Quantcast

Neil Lennon comments on uncertainty, SFA look cowardly

111

I would not pay too much attention to Neil Lennon’s comments about the squad not needing “much rebuilding, if at all.”  What he said about the prevailing uncertainty among all clubs is more revealing.

Celtic’s income will suffer next season in line with the rest of the industry, but Neil and the club will know that unique opportunities will open up with the transfer window.  Player valuations and wage offers will be down across the board.  Celtic are solvent, we should make this one of our busiest windows.

On receiving new evidence in 2018, an SFA Judicial Panel came to the conclusion that it did not have jurisdiction to determine whether Rangers’ 2011 Uefa licence was properly applied for and granted, and that the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) was the competent body.  Celtic were denied a Champions League qualification place as a consequence of this application.

After a two-year delay, the SFA yesterday announced they would not refer the matter to CAS “following consideration of the implications of such a referral”.

It may be the implications are irrelevant as the club went into liquidation in 2012, or it may be the implications are so great, Scottish football would be thrown into a whole new trauma.  This is not analogous of the SPFL declining to submit to a second investigation two weeks after Deloittes did exactly the same thing.

On that matter, Neil Doncaster explained himself in great detail and was examined by the media.  The SFA have given no explanation.  From the outside, it looks like a cowardly reaction to the treatment the SPFL board endured in recent weeks.

Click Here for Comments >
Share.

About Author

111 Comments
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3

  1. Every club in smaller leagues will need to manage any and all money they have as best they can until they know how and when football will be played again. Celtic is no different, it would be crazy to spend money right now. Once a clearer picture emerges that can be reviewed.

     

     

    We have about 8 players going out of contract/ loan ending and outside foster none had done that well for us, so they go and celtic cut the wage bill. If club brugg buy kioussi, great that’s another of the wage bill.

     

     

    If ajer and/ or ntcham want to go, get as much money for them as possible and replace. Eduard is in different category because it’s far harder to find a striker of his quality. Only stupid money would get that deal done. Hopefully we would be able to pick up some decent players along the way to cover the players sold.

     

     

    We need to get the strongest team we can onto the pitch to go for the 10, but not at any cost. I dont think one team will in scotland will come out of this stronger.

     

     

    I predict smaller squad, more young players being promoted into 1st team football, reduction in player wages and transfer fees and more free transfers will be the order of the day. Some of these things are not actually bad, just how we get there

     

     

    HH

  2. Just before I head out to the golf a wee snippet.

     

     

    View the new Castors jerseys exclusive to members of “MyGers”

     

    I believe it’s 50 quid to be a member,hurry up gullibles they’re going fast.

     

     

    Think I’ll play 9 in a row then go for a 2nd 9 in a row

     

     

    HH

  3. Good morning from the red skied Chilterns…

     

     

    “This is not analogous of the SPFL declining to submit to a second investigation two weeks after Deloittes did exactly the same thing.

     

     

    On that matter, Neil Doncaster explained himself in great detail and was examined by the media.”

     

     

    Well it is you know, in fact the similitude is frightening.

     

     

    We have a contrived vote by the SPFL. If it was a professional board it would have allowed the members to make the decision.

     

     

    Of course the SPFL as a board can have a preference in the voting, it can advise members of the advantages and disadvantages of voting in certain ways. After all they should have done the analysis, the facts should have been presented to the member clubs and the vote should have been professionally conducted.

     

     

    None of that happened, the SPFL executive decided what THEY wanted to happen and “fixed” the vote. To the point their Directors were calling clubs coercing them to vote a certain way.

     

     

    The Deloittes inquiry was likewise a sham, the parameters of the inquiry were “fixed” by the very people the inquiry was investigating, it was undertaken by a SPFL incumbant vendor, so hardly independent. It took no account of the issues raised by the clubs with a grevience (whether justified or not).

     

     

    Neil Doncaster went to the media for the same purpose now as he did in March 2012… to add smoke’n mirrors to the chaos.

     

     

    Remember it was the SFA who said it’s President (Campbell Ogilvie) was heavily conflicted. It was the SFA that announced the running inquiry into Rangers would be widened to take in the stream of revelations in terms of Rangers wrong doing that was entering the public domain.

     

     

    Remember both the Hugh Adam’s exposé and the Sherriffs turning up to collect the tax money were part of the Rangers scandal, both very much had a bearing on the WTC and what was to become Res 12.

