suggestions as to why it was raised in connection with the subject.
The article goes on to offer up evidence of the bigger story, which it somehow manages to miss.
“Rangers (sic.) believe they have every right to take the hump because Celtic have chosen to ignore years of protocol – an unwritten rule which has stood the test of time, whereby each club pays for damage done to its own stadium by opposing fans on derby day.”
Maybe, maybe not, but here’s the thing, whatever unwritten rules Celtic and Rangers observed died in 2012.
You want unwritten rules to persist? Pay your taxes, register your players correctly, make full and honest submissions to HMRC inquiries instead of shredding correspondence. Play by the rules everyone else has to play by.
Cheat, lie, hide and shred and you have no defence in written rules, never mind unwritten objects of your imagination. This reality should now be writ large for all to understand.
After the 1909 Scottish Cup final between Celtic and Rangers ended suspiciously in a draw, one astute observer noted that the clubs were acting in concert, like an Old Firm, in order to generate gate receipts from a replay.
With the permission of Oldco’s administrators, Newco were able to change their name to “Rangers”, but that act of an administrator cut no ice at Celtic Park, or most other Scottish grounds.
There is no Old Firm, it died in 2012. Celtic don’t use the phrase, they don’t observe unwritten rules they had in place with Rangers, they don’t want their stadium trashed, they don’t want to install “prison grade” facilities for visiting fans (this is what’s now required in Scotland in 2017, good grief!), they would happily never host the club again.
If you think all that happened in 2012 was a “relegation” (which you’d earlier reported was impossible), this might be news to you. It was more than this; it was the end of the old ways – and good riddance to them.
Celtic will stand of fall on our own merits. We will observe the laws and rules of the land, the tax authorities, the Association, Uefa and Fifa (even if it means criticising our own fans). If you’re looking for unwritten favours after vandalising our property: tough.
And for those who continually see O.F. conspiracies, none of them have ever been able to tell me a business case for Celtic to put life into that concept. It’s not good for business, no matter what the wildest conspiracy theorist might tell you. Anyone who tells you it is needs to take a look at himself.
434 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- »
Auldheid:
This is what confuses me still…
27th July 2012
The SFL, SFA and Scottish Premier League statement read: “We are pleased to confirm that agreement has been reached on all outstanding points relating to the transfer of the Scottish FA membership between Rangers FC (In Administration), and Sevco Scotland Ltd, who will be the new owners of The Rangers Football Club.
“A conditional membership will be issued to Sevco Scotland Ltd today, allowing Sunday’s Ramsdens Cup tie against Brechin City to go ahead.
“Following the completion of all legal documentation, the Scottish Premier League will conduct the formal transfer of the league share between RFC (IA) and Dundee FC on no later than Friday 3rd August 2012.
Can anybody tell me why Aw Naw got a straight red card?
NEUSTADT-BRAW on 17TH JANUARY 2017 4:52 AM
Brawderators… What’s Italian for procrastination?
Braw
==========================================================
Procrastination IS Italian.
Well………Latin.
Cras…………..the morra.
Canalamar
As a creditor to RFC what right do Celtic have to complain about what a new company calls itself?
How does what TRFC are called affect the size of the creditor pot from RFC and so reduce Celtic’s share? That’s my difficulty.
If on the grounds that Celtic were defrauded of £40K by the liquidation of RFC I suppose they might have been able to lodge a complaint of fraud (although I don’t see one) but taking a view of what is in Celtic’s longer term financial interest, I think they could make a case including my tangential points that such a complaint would cost shareholders more than pursuing it would.
Is this what you were getting at? Had to look up http://www.actionfraud.police.uk/fraud_protection/phoenix_company_fraud to see where a justification to object might lie.
Kit..,
The membership was not transferred, you and Auldheid were correct, a separate conditional membership was created for the new club, so memberships for both sevco and Rangers existed when they played Brechin. When Rangers entered liquidation their membership expired. Sevco’s membership became an associate membership. The use of the word transfer in that first paragraph is deliberately misleading, and identified to the world the SFA’s intentions, our Plc had the opportunity at that time to object as creditors,
The SPL share was nothing to do with the SFA, the share of relegated or liquidated clubs has to be transferred to the club being promoted, I expect this was used deliberately to confuse the issue, sevco have never possessed an SPL share.
As for Awe_Naw..,
I expect there were a few complaints made after he tore a few new fundaments for people abusing him and it suited today’s agenda.
