Central-mid quandary for Celtic


We know what to expect from Aberdeen tonight.  They will flood (pardon the pun) central midfield, defend deeply and, let’s be clear, they will score any time we allow them the kind of space they exploited at Celtic Park this month.

Question is, what will Celtic do about it?  If Stefan Johansen’s ankle knock keeps him out the central-mid triangle of Johansen, Brown and Biton will be disrupted, and surely Neil Lennon will not revert to a central two after the Scottish Cup lesson.  The picture is further complicated by the injury to Emilio Izaguirre, which forced Charlie Mulgrew back at the weekend.  Mulgrew would be a suitable direct replacement for Johansen.

In 10 years doing this stuff I’ve probably used no more than a few dozen words to praise emerging young talent; it’s been a rough decade in that respect.  Without wanting to go overboard in any way, Darnell Fisher has looked more than comfortable at right back in the absence of Mikael Lustig and Adam Matthews.  Darnell’s problem going forward will be that he has two excellent international players ahead of him in the pecking order, but for tonight, I would be tempted to bring Matthews to left back (if he can do it against Barcelona….) and restore Fisher to the right back slot.  This would allow Charlie to sit alongside Scott Brown and Nir Biton in central-mid.

Well done to Frank McAvennie, who is jumping out of an aeroplane 15,000 feet in the air.  You can play your part in this exercise by supporting the Quarriers run, Chavey Down residential home, in Newton Mearns, which helps young people up to the age of 16.

The need is for sensory equipment, toys and wheelchair-appropriate play areas.  To contribute, go to Frank’s JustGiving page, or text FMSD 89 followed by £1, 2, 3, 5, 10 to 70070.

If you would like to read the new CQN Magazine, GO HERE to read properly, and for FREE, the graphic below is just a taster.
[calameo code=0003901710a55b5798f06 lang=en page=1 hidelinks=1 width=100% height=500]

Click Here for Comments >

About Author

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 42

  1. Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan supports Oscar Knox, MacKenzie Furniss and anyone else who fights Neuroblastoma on

    Big Nan


    12:56 on


    25 February, 2014



    Ha I am NOT posting as a lawyer — more as a bozo with a keyboard.



    I used to be a lawyer but I am alright now as I often say!



    I came out of mainstream legal practice almost 9 years ago now as I found myself more and more involved in the field of business advice and far removed from my court practitioner days.



    The law is a great tool — but many lawyers institutionally consider it to be the only or main tool in the toolbox and it is only when you have taken a step back that you can really see that there are times when the law really is the court of last resort for all sorts of reasons.



    I once walked into a meeting where I found myself ( a nipper ) face to face with a well known Glasgow “personality” — although others may have called him a Gangster.



    He did not introduce himself but made it plain that he was the silent partner of the two spivs who had had the stupidity to employee me in connection with their business.



    He had a rasping voice that contrasted with his sharp suit.



    ” Are you any good as a lawyer, son?” he asked.



    ” Yes!” I said boldly



    ” Because I know a place where you can get loads of great lawyers” he rasped confidently.



    ” Where’s that then?” says I.



    ” Dalbeth Cemetery” says he quick as a flash



    ” Aye but do you not wait ages for them to give you an opinion?” says I, and added ” Besides those buggers never answer their phone!”



    We got on pretty famously after that until he faked someone’s death just so he could inherit a sum of money!



    The law is a great tool — but then so is a spanner —- both are useless when you need a screwdriver though!





    12:57 on 25 February, 2014





    What took you so long?






    Getting bloody served,bud!

  3. TheOriginalSadiesBhoy on

    hamiltontim is praying for oscar



    12:58 on 25 February, 2014





    Is Frankie Bhoy using a parachute?!





    Ha! Ha! Post of the day.

  4. Tin hat on here…..



    Totally agree with Judge Tyres reasoning today when you think of the information he was working with.



    All smoke and mirrors but it WILL come crashing down eventually.



    Have a little patience as that Manky Manure Nobhead Gary Barlow sings.

  5. BRT&H



    I so want to believe you that the original UTT and LNS verdicts were just an honest mistake but I am completely with tamrabam on this.



    In relation to swallowing the argument that the Murray Group’s EBT organisation was not a sham nor ever intended to be a sham, where is the evidence of their “working” in reaching a conclusion that agrees with this viewpoint? They wrote little more than an assertion that they had been told, by the Murray Group, that it was an honest scheme, set up honestly , and that any, however numerous, mistakes that were made were merely repeated cock-ups rather than deliberate corruption.



    If a defendant, answering to a plea of assault with a weapon, advanced the argument that he was intending to use the knife in question for peeling potatoes and that the assault victim had accidentally got between him and his potatoes, any judge, charged with weighing up the validity of such a defence, would look around for evidence of potatoes or potato peelings in the nearby vicinity of the assault. Where are the Rangers’ potato peelings?



    Where does the majority verdict list the evidence in favour of the honest mistake defence? They merely assert that they agree with the defence argument. An assertion is not a convincing argument; it requires evidence, data and instances of why cock-up is a more convincing account than conspiracy and corruption.



