Quantcast

Ogilvie admits “might have signed some documents”

663

Campbell Ogilvie was interviewed in today’s Scotland on Sunday but he singularly failed to deflect the central criticism of him continuing as president of the SFA despite being a director of Rangers during the period they introduced the controversial EBTs and, allegedly, illegally registered players with the SFA, which Ogilvie was also a director of.

Interviewer, Andrew Smith, asked “Can you see there being an issue with you being SFA president at a time when there is an ongoing SPL investigation into non-disclosure of payments at Rangers that you are directly linked to?  You were a director and the secretary who signed off the accounts in November 2001.  At that time the EBT scheme was in operation and players were receiving payments that weren’t in their contracts.”

Ogilvie’s response laid bare how inappropriate the situation is: “I was secretary up until 2002. That’s correct. I was a director, that’s correct.”

All he could do in response to the question of how inappropriate his job as SFA president is when Rangers are under investigation for non-disclosure of payments he was “directly linked to” is confirm he was a secretary and director.  He didn’t even offer a counter argument.

It was as though he’d been coached, badly, about what to do when you are asked a question you don’t want to answer.  Simply not answering the question and making an irrelevant statement treats Scottish football fans like fools.

The truth is he did not and cannot answer the question.  If Campbell Ogilvie cannot argue why there is not an issue for him continuing to be SFA president, why is he still SFA president?

Ogilvie confirmed that in March he told Andrew Smith that there were no side contracts and insisted this was “the case to the best of my knowledge”, despite Smith referring him to the recent BBC documentary, the assertions of which have not been challenged.

Readers would have been confused by this ‘knowledge’, that there were no side contracts as Ogilvie immediately denied involvement with player contracts.

This duel position, bearing witness that there were no side contracts, while denying knowledge of player contracts, is wholly inconsistent and, in itself, reasons enough to for his dismissal.

One of the most intriguing comments from Ogilvie was “I might have signed some documents from time to time.  I certainly didn’t do the player negotiations, I didn’t do the contracts.”

He “might have signed some documents from time to time”.  Oh dear.

If he signed some documents active in this scandal “from time to time”, for pity sake, just go.  Pack your bags, apologise profusely and get out of Scottish football.

We await to hear who conducted the inquiry into Ogilvie which allowed Stewart Regan to clear Ogivlie, but if this shoddy testimony informed their decision, the scandal at the heart of the SFA has taken on a new dimension.

Rumours that the SFA did not conduct an inquiry into Campbell Ogilvie and that chief exec, Stewart Regan, spoke inappropriately in order to save the skin of his pal, remain unfounded.

Click Here for Comments >
Share.

About Author

663 Comments

  1. saltires en sevilla on

    Doyle putting in a great shift up front causing problems -but Ireland need to keep ball for longer or this mob will give them the runaround

     

     

    sitting too deep when Croats have the ball

  2. City were the first to do the Poznan.

     

     

    Celtic were first to do the Huddle.

     

     

    See, simples…

  3. •-:¦:-•** -:¦:- sparkleghirl :¦:-.•**• -:¦:-• on

    ElDiegoBhoy on 10 June, 2012 at 20:28 said:

     

     

    But Whyyyyyyyyyy?

  4. Jelavic offside when the ball was played in …ie before it hit off an Irish player

     

     

    Beglin is a tadger

  5. tommytwiststommyturns on

    PF – agreed, he was offside. If they could just have held out to half-time.

     

     

    T4

  6. Guys

     

     

    It was not off side. Irish player tried to kick the ball out. If it was deflection from the croatian player or pass from Croatian player it was off side. No off side here.

  7. sparkleghirl – because you need to incline inwards to do it – if you do that facing down the stands your mind would just freak out and you’d probably end up falling over !

  8. Croatia far better team, everything coming from their right, Aiden getting run ragged and left back having a mare…

  9. lennon's passion on

    Supporters huddle was started by the GB, started at the Stein trophy we play Albion Rovers for every season. Big TM was at the game GB started it and it’s kicked on from then.

  10. •-:¦:-•** -:¦:- sparkleghirl :¦:-.•**• -:¦:-• on

    Larrybhoy on 10 June, 2012 at 20:33 said:

     

     

    :) Thank you. Vertigo then. I was only once in the top deck (Mc Stay’s testimonial I think) and yes, I did feel quite scared. Think I’d have been OK huddling facing forwards in block 105 though.

  11. T4

     

     

    Beglin doesn`t get it ..saying it came off an Irish player ….when the ball was played he was offside and clearly influencing play

  12. It just had to be Jelavic. Huns jumping up and down all over the country no doubt.

  13. why are people saying Jelavic goal was offside?? the ball came off an irish defender. it was never offside FFS!