CANAMALAR:
Was Sevco the company or the club regards transfer?
Vis-a-vis Aw_Naw, so it took a few ‘selectively offended’ dobbers to get him a red?
Some things never change on CQN.
Canalamar
And I’ll repeat in the hope it sinks in, the Plc as a creditor, could have objected to Rangers being used in the naming of any new Scottish footballing entity emanating from the basket of assets.
===============
And I’ll ask on what grounds?
How does what a new business that does not owe Celtic any money calls itself adversely affect Celtic’s shareholders?
If you are suggesting the liquidation to avoid coughing up the £40K was dodgy then this route
http://www.actionfraud.police.uk/fraud_protection/phoenix_company_fraud
might have been open but how could Celtic prove it and would any complaint increase the size of that creditor pot?
I just don’t see the same locus for Celtic here as there was for Res12.
As to your point about Celtic wanting a form of Rangers back, of course they did, but lost an opportunity to set conditions for acceptance like living within their means or tackling bigotry meaningfully or being treated as any new club applying for an SFL place.
Res12 provided that opportunity in 2013 if skulduggery had been confirmed but they adjourned it. However that keeps the door open until it can definitely be said without contradiction that Res12 was unnecessary which was the formal response in 2013.
Events this year are likely to demand answer.
kitalba on 17th January 2017 5:00 am
I think Canalamar has answered it.
There is Club Licensing which is an annual event following a detailed process but failing it does not necessarily mean ejection.
There is SFA Membership which is conferred on a club who play in the SPFL . There used to be three types but it was reduced to two after SPFL formed in 2013
And there is the SPFL share that in 2012 was an SPL share and so a club being relegated gave it up for an SFL place and the club being promoted took the SPL share over from the relegated club. With an amalgamated SPFL I think (without checking) the same arrangement applies within the SPFL Divisions.
———————–
SFA Handbook Articles 2011/12
4.2 Members shall be of three classes: full members: associate members: registered members.
SFA Handbook as Updated to 2 Aug 2013.
Article 6.2 A club or association shall be admitted as a registered member automatically by reason of its being admitted as a member of an Affiliated Association or an Affiliated National Association, or , in the case of a club in membership of or participation in an association. League or other combination of clubs formed in terms of Article 18 and in the case of an association by being formed in terms of Article 18 , provided it is not already an associate or full member . A registered member shall not be a member of more than one Affiliated Association or more than one Affiliated National Association. A registered member may apply at any time to become an associate member.
Article 6.3 A club or association desiring to qualify for full membership of the Scottish FA must first be admitted as an associate member . A club cannot be admitted as an associate member unless it meets and commits to continuing compliance with the Membership Criteria and amendments thereto as shall be promulgated by the Board from Time to time in connection with the membership of the Scottish FA.
—————————-
SFA Handbook as Updated to 2 Aug 2013
4.2 Members shall be of two classes:- full members and registered members
6.2 A club or association shall be admitted as a registered member automatically by reason of its being admitted as a member of an Affiliated Association or an Affiliated National Association, or in the case of a club through membership of or participation in an association, league or other combination of clubs formed in terms of Article 18 and in the case of an association by being formed in terms of Article 18, provided it is not already a full member. A registered member shall not be a member of more than one Affiliated Association or more than one Affiliated National Association. A registered member may apply at any time to become a full member.
6.3 A club or association desiring to qualify for full membership of the Scottish FA must meet, and commit to continuous compliance with, the Membership Criteria and amendments thereto as shall be promulgated by the Board from time to time in connection with the membership of the Scottish FA.
Navel gazers gaze.
That`s what they do.
Introspectors desperately seek validation for their attempts to malign the Club they claim to support.
Actually , that`s a job for John Cleese and the People`s Front for the liberation of Timdom.
Meanwhile , in the real world , Celtic supporters celebrate.
Hey , Brendan.
Go for it , son.
We`re right behind you.
Well . That`s Celtic supporters.
Good morning CQN from a dull, drizzling and miserable East Devon.
Hope everyone has recovered from the dreaded ” Blue Monday “.
HH.
Go for it Brendan.
http://soccersouls.com/2017/01/17/2-assists-6-europa-games-will-promising-youngster-bring-celtic/
Good morning friends from a damp, drizzly but pretty mild East Kilbride.
Fats.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy5WM1xYbGo
Auldheid:
“If on the grounds that Celtic were defrauded of £40K by the liquidation of RFC I suppose they might have been able to lodge a complaint of fraud (although I don’t see one) but taking a view of what is in Celtic’s longer term financial interest, I think they could make a case including my tangential points that such a complaint would cost shareholders more than pursuing it would.”