     

     

    As Stewart Regan’s words echoed around. The SMSM proclaimed Sir David Murray had cleared (yes, that’s the very wording they used) Campbell Ogilvie and in unison Neil Doncaster announced a SPL investigation which guzumped the SFA inquiry.

     

     

    The SPL inquiry never happened, instead the Scottish Football movers and shakers… yes ALL of them, went about the business of ressurecting Rangers, including the 5 way agreement, those architect was Neil Doncaster.

     

     

    Once everything was agreed including the dodgy 5 way agreement – which gave Rangers immunity as we’ve seen yet again this week – the LNS Commission pantomime was enacted. Neil Doncaster using the “heavily conflicted” Campbell Ogilvie as a key witness to ensure Rangers… past, present and future, were off the hook.

     

     

    There can be no doubt, all the movers and shakers in Scottish Football were involved in the 2011 licence cover up.

     

     

    Neil Doncaster – 5 way agreement and LNS Commission

     

     

    Celtic Board – Running the Res12 deceit.

     

     

    The SFA must be reformed and strengthened to ensure the likes of Neil Doncaster and the cartel can’t run Scottish Football as money go-round devoid of all sport integrity

     

     

    A parcel o’rogues sure enuff!!

     

     

    Stay Safe

     

     

    Hail Hail

  4. !!Bada Bing!! on

    A quick scan of the rags in Morrisons, McGregor says he’s staying for the 10,no matter if Rodgers wants him, we are trying to buy Forster and Elyounoussi from Southampton.

  5. fourstonecoppi on

    When the ba’s oan the dyke

     

    And yer gettin pu**ed by big mike

     

    That’s Castore!

  6. I’ve seen Celtic have been linked with Saido Berahino. Hopefully rubbish.

     

     

    One to avoid.

  7. Chairbhoy and Gallagher are from opposing views.

     

     

    These are tough times.

     

     

    This makes me happy.

     

     

    Never forget Guy….s

     

     

    Love is the Law.

     

     

    Getting worried now about Tontine Tim and macjay1 not posting. Aidans Mum does say I worry too much.

  8. PETEC @ 8:46 AM,

     

     

    Hope all’s good with you and yours…

     

     

    May I ask – “Opposing” – in what way?

     

     

    Stay Safe

     

     

    Hail Hail

  9. No problemo CB,

     

     

    Over the years I have ascertained you are right of centre and Gallagher is left of centre.

     

     

    When Kitalba posted the brilliant speech at the Prayer meeting by Ben Carson talking about wings it had real meaning.

     

     

    God Bless ye Bro

  10. Neil Lennon & McCartney on

    Huge congratulations to Lenny, but let’s not forget Ronny Delia

     

     

    “…….. I think the positive thing is, you don’t feel that it’s going to end. You feel that the club is still hungry and wants to achieve more. So far, they’ve done it, and that’s great, and I know the motivation going into next season is going to be unbelievable because of what they can win.”

     

     

    “I’m just so happy for all the Celtic fans and the club because they’ve done nine now.”

  11. Mega respect to Ronny D and Brendan R.

     

     

    Allow it.

     

     

    Lenny is so under rated.

     

     

    Real Deal howevaaaaaah.

     

     

    Thanks to Saint Stivs for the picture of Lenny at Ibrox.

     

     

    Real Deal Lennyfield.

     

     

    His Star is gonnae shine so bright in Europe methinks in this coming Season. Our most excellent Bhoys have had a decent break for once.

  12. Good morning from a sunny North Staffordshire.

     

    Compare and contrast the smsm approach to the ‘dossier’ and Res12.

  13. PETEC @ 9:08 AM,

     

     

    Thanks for the clarification, interesting observation.

     

     

    I’m regarded by most folk round here (home counties) to be left of centre (or a commie:). Interesting your view from Scotland is different and probably accurate relatively speaking.

     

     

    As long as I’m not right of MacJay I’m no going to worry:)))

     

     

    What an interesting season the 10 is going to be…

     

     

    Stay Safe

     

     

    Hail Hail

  14. Back to Basics - Glass Half Full on

    Timaloy29 …

     

     

    I think Berahino would improve Celtic.

     

     

    He wouldn’t get a game.

