Celtic scintillate. The Red Sea flows by Govan


Part of me would like to believe that Celtic destroyed Ferencvaros with a multi-cultural display of slick football as a consequence of the hostile reception they received for an expression of support for racial equality before kick-off.    But that’s not true.  The home supporters deserved no more than to see their team bettered and beaten, Celtic would have been as fabulous no matter.

An early goal followed by an early concession gave the expectation that anything could happen.  Liel Abada’s returned to the first team after a few weeks rest did him the power of good, he snatched onto a poor defensive touch, squaring for Kyogo.  What followed took me back 20 years….. it’s been that long since we’ve had someone with such composure.

Joe Hart could do nothing about the deflected equaliser but when he smothered a shot midway through the first half, he sprung to his feet to release a break.  David Turnbull got the faintest of touches for what would prove to be another assist as the ball found its way to Joto on the left.  The Portuguese drew four defenders before firing a shot that clipped one on its way into the net off a post.

Celtic were on fire now and spurned several chances to stretch their lead, the best when Kyogo controlled an inch-perfect Turnbull pass before dinking the goalkeeper, only to be denied by a goal line clearance.  When the third came, it was another poster moment for great football.  Turnbull won the ball for McGregor to find Kyogo, who played a pass into the box, between defenders.  Abada did not break his stride as he found the corner of the goal.

A late consolation brought Ferencvaros within striking distance of Celtic but the visitors managed the game to the final whistle without concern.  The Europa League knockout rounds are still a possibility but it will almost certainly be the Conference League, which Celtic are now assured of.

Newco accounts for the year to 30 June 2021 are out.  I’ll do a more in-depth look later, a few headlines:

Comprehensive loss for the year was £26.024m, elsewhere you will mainly see the lower operating loss figure quoted, not that £24.153m is low.

For Financial Fair Play purposes, Uefa permit this loss to be adjusted due to the unique circumstances we have lived through.  A quick ready reckoner of this:

While other revenue streams and costs remain consistent with the previous campaigns, gate receipts are down £17.46m (no fans spending money at games) and operating costs are down £8.8m (no fans to serve or steward at games).  Subtract the former from the latter and Uefa will forgive £8.6m of the comprehensive loss, reducing the Financial Fair Play loss to £17.42m or thereabouts.

Football has returned to largely normal operations this year, so that £17.42m figure is a good proxy for Newco’s forward comprehensive loss.  For a business that has never earned more than £59m in its history, the lambeg drums must be ringing the alarm!  There’s so much red ink at Ibrox you’d mistake the Clyde for the Red Sea.

Click Here for Comments >

About Author


  1. Hi Tom (from last thread).



    If I understand admin law correctly (that’s finance law rather than football rules) then any creditor who has a valid claim for monies due which are unpaid can call an admin event. Problem with sevco is that the vast majority of their major debt is via shareholders loans. The rest are probably small sums which can be found one way or another, for example see the multiple small share issues lodged at Companies House, 8 since March this year –






    To call an admin normally the creditor would be of the opinion that they are more likely to maximise their debt return through administration than simply waiting for sevco to pay. The shareholders are generally unlikely to call an admin event to recover their loans as they have a vested interest in the continued running of the company. Also why loan the company money then call an admin event where you’d potentially get a lesser amount back, it wouldn’t make sense in the short term. However bear in mind the “sunk cost fallacy” is also at play here.



    If there’s a significant debt to a non-shareholder (eg HMRC) then that could make things interesting, of course the accounts wouldn’t include this level of commercial detail. Plus there’s a question as to how long you can continue to operate in this manner before such a creditor is created.

  2. Which brings me back To Robert Tressel’ s brilliant post the


    other day I.e shite does indeed float.


    H H Mick

  3. There has to be some sort of Tax default, my guess is PAYE as VAT are rather more strict and on the ball, yes I know :)), than their IR comrades, por cierto




    You’re so right, but here they come lining up their inane


    barbs, their look at me I’m a rebel, or somebody react to


    my windup, so obvious, is their anyone not aware of how


    the trolly dollys work on here?


    What about that new punter Joe Ordinary , surely he can


    see how they work in tandem, it’s almost telepathic, like


    it’s the same person.




    H H Mick

  5. Imagine Man City saying to the rest of the league, by the way we need a huge loan to keep the lights on,and fulfil our fixtures………it’s a total joke, they have been trading insolvent for years,meanwhile the SPFL, SFA,and the other clubs say hee haw

  6. £40 million awaits in the Champions League, and we wonder why they get ridiculous decisions every week? Scottish football, corrupt to the core

  7. !!BADA BING!! on 5TH NOVEMBER 2021 12:47 PM


    ‘Imagine Man City saying to the rest of the league, by the way we need a huge loan to keep the lights on,and fulfil our fixtures………it’s a total joke, they have been trading insolvent for years,meanwhile the SPFL, SFA,and the other clubs say hee haw’








    Their previous iteration went bust but so far as Celtic are concerned nothing happened and it’s business as normal so why should anyone else bother that they are trading whilst insolvent?

  8. Some think you can pick and choose when to boot the ball up the park “to safety”. Or as John Hartson described it “a clipped pass”.



    Not correct.



