I admit to some admiration for the Daily Record which today came out with an outstanding article on the integrity and honest which inspires their values. A truly inspirational piece, although somewhat undermined by an angry, if entertaining, rant against social networking sites and football forums, which are apparently characterised by “insane, insulting and illogical.. messages”, with a “lack of intellect”.
It’s good to see they don’t take themselves too seriously.
We also got the most rewarding argument to justify the accusation that Celtic “reneged” on an agreement to pay Rangers ticket money in advance of this month’s game at Ibrox. The Record state that Celtic agreed to pay in advance as long as Rangers were not in administration (Celtic may tell a different story), which Rangers now are. However, as Rangers issued an invoice for the tickets before going into administration, the Record argue that Celtic have, in fact, reneged as their payment didn’t reach Rangers before the administration date, 40 days in advance of the game.
They decline to claim evidence that paying more than 40 days before the game was part of the agreement, but with a startling command of intellect and logic, overlook this fact when claiming “the agreement must still have been broken”.
Don’t even try to figure this one out, it is logic way above your intellect. It remains to be seen if it has outfoxed Celtic.
The newspaper cites conversations between Rangers staff to back up their story. No wonder that lot ended up in such a state. Don’t think this is a concerted effort to undermine your football team, you might feel that way, but, again, it’s a problem with your intellect. A TwitLonger link to the article can be found here.
364 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- »
JAMES FORREST 1445
Can yu do me a wee favour,bud?
Don’t EVER request that this post be pulled.
You haven’t just surpassed yourself,you’ve surpassed us all-and that from one of your well-meaning critics!
Print this and frame it,for I doubt you will better it,not because I don’t think you can,but why would you want to?
This is the James Forrest version of Champagne Supernova,A Day in the Life,Sad-eyed Lady of the Lowlands and Born to Run.
playfusbal4dguilders
they can ask Andrew Dickson right now as he is there and has been responsible for first team finances since 2001
I expect the SPL to announce their exclusion from the SPL by the end of today
Hail Hail
If, as Mark Hately and Craig Burley have eloquently suggested, The SPL title is tainted
I wonder who they think tainted it?
What did they do to taint it?
And what steps should be taken to ensure that they never taint it again?
Wow! Major development! I assume that’s the “players not registered at Ibrox” controversy … that’s a landmark moment.
Any application from NewCo Rangers will have to be done from Division 1.
Spl to investigate payment to players
Every day is Christmas just now…
Celtfish…
Oxon Shamrock CSC, The Six Bells, Bicester
Not sure about 2001-02 as I didn’t live down here then…
http://thesixbellsbicester.com/celtic.php
Scroll down for a look at ‘Miss Celtic’
HH
dirtymac;
Thanks for the info on how to bold mate. Much appreciated.
I spotted that mistake with the dates, but it’s the same difference. Everyone knew the club was at the edge of the cliff. Celtic held on for a couple of weeks perhaps because they heard the same word the rest of us had … and fair play to them for it.
That this hasn’t been one days news but two is the height of desperation from this people. The sensible thing would be to let this die … their insistence on keeping it going is embarrassing and small minded at best.
SSN are breaking news that rangers mates at the SPL are to investigate rangers payments to players.
For me, the best by-product of this blog (and others) is the fact it has well and truly sorted out, exposed, outwitted and shamed the old media.
Traynor and co know fine and well that they are history.
hh
We are playing Malmo tomorrow in a closed doors game. I am still gutted the Celtic Support were not given the opportunity to thank them properly for putting the boot into der hun.
HH
miki67 on 5 March, 2012 at 14:16 said:
You’ve got it bang to rights, miki. And the whole UK/Scottish political establishment is falling over itself to save this dirty thing.
What they and the media are saying is, in effect – there are rules about honesty and integrity in sport and they apply to all without fear or favour all that is except, of course, the huns.
And why does rangers deserve their exceptional status? Well for a start they’ve got a world-wide reputation for violence and bigotry after all. That’s part of the fabric of the nation, after all.
So der huns wanted Celtic to pay upfront on the 21st of jan for a game to be played on the 25th march.
They wanted to use Celtic fans money to spend on players during the jan transfer window to strengthen their team, that they actually couldn’t afford to pay for!!
Hurry up and die hun scum!!
marrakesh
me too, their time is running out
the celtic internet bloggers have been A+
keep it up
NTEGRITY IS NAME OF OUR GAME
BY JIM TRAYNOR ON MAR 5, 12 07:30 AM IN
THE MAIN CURRENCY, IN FACT THE ONLY CURRENCY ANY OF US IN THE NEWSPAPER GAME SHOULD HAVE IN OUR MORAL BANKS MUST BE INTEGRITY.