You wouldn’t be promoting harvesting the bigot pound whilst prostituting the club’s collective soul at the expense of ethical principles now would you?
Auldheid,
Check section 3)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/45/part/7A/crossheading/objections-investigations-and-revocation
Any objection, was any objection made ?
Every creditor is informed using form 4.73, informing creditors implies objections can be prepared,whether thats to the courts, companies house or the receiver is unclear but section 3) looks to be the most obvious route.
Rather:
You wouldn’t be promoting prostituting the club’s collective soul to harvest the bigot pound at the expense of ethical principles now would you?
I think that is how it should have read.
‘ Morning from a dull yet mild Media City in Salford, been in gym already. I can surely b not far way from another hamstring injury
Good Morning.
Just my opinion, but this whole thing about the new club at Ibrox suffers from being bogged down and overly concerned with the detail of the rules, the terms of the regulations and the minutiae of the procedures adopted by and justified by the SFA or UEFA.
Lawyers often get stuck in the detail of the law as opposed to looking at what the law was intended to achieve.
So, on The Rangers (old or new) let me put a purely business argument.
By 2012 UEFA, and through them the SFA, had started to introduce regulations which sought to introduce financial fair play rules designed to prevent football clubs throughout Europe running on an improper or inappropriate business basis.
Dead simple principle.
When Rangers went bust in the way it went bust, the whole of Scottish Football felt the shockwaves. TV contracts were supposedly in Jeopardy, gates and revenue were going to be adversely affected, the transfer market was depleted, and the loss of such a big club and the money it generated in Scotland was seen as a disaster.
Dead simple cause and effect. Dead simple industry analysis. So you analyse, gather the facts and learn from any mistakes. Yes?
In 2013, in my one and only prolonged meeting with Peter Lawwell, the Celtic CEO spoke a glaringly obvious truth and made perfect business sense:
He openly questioned who knew or could have guessed just how bad things were over at Ibrox? Who could have guessed in advance that the whole house of cards would come crashing down so spectacularly? Not only that, but he also pointed out that no one could guess what would happen next at Ibrox as at the time Charlie Green was openly spouting nonsense and anyone could see that there was no business stability at all down Govan way.
Dead simple business premise: You can’t build a business plan or have any confidence or faith in a business contract where one of the main players is unstable or in deep trouble or is openly bust or short of money.
In other words it made no business sense to have any reliance on this “new” Rangers as who knew if their business would survive.
So, let me pose a question or a theory.
Were there those within Scottish Football, and elsewhere, who genuinely believed — that by staying quiet, by saying nothing, and by allowing a legal myth to be created whereby a badly funded and poorly run new business which imitates an already wrecked and failed business — they were doing something good for Scottish Football?
Why on God’s earth did they think that?
If the finances of Scottish Football were wrecked, or nearly wrecked, by a club like Rangers being run into the ground and going bust, why did anyone in their right mind believe that those same finances and that same business model would benefit from a poorly financed and badly governed phoenix club being given virtually the same provenance and prominance within the same business sector?
That is just madness of the most astounding degree.
The Celtic CEO pointed out years ago that business wise you cannot enter into any collective agreement that is dependent or heavily relies on there being a Rangers of any kind or Ibrox producing any kind of successful team for definite, because no one can gauge what the state of that business is or is going to be in the future. From the outside, it is a business that looked then, and looks now, to be fatally wounded.
And hey, correct me if I am wrong, those financial fair play rules and all their detail were designed so that football authorities could see at a glance that a football club was being properly run and that when things were going wrong they could be spotted immediately and so prevent the rest of football being adversely affected.
So, how does Scottish Football possibly benefit in maintaining the notion that the current business is the same business as the previous one which totally jeopardised the game in Scotland and supposedly brought us all to the point of Armageddon?
AND
In the event that the imitation business suffers an insolvency event in the short to medium term in the future, will all those in football be rushing to repeat the myth scenario and scream “Armageddon is upon us” once again?
If so, they have failed in their duties and should be removed from office for failing to learn hee haw from the past.
Forget the details of the rules.
Look at what the rules were meant to achieve for the greater good of football as a whole as opposed to looking at how one team, one club, one company or one legal entity did or did not comply with the minutiae of the rules.
The rules were designed to ensure that the finances of one club does not bugger up and skew the game as a whole!