     

     

    :)

     

     

    But we could employ him to stand up in front of the young guys at every meeting and say …

     

     

    “I am what happens when a young player listens to his agent, gets an inflated ego, and stops working”.

     

     

    Another promising career down the toilet.

  15. Happy Ascension Day

     

     

    Berahino – just ask any Stoke city fans – an absolute waster on and off the pitch.

  16. Odsonne and Griff are the top 2 for next season. 3-5-2. Loads of goals there..

     

     

    Klimala needs more game time as does Bayo too…can’t see us adding another forward to the mix.

  17. interesting that i have had a few emails from Celtic this week (albeit the iphone shoves them in junk) but nothing about the refund announcement. I know all about t-shirts and scooters but not that.

     

     

    will be interesting to see the stats on refunds – Thistle fans left the money in pretty much

  18. Let’s get down to basics, OK?

     

    Scottish football is absolutely rotten to the very core, simple

     

     

    KINGLuBO

     

     

    SOUTH OF TUNIS

     

     

    Be a good fellow and let us know you’re ok

  19. Nearly an hour without a comment. Covid-19 is affecting CQN as well !

     

     

    The Arbroath Emerald CSC sent out details of how to get a refund from Celtic. It would seem that that is not possible online and a form has to be downloaded , printed and despatched. Not clear what one must do if one does not have a computer or one has a computer but does not have a printer !!

     

    Anyway, I wanted to let Celtic know that my original intention was that my Club could keep the refund. Their recent lack of response to the SFA and Resolution 12 , however, is giving me cause to rethink.

     

    I am hoping that this path MIGHT lead to a rethink by our Board.

  20. BIG WAVY on 21ST MAY 2020 10:54 AM

     

    Odsonne and Griff are the top 2 for next season. 3-5-2. Loads of goals there..

     

     

    Klimala needs more game time as does Bayo too…can’t see us adding another forward to the mix.

     

     

    ____

     

     

    Don’t think Neil Lennon fancies Bayo.

     

     

    I haven’t heard good things about Klimala either. The Celtic guy from the Athletic says people at Celtic are unimpressed with him at training etc.

  21. I knew that would happen ! TWO comments whilst I am claiming there had been none for nearly an hour !!

     

    I do, however, echo Kinglubo`s comment re SoT

  22. BACK TO BASICS – GLASS HALF FULL on 21ST MAY 2020 10:31 AM

     

     

    Haha

     

     

    Kudos for finding a use for him considering he doesn’t score goals

  23. ….☘️☘️☘️☘️☘️..

     

    ☘️………………….☘️

     

    ☘️………………….☘️

     

    ☘️………………….☘️

     

    ….☘️☘️☘️☘️.☘️..

     

    …………………….☘️..

     

    ……………………☘️..

     

    …………………..☘️…

     

    ………………….☘️….

     

    ………………..☘️…..

     

    ………………☘️…….

     

     

    in a row

     

     

    BT Sport 9.45 Saturday night with Neil Lennon, Chris Sutton and Johan Mjallby

  24. BROGAN ROGAN TREVINO AND HOGAN on

    Good Morning. (Long Post- sorry)

     

     

    “Implication” is a great word. When something is implied it is not stated for certain, but it is heavily hinted at.

     

     

    Another great word is “Consequence”

     

     

    A Consequence is something that is stronger and more tangible than anything that is implied.

     

     

    A Direct consequence is much firmer and more certain than anything that is implied, and of course there are consequences when you do something, and there are consequences when you fail to do something.

     

     

    So here is part of the SFA’s statement with one word substituted for the other.

     

     

    “following consideration of the consequences of such a referral”.

     

     

    They used the word implication, but in reality they meant consequences.

     

     

    Before considering the devastating consequence of not referring the matter to CAS, let’s recap on the history here without getting bogged down in the detail, because in all honesty the detail of what actually happened in 2011/2012 is now a squirrel of gigantic proportions.

     

     

    The facts are these.

     

     

    By 2013 there was sufficient evidence available to merit further investigation into the UEFA licence application concerned.

     

     

    The board of Celtic PLC had instigated their own enquiries as they had seen enough to request clarification from then SFA CEO Stewart Regan.

     

     

    Regan responded with replies which were misleading, inaccurate and, some would say dismissive. His letters terminated with the suggestion that Celtic should be satisfied with his responses and that should be an end of the matter.

     

     

    It wasn’t.