    Either your stock in trade is a hoof up the park or you play it out from the back.



    Despite the palpitations it may give us, playing out from the back rarely costs a goal. Some say we lost one or two due to this approach. I disagree and will give reasons shortly.



    If true, then why did we not lose more goals. Those were not the only 2 occasions we lost possession.



    First goal. Abada tried a nice wee lob over an opposition to Turnbull (?). Too hard. They took possession and moved the ball from the left across to the right. So any immediate impact of losing possession was no longer a goal threat and was just regular defending. Mostly we did everything that can be expected and there is nothing you can do about a deflection like that.



    Second goal. Mike’s tries to dribble the ball out, takes an awkward touch and loses his footing too. Here is where I would suggest that this isn’t the same as playing the ball out from the back. A pass would have been better (but then so would a pass fromTurnbull to an unmarked Kyogo have been better than shooting). Anyway, we were now left with a 2 on 1 against Ralston. He can’t cover both but does his best to prevent the shot in the circumstances. As it happens it is a peach of a strike into the top corner. Credit where it is due surely.



    Finally, returning to the “clipped ball” up the park. After advocating it , John happily commented “like that” when Hart, under pressure, decided to hit it long towards the right wing. Within seconds he was having to make a save from a poor shot this time. What if that shot had been the pearler?



    My point being, hoofing the ball up the park as a way of getting out of a dangerous defensive situation does not give you any more chance than playing it out,



    But playing it out DOES provide the opportunity to attack. And we do that very well. Mostly.



    *Exception of course is if you’ve got Sutton / Hartson and Larson to find with the out ball. No we’re talking

  9. DAVE KING’S £5m loan to Rangers has cost the club over £800,000 in interest repayments.



    The loan from the former Ibrox chairman, who stood down last year, came with an interest rate of 16 percent.

  10. The defence and GK were excellent last night, but we still lost 2 goals,the ball players need to stop flicking the ball ,as if it’s a game of 5 a sides

  11. “As stated in note 1 the risk that key cash flows are not achieved as forecast, along with the absence of a binding debt facility for any shortfalls, indicate that a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern”

  12. Their wage bill was 95% of ours last season



    Puts the Gerrard’s miracle into a bit of perspective

  13. They received 11m from Uefa for their Europa campaign, they’d receive approx 26m for an average CL campaign.



    It’s really all about chasing the cash for them, they don’t care about paper losses apparently, so uefa money is life or death to them, much more than a well-run club with enough cash in the bank like us. But the difference in Europ abd CL money is roughly what they lose every year



    To make a profit they need to sell players. Preferably to cash rich clubs who will pay a large percentage of the fee upfront. £12m over three or four years won’t do. Which will bring the price down.

  14. GlassTwoThirdsFull on

    “The fact we can get three goals away from home is because we just go at teams. I still think that is the way forward. It’s the kind of team we want to be and I think it’s the team our supporters want us to be.”




    Music to my ears, Ange.


    Hopefully seen the last of the parking the bus, isolated one up front and still getting beat!


    Fast-paced football, movement, runs in behind, players looking to get on the ball and play it forward. That’ll do me!


    Not being an old firmist I really don’t get the fascination with everything that happens at It’s-Definitely-Not-Rangers. If we had a progressive thinking board with a bit of vision and ambition they would be a mere dot in the rear view mirror as Celtic moved forward and maximised its potential.


    Maybe one day……..

  15. Re-post.



    Morning CQN, I lost my dad in August this year and whilst clearing up his documents I found his Celtic share certificate. So I have two questions:



    Firstly how do I go about transferring ownership?



    Secondly is it too late to pass the proxy on?




  16. Turnbull showed them all how to hold off an opponent. If only others shielded the ball like that.

  17. Paul67



    ” There’s so much red ink at Ibrox you’d mistake the Clyde for the Red Sea ”



    A worlds record no ‘reds’ in 66 domestic games, a carefully co-ordinated full-blown ramped up blatant new fraud to ensure the pitch at Poundland doesn’t float into the rising Clyde.



    Ange Postecoglu says he doesn’t look at ‘the decisions in other games’ just like Bankier, Wilson and the crew don’t bother about ‘demotion’



    Shafted CSC

  18. I know for a fact that Celtic normally get little support in SPFL/SFA committees. we have been supported by ICT and Kilmarnock and very few others. We cannot call Rangers to account on our own nor are we allowed to go direct to UEFA as it is the SFA that are members.



    We were instrumental in ensuring that Maxwell ad the modernisers were appointed but they turned out the same as before. They know fine well that Rangers are in breech of Fair play but they turn a blind eye.



    Nevertheless, Celtic must call this mismanagement out even if they are doomed to failure. It is important that we do the right thing or we have no place to bellyache about this

  19. If they lived within their means they would be competing with other teams for the 2nd CL spot, why do other teams not see this and reap the financial rewards, that they are gaining by spending money they just don’t have! Again, what was their TAX position at the European licensing cut off date, I know about the COVID leeway, but would still be interesting to find out if it was outwith the required position, as a previous incarnation cheated the system once and there were directors and chairman still in the company from that previous regime, who would know how to go about achieving that licence by duplicitous means. por cierto