Accordingly, it makes no sense to even contemplate or tolerate the creation of an imitation club and put it in a position where it can potentially have the same disasterous impact as the previous club under the stewardship of many who were responsible for the previous disaster in the first place.
If it is at all possible, any right thinking business person would want nothing to do with such a business and any dealings you are forced to have must be undertaken with the appropriate business scepticism.
Perhaps that is why Celtic officials recorded the conditions at Ibrox prior to the hogmonay visit.
If it is true that the Ibrox club made a completely false claim regarding alledged damage to their stdium and wrongly sought monetary compensation on the back of a false claim, then there is a word for that in law.
If it is true that customers, of any kind, entered into business premises and deliberately and criminally set about damaging those premises, then there is an obvious course of action to follow in such a circumstance.
In both of the scenarios above, common sense, and not the law, tells you that you never deal with such people ever again.
In the real world, Celtic Supporters support the team and hold the Plc responsible for the missed opportunities and loss of earnings through corrupt governance of the game, that cost everyone but the Plc board who got all their rewards anyway.
Meanwhile the teleological will justify anything, anyhow as long as they can claim even a hint of progress, same as the generals in WWI, donkeys.
BROGAN ROGAN TREVINO AND HOGAN;
You speak extensively about rules, but I personally can’t determine the rules. They have a Sandy Brysonesque fluidity to them that always favours a certain geographical club.
We are not subject to the same rules as another club is. That is not a level playing field.
The rules on here seem to have a rather Sandy Bryson quality to them too eh! Paul67?
BRTH,
“He openly questioned who knew or could have guessed just how bad things were over at Ibrox? Who could have guessed in advance that the whole house of cards would come crashing down so spectacularly?”
This blog had been openly predicting exactly those scenarios for years, so if PL could not see it as an insider then his already shady reputation takes another hit on your reportage.
CANAMALAR:
I was surprised that BRTH actually wrote that because like you state, it appeared to be commonly discussed and predicted right across the spectrum of the Celtic-minded blogosphere years in advance of their meeting.
BRTH:
Do you think Celtic PLC’s collective common sense, and they are ever so lauded on here as being individually and collectively astute business men, will deter them from taking 8,000 pokes of bigot pounds come the next Celtic v The Rangers football match played at Parkhead?
Why was Dr John Reid told to back off, why was he not allowed to produce the dossier he threatened to re the cheating ?
If we had the answers to these questions we would know, but I think we already have the answers.
BBC equivalent to Thugs and Thieves:
BBC
Friday, 13 December, 2002, 22:47 GMT
Celtic fans’ plane in emergency landing
A charter plane carrying 148 Celtic football fans has been forced to make an emergency landing at Cardiff International Airport after reports of a major public disturbance on board.
The Boeing 737, en route from Santiago in northern Spain to Glasgow, was carrying supporters home after their team’s Uefa Cup game against Celta Vigo and was due to arrive at 1535 GMT.
In a “full emergency” situation, South Wales Police boarded the plane – now on the runway at Cardiff – to take statements from crew members and passengers.
Several passengers were removed from the plane for further questioning. At least six arrests were made.
Police said six males from Glasgow were arrested – two 37-year-olds, and others aged 40, 42, 45 and 51.
They were arrested on suspicion of violent disorder and taken to Barry police station.
The remaining fans will be sent back to Glasgow on a bus.
The Royal Air Force at Kinloss in Moray was alerted shortly after 1500 GMT and scrambled two helicopters – on exercise in the Bristol Channel – as a precaution before the plane’s crew elected to divert.
The plane landed at Cardiff at 1517 GMT. Nine fire engines and ambulances joined police at the scene.
‘Unruly’ passengers
Ian Macauley of airline Astreus told BBC News 24: “It became apparent during the flight that a number of passengers were becoming unruly.
“The captain adjudged the situation was such that he should divert to Cardiff.
“The aircraft landed safety at Cardiff and there have been a number of arrests – a number of people have been removed.
“We understand somebody may have been smoking on the aircraft, which is completely forbidden.
“When the passenger’s ways were pointed out, a number of people got involved in something which became a fracas.”
It is not known whether alcohol played a part in the incident, which one member of crew described as a “riot” at one point.
Helicopter scrambled
According to passenger Steve Prince, the pilot told passengers they would be detained on the runway at Glasgow.
“After that, there was a discussion between one of the passengers and the cabin crew – it was a little bit heated but not too bad,” he said.