     

     

    By this time shareholders had gathered further evidence and questioned the responses provided by Regan. They also asked the board to bypass the SFA and take the matter to UEFA as they had no faith in the SFA which Celtic themselves had previously described as not being fit for purpose.

     

     

    The information available cast severe doubt not only on Mr Regan’s responses but on the efficiency of the SFA in analysing the information provided in support of the licence application, in determining the information required to approve such an application, the interpretation and application of the licensing rules, and the reasons stated by Regan for granting the application.

     

     

    Mr Regan, in passing, also stressed that the SFA’s entire modus operandi had been audited by UEFA – only for later evidence to emerge which suggested that this was simply just not the case.

     

     

    Instead of the matter being at an end, all Regan had done was provide more evidence which merited further questions.

     

     

    In response to those further questions, we know fine well that he drafted his answers and sent them to Ibrox for prior approval – only to be told that his draft response would be embarrassing for both RFC and the SFA.

     

     

    Consequences eh?

     

     

    So another letter goes back to Celtic, again “implying” that the matter was closed.

     

     

    What was Celtic to do at this stage?

     

     

    One of the difficulties here was that Celtic were privy to information which was not in the public domain as such and about which there were questions of provenance.

     

     

    Now lets be clear about what Provenance means.

     

     

    The provenance of a document is not just its authenticity or being able to prove who wrote it, but also how it got from A to B, what it says, who saw it, relied on it and so on.

     

     

    Equally, under no circumstances were the board of Celtic PLC going to make further enquiries on the back of documents which others could claim were fake, could deny, and could be used to cause trouble for Celtic — and they were professionally correct to take that stand.

     

     

    However some of the documentation and information could be stood up. It had been produced in courts of law by either the authors or the recipients and to that extent they were in the public domain and were accessible.

     

     

    At this stage, it should always be remembered that the SFA have full powers of inquiry and can mount investigations, ask questions and demand the recovery of files from any football club and indeed the tax authorities and others.

     

     

    All requests asking the SFA to do this and to look into the matter further were rejected.

     

     

    So, after a certain period of time, Celtic have some information, but not all, and they have some information which they can’t really use because its provenance is not 100% in their eyes.

     

     

    At this stage, shareholders, quite separate to the board of Celtic PLC instruct an international firm of solicitors and, using some of the information available, start to ask questions separately.

     

     

    Meanwhile, the board of Celtic PLC ask the SFA about one particular document – a letter – and ask the then Corporate Compliance Officer (Andrew McKinlay) if the document is held within the SFA files or not?

     

     

    Privately, shareholders are told that Mr McKinlay, (having been appraised of the nature of the concerns of Celtic PLC and the shareholders) is of the view that if the letter is missing from SFA files then there will have to be an inquiry. He also was of the opinion that if the letter was in the SFA files — there would have to be an inquiry!!

     

     

    Clearly, all was not ok within the state of Denmark so to speak.

     

     

    Meanwhile, the SFA reply to the shareholders lawyers and commence what can only be described as a litany of excuses for not answering questions and for taking no action whatsoever. Over the next few years they would say:

     

     

    They can’t answer questions, or examine evidence, unless the questions are asked directly by a member club and any evidence is produced by a member club. (There may be good grounds in law to challenge this but they are as yet untested).

     

     

    Later they said that they could not make any further enquiries, conduct a formal inquiry, or report to UEFA on the season concerned, because they were time barred from doing so.

     

     

    They also said that certain matters were confidential to clubs and could not be shared or commented upon.

     

     

    In the interim they sought to further explain themselves but did no more than tie themselves in knots when faced with further information.

     

     

    At one point shareholders were able to show that Stewart Regan had publicly answered one particular issue or question with at least four contradictory and different answers.

     

     

    Then the SFA suggested that shareholders write to UEFA with their concerns and stated clearly that if UEFA instigated an inquiry then the SFA would respond fully and that would get them over the time bar hurdle.

     

     

    They even provided the name and address of a UEFA man to write to!

     

     

    Well, being cynics, shareholders chose to write to someone else entirely who was far higher up the food chain.

     

     

    It would be fair to say that Celtic did not want to go directly to UEFA, as had originally been requested, and preferred to go through the SFA — presumably because they were members of that association and because they wanted to rehearse other issues with UEFA.

     

     

    In any event, UEFA responded and clarified a few things.