    I seem to recall that, prior to the evidence being weighed, the actual architect of the advice underlying the scheme, the dual expert in screwing, the former porn star cum tax advisor, had stated openly that Rangers would have been in the clear if they had just followed his advice to the letter but they failed to do so. He was telling the tax judges that Rangers did not do it right and that finding them guilty would not have undermined the validity or future legal use of his EBT scheme or advice. Like the Judge at Edinburgh’s trial of Neil Lennon’s assailant, Mr. Baxendale-Walker stated that they were guilty but Misters Mure & Rae and LNS said “Naw! Yir no!”. Two assessors with a legal background found them not guilty but it took a C.A., in Dr. Poon, to forensically nail this weak reasoning.



    Now, those of you who worked within the profession of law, will have more respect for the probity and honesty of most practitioners and will resent any loose depiction of them as either a masonic cabal or a venal, corrupt body as a whole.



    However Judges have been making stupid corrupt decisions from time immemorial. Judge Taney in the Dredd Scott case, the indiscreet Webster Thayer in the Sacco & Vanzeti case, Lord Denning with his politicised ruling on the word “economic” in his judgement against GLC transport subsidy and our own top guy, Frank Mulholland, responsible for the dazzlingly stupid drafting of the OBaF Act. All of these were lauded, respectable men with no known “inner circle” allegiances, yet they made perverse judgements which fitted their own prejudices, and those of their masters, more than the legal precepts they were charged to uphold.



    Now, in Lord Nimmo Smith’s case and with Mure & Rae , we are assured that there was no “allegiance” that accounts for their verdicts. Well why is their reasoning for their verdict so weak or, in the case of the majority UTT verdict, practically non-existent, especially on the most germane points?



    In the absence of all this, where does Occam’s Razor take us? Why would they be so thin in defending their position when Dr. Poon was so expansive in defending hers?



    Is it really just paranoia that interprets their reticence as a self defence mechanism? That they could not outline their “working” because they had no compelling evidence for agreeing with the defendants.



    In your last, contemporary, defence of the majority verdict’s probity, you suggested that they may have wanted, for reasons of better clarification of the law, for this to proceed to a higher appeal level. I found that an unconvincing defence then, because they did not nor could not know, that their verdict would be appealed by HMRC. Even a prior assertion of their determination to appeal, would be no guarantee that this is how HMRC would react after either post-trial pressure or reflection. The majority verdict guys made their decision and it could have been final and buried this case for all time. It is hard to escape the view that this was what they wanted.





    Is Foghorn Leghorn not a play on an Italian place name or summat?



    Mail ya shortly when I finally come to my senses and knock it on the head for the day.



    Last pint according to my abacus and stopwatch.

  7. Given the amount of help THEY have had from The Establishment over the years, it is understandable how some are viewing Lord Tyre`s verdict. In this case, though, I think it is an erroneous view. Lord Tyre`s verdict was, IMO, unprejudiced.



    Cheerio for now,




  8. auldheid,



    Thanks for the response, well considered as usual and in the circumstances probably the best and safest outcome that we can expect, much as it will cause me a great deal of angst to accept it.




  9. frank ryan’s whiskey



    11:17 on 25 February, 2014


    So Lord O’Dochartaigh is a Tim!!



    Judge Lord Doherty revealed he was a Celtic season ticket holder and a “modest” shareholder in the club. Both sides said they had no objection to him hearing the case.



    Just a question one of our legal eagles may be able to answer. Why would Doherty admit to being a Celtic supporter (conflict of interest with the particular casei am guessing) but if he were a member of the masonic order he would not ,i assume, have to admit to being a member of said association with all the inherent conflicts of interest there?



    That’s a difficult one because there are many Masons that are Tims

  10. Kayal33


    13:34 on


    25 February, 2014


    Liam Henderson for Stefan Johansen if he’s not fit. Straight replacement. Like for like, centre mid for centre mid. Keeps team shape that’s worked well since cup defeat. Stop us getting overrun in midfield like last time. Prevents rushing players back from injury. Gives youth a chance.



    Ticks many boxes.



    Agree.This boy shows every attribute of a star player.Remember Paul Mc Stay playing against the Dons up there and scoring on his debut.Look where that catapulted him.Lenny has to show some faith.Tinkering with the team does not work.Not with Lenny anyhow.Straight swap.No problem.

  11. patsean



    12:59 on 25 February, 2014



    If your still looking for tickets might have some but won’t no till 4-45. Will post about that time if any HH

  12. ryecatcher



    13:50 on 25 February, 2014





    You need to get yourself off to University…….it is DIE…..as in DIE YA HUN





    I know, I know, spelling, and diplomat courses where not my strongest, so feck off.

  13. Sky sports 1 2-15pm



    Footballs greatest team Glasgow Celtic 1967


    Worth a watch I would think HH

  14. Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan supports Oscar Knox, MacKenzie Furniss and anyone else who fights Neuroblastoma on

    I suspect that Colin Tyre will have ruled against the arrestment because there is no de facto evidence that Rangers Football Club Ltd are de facto insolvent or in imminent danger of nit being able to pay their bills.