“One of the passengers leaned over and tapped one of the cabin crew on the shoulder.
“The next thing, we were descending at a rapid rate and heading to Cardiff.
“I’m a little surprised to hear there had been a riot on board. There were not any fierce postures taken.”
He claimed “no alcohol whatsoever” had been sold or consumed on the plane.
A Celtic FC statement read: “We are extremely concerned about the reports we are receiving, both about the seriousness of events and the safety of our supporters.
“We are awaiting more information but currently understand that the flight was not an official Celtic charter and was not arranged through Celtic Football Club.”
Kit..,
Remember it well, was one of the big attractions to this site, long before me, Awe_Naw and I think voguepunter developed the traditional CQN welcome and that’s going back about 8 or 9 year.
I also remember getting dogs abuse from the guy you just complained about, for telling someone to stop talking and have another drink (without knowing they had a drink problem), seems that’s changed and it’s OK now.
Can somebody remind me what was the outcome of that episode where Britain’s defence forces were mobiised to arrest an illegal tobacco smoker and a shoulder tapper?
Can anybody remind me what did the BBC report about The Rangers supporters very recent and very blatant, sectarian singing in airports and airplanes, and the groping of aircrews by Rangers supporters?
That’s a very poor defence of PL BRT&H.
Seriously, I’m surprised you bought that nonsense when everyone of us knew they were a basket case.
FFS all PL had to do was listen to Hugh Adams. I’m astounded of forehead you bought that!
MWD
AULDHEID @ 2:47 AM,
From the get go I thought Res 12 would have a problem in this regard, as far as the resolution is concerned and also, a point you mentioned earlier – the 5 way agreement, Celtic should have a least laid down a marker.
Why do I go no further than that?
Well on occasion Celtic have spoken out – always IMO, with good cause, but what is the result?
Let’s look at one fairly recent example.
Of course We know our History but a wee reminder…
Celtic as a whole have been of the view they get cheated in Scottish Football, they believe(d) “Rangers” get preferential treatment.
Now events went into overdrive during the Tony Mowbray era, we strongly suspected, and have subsequently been proven right, that this was due Rangers precarious financial position and their need for Scottish Prize money and Champions League Participation to keep them afloat.
Now of course this continued into the Neil Lennon era where it came to a head.
First we had Dougie McDonald and the Dallas cover-up – that proved beyond doubt what, again, we had long suspected… Referees and match officials conspire against Celtic.
Then shortly after we had Willie Collum awarding a penalty to Rangers in an Old Firm Match, that the whole world and his wife could see was; a) NOT a penalty, b) The referee did NOT see the incident, he in fact had his back to it.
Okay, we are all clear on that.
So Neil Lennon spoke out.
The Chairman of the Board John Reid, spoke out.
The result… The SMSM railed against Celtic, As did the Scottish Football Establisent, the Referees went on Strike and spokesmen from ex-referees, through pundits to the usual suspects pilloried Celtic.
Who said this…
“[Referees] need to be protected from chairman and managers who question their honesty and integrity”
Yes – Jim Traynor, looks rather ominous in hindsight doesn’t it.
Of course you had “Scottish Football Correspondent” Roddy Forsyth repeating the pro Referee anti-Celtic propaganda in England and beyond.
They were prepared to make Scotland look like a Footballing Banana Republic, than face up to the wrong doing.
Have no doubt, that’s what happens when Celtic have the audacity to speak up about being cheated.
For me… Our current strategy is working just fine thank you…
If You Can’t Join Them, Beat Them!
Hail Hail
December 2013 Celtic ban 128 Celtic Supporters who happened to be members of the Green Brigade following 10k’s worth of damage purportedly caused by them to Motherwell’s stadium. Belatedly turns out it was not the Green Brigade’s members who caused the damage.
The huns cause 40k’s worth of damage to Parkhead, what was Celtic’s response?
Destroy all CCTV footage ?
and don’t forget how our PLC stood up for its supporters post the 5-Banger-Riot up in Dundee
does anyone know why we dont have a game listed for the weekend of the 12th february.
its not an international week is it?
Scottish cup weekend Foghorn
They scrambled 60 police officers, the fire brigade, Britain’s elite first responder defence forces and the salvation army and it resulted in Welsh courts collecting £550 in fines.
Value for tax payers money.
No assaults, no sectarian singing, no groping of air crews.
Any Huns looking in will be very pleased to report on the standard of posting on CQN this morning.
Cheerio for now,
JJ