Agree 100%. Happy to hear that. It should come before pay cheques, before concerns over upsetting people. Truth to power is a vital component of a democracy. So, good start. Let’s see where you are going with this.
WITHOUT IT WE, AS JOURNALISTS, ARE OF NO USE TO ANYONE. WE HAVE NO VALUE. NONE AT ALL.
Absolutely correct. Otherwise you are nothing but a wind-sock or worse, a propagandist for people with agendas, nothing but a mouthpiece for them.
WITHOUT INTEGRITY WE FAIL OUR READERS, OUR PAPERS AND OUR EMPLOYERS. BUT JUST AS IMPORTANTLY WE FAIL OURSELVES.
I would argue the latter is more important than the former, but it’s good to hear you have some modicum of personal pride, and a sense of responsibility. Keep it going.
INTEGRITY, HONESTY AND THE DESIRE TO CALL IT OUT NO MATTER THE CONSEQUENCES IS WHAT DEFINES US. THANKFULLY IT’S ALSO WHAT SETS US APART, ESPECIALLY FROM ALL THOSE ‘BRAVE’ KEYBOARD THUMPERS OUT THERE IN THE WORLD OF SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES AND FOOTBALL FORUMS.
Hold the bus …. I get the first three paragraphs, because those are noble sentiments. But are you trying to say you are one of those guys? Oh no, hold the bus … that won’t do at all. You aren’t fit to class yourself in the group … and as to “brave” keyboard thumpers … your sarcasm is shocking, because most of them have more string to their bow than you ever will. Many of these “brave” keyboard thumpers have balls … and brains to go with them.
THEY AREN’T GOVERNED BY THE LAWS WHICH MUST BE OBSERVED BY NEWSPAPERS LIKE THIS ONE AND ARE ALLOWED TO BASH OUT THE MOST INSANE, INSULTING, ILLOGICAL AND CONFUSED MESSAGES.
What absolute nonsense you are talking there. Yes, it’s BS. I know full well that libel laws are the same whether you work for a national newspaper or a regional internet site. I know the same rules govern bloggers as cover national columnists, and if you don’t know that you are incompetent and if you do know it, and I think you do, you are a goddamned shifty eyed liar.
I SHOULDN’T COMPLAIN, THOUGH, BECAUSE IT ALL DEMONSTRATES THEIR LACK OF INTELLECT AND COMMON DECENCY.
The fact you are either deliberately lying or boldly going forward with not even the slightest grasp of your facts demonstrates yours more than anything I write ever could.
WHICH MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY THEY PREFER TO HIDE BEHIND ANONYMITY OR CHILDISH PSEUDONYMS.
I personally post under my own name. Many others do too. And those who don’t have good reason for not wanting to reveal themselves. We know about Levinson. We don’t want people like you raking through our bins, or tapping our phones trying to find scandal. In the newspaper business you protect the anonymity of sources … so what’s the difference? Unless you don’t ….
BUT SADLY THERE ARE SOME HIGH-PROFILE FOOTBALL PEOPLE USING THIS GIFT AS CONDUITS FOR THEIR OWN PROPAGANDA AND IF YOU’VE LOOKED AT SOME OF THESE SITES YOU’LL KNOW JUST HOW EASY IT IS TO INFLUENCE AND STIR UNREST.
You are accusing people in the football business of peddling propaganda? You who’s newspaper accepted the “Craig Whyte is a billionaire”fairy-tale with not even a question? You who have written the most servile, slobbering article in the history of Scottish football journalism, the homo-erotic piece we know as “the succulent lamb” story? You’re having a laugh, right? As to influencing the websites … that cuts both ways. Didn’t you hear about how some of your colleagues were conned a couple of years back into bigging up a Rangers youth player who didn’t exist? I can forward you the information if it’s escaped your notice ….
THERE IS CERTAINLY A LACK OF INTEGRITY IN CYBERSPACE BUT IT’S HONESTY THAT PERSUADES THE EDITORS AT THE DAILY RECORD AND SUNDAY MAIL TO EMPLOY THEIR JOURNALISTS IN THE FIRST PLACE. IT’S WHY THEY TRUST US TO MAKE BEST USE OF THE PLATFORMS GIVEN TO US.