     

     

    They directly contradicted some of what Regan had said previously, provided some further and new information which was interesting but only partly relevant, but again stated that they couldn’t really correspond with anyone other than a member club and effectively invited Celtic to take the matter up with them directly.

     

     

    Celtic didn’t do that – and the explanation for that at the time was that the board were involved in so many things and so many discussions with UEFA and the SFA that they wanted to pick their battles and their battleground so to speak.

     

     

    That happens in all walks of business and in this instance this was not a matter that Celtic PLC wanted to take forward at that time. Later, Shareholders would be told at a much later AGM that UEFA were not interested – despite what they had written in their letter.

     

     

    Of course, in the background the wheels of justice in the outside world continued to turn and first the Supreme Court and then the High Court ruled.

     

     

    It was in the course of those hearings, particularly the High Court Trial of Craig Whyte, that what Paul refers to as “New Evidence” comes to light — although much of the evidence was not in fact new ( as it had by this time been known for years) but it was spoken to directly by witnesses who could and did absolutely verify the provenance of what had been said before.

     

     

    As a consequence (that word again) Regan pronounced that the SFA had likely been duped, and Celtic and the SPL called for a full inquiry — which the SFA refused. Surprise Surprise.

     

     

    Instead, The SFA ordered that there be a limited inquiry with a view to bringing disciplinary charges — all question of time bar and that sort of thing having magically disappeared.

     

     

    In the background shareholders continued to ask, and indeed answer, questions.

     

     

    For example, the letter which Andrew McKinlay suggested would merit an inquiry had not turned up and shareholders were asked to furnish an alleged copy which the SFA would make enquiries on.

     

     

    Later, we were told that the supposed recipient of that letter had never received it and that the party to whom it was addressed had never seen it which would explain why it had never made its way to the SFA files.

     

     

    Alas, when shareholders were able to produce a replying letter acknowledging receipt of the letter concerned and which dealt with its contents in some detail — this particular myth was scotched big style amidst no little embarrassment.

     

     

    As an aside, even after the letter which sparked all this activity had been delivered to Hampden and acknowledged, it once again went missing from the SFA files and during the course of the above mentioned SFA investigation they had to write to shareholders and request a further copy.

     

     

    Strangely the first two letters requesting that further copy never reached the shareholders lawyers and their existence only came to light when the SFA head of security phoned up to ask why his letters were being ignored.

     

     

    I will leave you to consider the implications of this chain of events for the moment.

     

     

    Returning to the SFA internal inquiry, after some considerable time the SFA actually determine that their investigations and inquiries have produced enough evidence to merit bringing disciplinary charges against RFC in relation to the UEFA licence application.

     

     

    The SFA don’t refer the matter to UEFA – they proceed with charges under their own rules, and in terms of UEFA rules.

     

     

    By this time, the chap in charge of bringing these charges for the SFA is Mr McGlennan.

     

     

    Mr Regan and Mr McKinlay are still in the building however.

     

     

    Back at Celtic Park shareholders are told that persistence has indeed beaten resistance because after years of foraging and corresponding disciplinary charges are being brought and the evidence will be heard. Celtic are disappointed that their call for a full independent inquiry has been rejected but at least part of the matter is now going before an independent tribunal and we will wait and see what comes of that.

     

     

    But here comes a spanner in the works.

     

     

    RFC (or The Rangers Football Club Ltd) raise some preliminary points of law with the independent tribunal.

     

     

    These preliminary points may well relate to not only the legal status of the defendant, but also to the time parameters of the charges, and the jurisdiction of the tribunal itself.

     

     

    Auldheid is very vexed about what happened with regard to the time period to be considered and learns that the original charges posted on the SFA website seem to have been secretly amended with the material times to be examined being supposedly reduced. Further, before the charges are even dealt with a statement is issued by RFC saying that in relation to the key dates that have been dropped, the SFA have determined that there is no case to answer and that the issue is at an end.

     

     

    Although how they can do that if they now never had jurisdiction I don’t quite follow.

     

     

    Given that this statement declaring no case to answer was issued over two years before the most recent one from the SFA and is never contradicted by the SFA – I will leave you to draw your own conclusions.

     

     

    Eventually the judical panel rule that they don’t have jurisdiction and recommend that the case go to CAS for determination.

     

     

    When this matter is raised with Celtic PLC, The board once again take the matter up with the SFA and come back with the comment that the matter will go to CAS — “Why wouldn’t it?”