    The very fact that the directors have secured additional funding ( whether that is wise in the long term or not ) suggests that the people behind the company have access to and are capable of securing the necessary finances to ensure payment of their debts.



    Martin Bain was able to persuade the court that Rangers PLC had de facto outstanding debts and was subject to a major claim by the revenue which would preclude him from recovering payment of his claim if successful — his claim being one based on contract and being more than statable.



    In this case, IA has a claim but it is “iffy” to an extent and he has clearly failed to persuade Tyre that the company will be unable to pay him in the event of his being successful.



    Every chance he will come back for another go though should new info come to light concerning unpaid debts.

  15. So at one point we have:



    moo ‏@moo_ted 1h


    Lord Tyre suggesting it might not be reasonable to grant the IA motion as it may put them into Insolvency.



    Then later we get:



    moo ‏@moo_ted 42m


    Lord Tyre says there is enough evidence for the case to go ahead. But no arrestment of moneys as its unreasonable.



    So he doesn’t actually say they’re not in danger of imminent insolvency.



    However I’d suggest that what he’s seen shows that ring fencing the money may prevent them from reaching a point where they can gather ST and thus stay in business until the case is heard but the loans they’ve just secured will allow just that. More or less backing up all the speculation in the last day or so.



    It also implies that although IA has a case, it’s not open and shut. He may not win and in that case it would be unreasonable to push them towards insolvency by ring-fencing the cash.

  16. Hamiltontim is praying for Oscar on

    Bobby Russell



    Did Franny get in touch with you regarding those tickets for tonight?

  17. embramike supporting wee Oscar and Res 12 on

    Just sat through the morning of day 2 of the UTT case, obviously the short straw of Embra RFC related cases today! Brain and ass suitably numb!



    Point to mention that Lord Doherty was always hearing this case, not a last minute sub.



    HMRC will continue for the rest of the week before Murray team reply. Even legals saying it is dry but I say desiccated dry!



    It is points of law relating to definition of a contract to pay emoluments, what was explicit or tacit, agreed or implied. Semantics of how the EBTs were said to be handled and actually how. Loaded with references to the 17 days of FTT evidence, decisions, opinions, skeletons (no zombie jokes) and related case law!



    Interesting aside comment off record that the leaks to Rangers Tax Case caused some consternation to say the least, probably why I was asked informally (due to my casual attire) if I was there for a blog!



    After the 10 day hearing, a written decision can be expected (a month?) and thereafter the possibility of a further appeal to the highest level tribunal whenever.



    There’s half a day of my life I won’t get back. Somebody else’s turn next time!

  18. Auldheid



    “Everybody knows that but the truth is the game does not want to go there because of the title stripping consequences.”



    Use of the phrase “the game” is curiously unpersonal. Who do you mean precisely?





    “In that regard my position is they can keep their stinking titles as long as the whole culture of mis-governance that helped produced them is dismantled.


    Now I know some will demand title stripping but I ask where does that take our game? In the podcast Stuart Cosgrove speaks of the shame die hard Rangers men feel at what has been done in their name at their club. The nutters will be the loudest and defiant, that is what makes them nutters, but they do not represent the full support.”




    I struggle to understand why, if the decent Rangers fans are ashamed of how they came about these titles, they would not want to relinquish them as tainted. What use is their shame otherwise?



    If, instead, you are arguing that we should not seek relinquished titles because the nutters would riot, I think we come close to arguing for appeasement.



    I understand that re-construction of the future is more important than punishing the mis-deeds of the past. However, if the forces that sought and obtained corruption in the game in the past, are still about, they will seek to corrupt whatever future mechanisms are put in place. I fear we may be being asked to buy a pig in a poke again, with the promise of “incorruptible administration procedures”. That is, I think, a chimera, as there has been no set of rules that have been immune from man’s ability to corrupt.



    Not the Ten Commandments. Not the US constitution. And certainly not the SFA rule book.

  19. Perhaps Lord Tyre is a tube with an inflated sense of importance or possibly just a well balanced individual. We should tread carefully but I think this could still turn out to be a good year.



    Coat etc.

  20. Rubber this post.


    syd negakev



    14:03 on 25 February, 2014


    Perhaps Lord Tyre is a tube with an inflated sense of importance or possibly just a well balanced individual. We should tread carefully but I think this could still turn out to be a good year.



    Coat etc.

  21. TheOriginalSadiesBhoy on

    Any of you ghuys who have Virgin TV and are fretting over having to buy Breaking Bad dvds to watch the series Cost £50 a£60???? I noticed yesterday that in Virgin On Demand Movies there is an option for Netflix. You can get Netflix on your telly for one months free trial and watch all 60 + (?) episodes of Breaking Bad and other Great tv series and films.mthereafter it costs £6.99 per month if you wish to continue.

  22. TheOriginalSadiesBhoy on

    Oops.,last sentence should read, “Thereafter it costs £6.99 per month if you wish to continue.”

  23. from twitter court dude;-)



    moo ‏@moo_ted 3 mins



    Biggest laugh in court. Sevco lawyer ” Rangers are 1 of biggest brands in world, Lord Tyre ” it didn’t stop them being liquidated” . Ha ha.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 42