Someone from the media, the disgraced media, being dragged through the gutter of the Levenson Inquiry, is lecturing us on integrity and lack thereof? You, who’s newspaper called the Celtic players Thugs & Thieves, in a story that was 99% lies? Who’s journalist Hugh Keevins was sued by Martin O’Neill not for getting facts wrong, but for making them up entirely? The fact is, your owners might “trust” you, but only to write what they want, only to reflect their own prejudices. The readers certainly don’t trust you … which is why your sales figures are dropping like an elevator with the cord cut , and journos around you are going down like soldiers in an open field automatic weapon kill-zone … that’s the measure of how you’re trusted.
AND IT’S BECAUSE OF THAT INTEGRITY WE STAND BY OUR STORY WHICH REVEALED CELTIC DID NOT FULFIL A TICKET AGREEMENT WITH RANGERS.
It’s because your paper thrives on controversy, and because you, personally, hate Celtic. It’s a non-story and you know it.
LAST WEEK (TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28) WHILE WORKING ON RANGERS’ FINANCIAL MELTDOWN, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED THAT CELTIC HAD DECIDED NOT TO PAY IN ADVANCE FOR THEIR TICKET ALLOCATION FOR THE OLD FIRM MATCH AT IBROX ON MARCH 25. RANGERS BELIEVED THERE WAS A VERBAL AGREEMENT IN PLACE FOR CELTIC TO DO SO.
A verbal agreement isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. I remember a columnist from your paper going on the radio and saying if Celtic signed Thomas Gravesen he would quit his job and join the circus. He is still writing for your paper and appearing on Clyde and has not, to the best of my knowledge, donned the clown’s suit yet … although he writes and talks as if he had.
I ALONG WITH KEITH JACKSON RAN THE STORY ON OUR BACK PAGE AND THAT MORNING CELTIC REACTED STRONGLY, INSISTING NO SUCH ASSURANCE HAD BEEN GIVEN.
What amazes me is it took two of you to come up with that. Did one of you hold the paper whilst the other held the pencil? I could have come up with something better, on my own, during one of my Kit-Kat and coffee breaks. I would suggest Celtic’s reaction boils down to no such agreement being in existence. I say again, a verbal agreement? How can anyone prove such a thing exists?
THEN THEY SAID THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT BUT LATER ADDED IT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS NOT BEING IN ADMINISTRATION. WHICH, OF COURSE, THEY ARE TODAY.
I don’t recall Celtic admitting there was an agreement, but even if there was … Rangers are in administration, as you’ve said, and with other creditors being treated like mugs why the Hell would we be daft enough to hand this money over without iron clad guarantees?
BUT AT NO TIME IN MY CONVERSATION WITH CELTIC ON THE DAY THE STORY APPEARED WAS IT STATED THE AGREEMENT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS’ REMAINING SOLVENT. THAT CAVEAT WAS NEVER MENTIONED.
Did you ask the right questions? I remember you pulling Chick Young up for that, saying that unless the journalist asks the questions which will stand up his story properly the story has no legs.
HOWEVER, IT WAS ADMITTED THERE WAS SOME AGREEMENT AND THAT CONFIRMED WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN OUR PAPER. NOT THAT WE REQUIRED FURTHER PROOF.
A verbal agreement, dependant on a number of variables? And that constitutes proof that said agreement was broken? Even though one of those variables had come into play? This has to be one of the flimsiest grounds for a news story ever conceived.
THE AGREEMENT WHICH RANGERS INSIST WAS IN PLACE AND WHICH CELTIC CONTINUE TO PROTEST DIDN’T EXIST WAS THE RESULT OF THE PARKHEAD CLUB DEMANDING PAYMENT UP FRONT FROM RANGERS FOR THEIR ALLOCATION OF TICKETS FOR THE OLD FIRM GAME AT CELTIC PARK ON DECEMBER 28.
Celtic wanted the money from Rangers because there was a danger the match might not go ahead. Celtic are with-holding this money for the same reason. Are you really too stupid that you haven’t figured that out? Celtic’s position has been entirely consistent here, from the word go. We are protecting our own interests, as we are entitled to do.
IT SHOULD BE STRESSED MOST OF US AGREED THAT IT WAS WISE FOR CELTIC TO HAVE ASKED TO SEE THE MONEY FIRST BECAUSE OF THE FRAGILE STATE OF RANGERS’ FINANCES.
Then what’s the problem here? Why the self-righteous indignation?
BUT OUR INFORMATION SAYS THAT BOTH CLUBS AGREED CELTIC WOULD ALSO PAY IN ADVANCE FOR THIS MONTH’S MATCH.