     

     

    However, by this time there are other matters to consider in this sorry tale.

     

     

    After years of failing to investigate, report to UEFA and take any action whatever, the SFA have finally determined that they can and should bring charges, alleging breaches of football rules, based on the evidence they have in-gathered..

     

     

    Only for an independent tribunal, chaired by a legally qualified chairman, to determine that the SFA, in this instance, cannot prosecute and appoint a panel to hear and determine whether or not there has been a breach of the SFA’s own rules.

     

     

    Let that sink in for a moment — for whatever reason — an independent judicial panel have determined that the SFA CANNOT enforce its own rules by way of a legal hearing.

     

     

    Now why would that be?

     

     

    Just what are the “implications” of that ruling and what might the “consequences” be?

     

     

    Could it be that the rules and regulations of the SFA (and UEFA for that matter) are absolutely unenforceable in Scotland unless the SFA stands aside, acts only as prosecutor and refers each and every case where there is an alleged rule breach to CAS?

     

     

    If that is the case the implication is that every football club and every player in Scotland can breach every rule in the book and the SFA can do nothing about it unless they go to CAS.

     

     

    Surely that can’t be right?

     

     

    Or is the position, as has been suggested, that the referral to CAS is only applicable in this case because of the famous 5 way agreement — which of course is supposedly an agreement between the SFA, the SPL, the SFL and those with an interest (of whatever kind) in just one football club?

     

     

    If so, then the clear implication is that by design or sheer incompetence, the SFA has by way of that agreement contractually signed away its rights to enforce its own rules and conduct its own hearings in respect of just one club within its association!

     

     

    That would be an astonishing set of circumstances yet there is a fair degree of evidence to suggest that this is precisely where we are.

     

     

    Basically, the club charged via the SFA process does not come under the jurisdiction of the SFA in certain circumstances, and in its statement the SFA is making clear that they cannot proceed with any referral to CAS for fear of the implications and the potential consequences of the hearing and the eventual ruling.

     

     

    What a farce?

     

     

    But wait because the questions do not stop there.

     

     

    By this time, Mr Regan, Mr McKinlay and Mr McGlennan, who you will recall brought the charges, have all left the building leaving a trail of idiotic devastation behind them and an almighty legal mess for others to clean up as best they can.

     

     

    I have to ask why they brought the charges in the first place if the 5 way agreement contractually debarred an SFA independent panel from considering those same charges and enforcing SFA rules?

     

     

    They must have known of the terms of the 5 way agreement but did they not understand what they had signed up to? Did they not realise that in effect the 5 way agreement totally neutered the SFA in respect of one club?

     

     

    Yet that is what the panel has ruled and it is my guess that this what the SFA are afraid CAS will rule.

     

     

    So, after years and years of obfuscation, irregular replies, contradictory responses, and eventual charges alleging rule breaches — there is to be no hearing, no ruling, no conclusion. Not because the evidence isn’t strong enough or because the charges have been refuted in fact or explained away, but because the SFA is afraid to proceed and disclose that it contracted out of its own rules in one instance?

     

     

    Oh well. That’s that then.

     

     

    Or is it?

     

     

    I believe that shareholders in the game can and should challenge this.

     

     

    I think Celtic should for the sake of their business, but won’t because time has moved on, the club has secured nine in a row and so the fans won’t care a jot at this time/

     

     

    That however is short termism.

     

     

    Everybody knows now what happened in season 2011/2012. The evidence came out in court. The SFA were misled by one club and there are direct and implied consequences for every other club.

     

     

    Now imagine if the deception of the SFA continued after the period involved in the UEFA licensing process.

     

     

    Someone who is behind with their taxes may well be behind in relation to other payments — such as those promised in a side letter to a trust in Jersey. Could it be that right up until 2012 payments were being made to those trusts out of sight of the SFA and in breach of SFA rules?

     

     

    You might possibly think that — I couldn’t possibly comment.

     

     

    However all of that is history and many fans will be vexed with the question could the Celtic board have done more; Were the Celtic board privy to the 5 way agreement, had they seen it, are they involved etc?

     

     

    The CEO said very clearly at last years AGM that he had not seen the 5 way – and that to be honest is my greatest worry.

     

     

    If that is correct, and I am not going to suggest that it is incorrect, then the implications and consequences are horrific.

     

     

    It would mean that a club like Celtic can enter SFA competitions each year on the basis of the football rules as presented to them only to find that the SFA has agreed to change those rules in secret and behind closed doors without telling Celtic or any other club.

     

     

    It would mean that officials within the SFA have free reign to enter into agreements and binding contracts which sign away their ability to enforce rules, or to change the rules, without ever consulting Celtic or other clubs.

     

     

    It would mean that agreements like the 5 way agreement can be entered into and signed by SFA officials who are either crooked, or, so grossly incompetent as to not know what they are doing in terms of jurisdiction and so on.

     

     

    It would mean that Celtic PLC have a business worth potentially hundreds of millions of pounds which is forced to play within an association structure which has been shown to be way out of control, acts on a frolic of its own, covers up its own incompetence and over which the best business brains at Celtic PLC have little influence and no control whatsoever.

     

     

    It would mean that Celtic PLC cannot, and never could, give any shareholder, season ticket holder, sponsor advertiser, player, agent or anyone else any type of reasonable reassurance that the events narrated above and elsewhere were a one off or could not be repeated in the future.

     

     

    Others believe that Celtic are complicit in this mess and I have to admit that Peter Lawwell has on occasion done himself no good by boasting that awkward issues have been kicked into the long grass etc — that is disappointing from someone who has shown very good qualities as a CEO over a long period.

     

     

    However, I have been at meetings when I have been told that when it comes to meetings at the SFA, other clubs simply don’t care about the issue, that Celtic has only one vote, and that the club have tried and have spoken to other club officials and officers but can’t get them interested in any sort of inquiry of any kind.

     

     

    I genuinely believe that to be the case as Scottish Football is not run like any other business and it is not subject to the law of the real world.

     

     

    When giving evidence at one hearing I believe that Rod McKenzie stated the opinion that “the law had not caught up with Scottish Football”

     

     

    What I believe he meant by that was that the law of the outside world does not apply at all times to Scottish Football.

     

     

    When clubs gather under the auspices of the SFA or the SPFL it is like a conclave of Cardinals in the Sistine Chapel. While the world is outside, it is only their rules and their votes on the inside that matter.

     

     

    If they chose to amend the rules, ignore the rules, waive the rules, or whatever by way of a vote or an agreement there is nothing you, me or any dissenting club can do about it.

     

     

    If the implications and consequences for the SFA are construed as harmful in any situation then lets abandon the rules even if that lets injustice prevail and wrongdoing go unpunished.

     

     

    Noises will be made saying this couldn’t happen again and there has been reform and all that tosh but in actual fact that is nonsense.

     

     

    The SFA are skint, they can’t afford to monitor the veracity of what club officials present to them and they can’t do, or won’t do, anything about past perpetrators presenting current documentation which require greater scrutiny than in the past if only to ensure there is no repetition of past mistakes.

     

     

    Can the board of Celtic PLC, or any other club for that matter, guarantee that there will never be another agreement such as the 5 way agreement? I don’t think they can.

     

     

    Can the SFA, UEFA, Celtic or anyone else guarantee that the SFA will not be misled in future and be found to be inept at dealing with licensing processes and any other such deception — I don’t think they can.

     

     

    On a commercial basis, can anyone at ADIDAS be confident that the SFA will do all in its power to ensure that UEFA rules will be properly applied and that their strips will rightly and properly be seen in licensed competition with the licensing rules being properly overseen by the people at Hampden — I don’t think they can.

     

     

    Forget the detail of what happened in the past, the decision of the SFA this week, the timing of which was no accident, has raised questions about the entire future and basis of Scottish Football and its Administration.

     

     

    If that decision is allowed to stand without comment or challenge then Football in Scotland has been holed below the waterline and the consequences may be fatal.

     

     

    The precedent has been set. The rules will be broken and flaunted again and the SFA will bot deal with it swiftly or adequately.

     

     

    And Celtic, their board, their sponsors, shareholders and fans are absolutely powerless to do anything about it.

     

     

    For them, the implications and consequences are both plain to see and absolutely dire.

     

     

    BRTH

  25. BRTH

     

     

    Well said more truth ☘️

     

     

    Pete/Chairbhoy

     

    Sometimes it’s between right and wrong

     

    as against right and left. Truth is truth HH☘️☘️

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
Do Not Sell My Personal Information