Aaaah now we come to it. And that information came from where? The administrators? Where would they get proof of a “verbal agreement”? How do they know such a thing existed? The only people who could have provided you that information are the hierarchy at Rangers … you know, those untrustworthy unscrupulous base liars who the entire media acknowledges cannot be trusted at all. Or is it someone else inside Rangers, someone who perhaps wants to deflect attention away from the crap performances on the park which are partly responsible for this god-awful shambles they are in? Iron-clad sources … not.
INDEED, ON JANUARY 21 RANGERS REQUESTED PAYMENT AHEAD OF THE TICKETS BEING ISSUED IN A MESSAGE WHICH STATED IT HAD BEEN AGREED. ABOUT 50 MINUTES LATER CELTIC RESPONDED BY THANKING RANGERS FOR THEIR INVOICE AND ADDED IT WOULD BE PASSED ON TO FINANCE FOR PAYMENT TO BE MADE AS SOON AS.
I won’t ask where you got that information. Have you heard of uttering? I suggest you look it up, as even documents stamped at Ibrox have to be viewed with suspicion these days.
PERHAPS IT WOULD ALSO HELP JOG MEMORIES IF IT IS POINTED OUT THAT FIVE DAYS EARLIER ALI RUSSELL, WHO WAS RANGERS’ CHIEF OPERATIONS MANAGER AT THE TIME, TOLD HIS TICKET OFFICE STAFF THAT CELTIC HAD AGREED THEY WOULD PAY IN ADVANCE.
And he told the Rangers fans in the same month that players were being vigorously pursued, and his boss told the press that the club as not in imminent threat of administration … oh I could go on, but you get the point already ….
CELTIC DIDN’T PAY AND NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY JUMP UP AND DOWN IN PROTEST THAT IS THE WAY IT IS. RANGERS PAID UP FRONT, CELTIC DIDN’T.
And I say again, Celtic were correct to ask Rangers to pay upfront and they were equally correct to refuse to give Rangers money for a game which might not happen. Celtic have acted with total probity throughout here. They have acted in the interests of their shareholders and fans, and with no legal contract governing this process they were quite entitled to do so. Celtic have grave doubts about the March 25 game, as they had doubts about the December 28 match, and when you hear Rangers administrators dismissively suggesting creditors will have to accept pence in the pound after they tried to sign a player at £7000 a week, how can they muster the brass neck to actually question our club and the way we conduct our affairs?
INCIDENTALLY, IT’S EASY TO UNDERSTAND WHY CELTIC WOULD HAVE BEEN RELUCTANT TO PAY IN ADVANCE. ANY BUSINESS WOULD BE EXTREMELY WORRIED ABOUT HANDING OVER MONEY TO RANGERS AT THIS TIME BUT THE IBROX CLUB HAVE NO DOUBT THEY HAD A DEAL.
And Celtic say they didn’t. You can believe the people inside a club who’s lies, who’s arrogance, who’s ego and who’s overall conduct has propelled Scottish football to the edge of the greatest crisis in its history, or you can believe the people inside Celtic who have acted perfectly responsibly and reasonably throughout. Who do you choose to trust? I think your choice is clear, and that tells us everything we need to know about your motivations here.
SO, TOO, DO RANGERS’ ADMINISTRATORS DUFF AND PHELPS WHO SAID THROUGH A SPOKESMAN: ‘IT IS REGRETTABLE THAT AN APPARENT INITIAL AGREEMENT WAS UNFULFILLED.’ CELTIC MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ALSO THAT THEY WERE BEING BLAMED FOR COSTING JOBS AT IBROX AND MURRAY PARK BUT NO ONE HERE SUGGESTED THAT. LET’S BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR ON THIS, RANGERS AND RANGERS ALONE ARE TO BLAME FOR THEIR DECLINE INTO ADMINISTRATION AND ANY JOB LOSSES.
I ask again; how do Duff and Phelps know this existed? A verbal agreement is, by its nature, unwritten, and they cannot trust anything the old board has said. You are damned right Celtic are not to blame for anything that happens at Rangers. Our concern is to make sure our fans don’t join the list of creditors, which will shortly stretch from Govan to Girvan.
NONE OF THIS IS THE FAULT OF CELTIC OR ANYONE AT THAT CLUB.
Oh that much is clear to you, is it?
BUT OUR EVIDENCE AND THE CONTENT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH RANGERS AND CELTIC MADE IT CLEAR AN AGREEMENT WAS IN PLACE.
And I say again, even if you are right SO WHAT? Circumstances have changed, changed utterly, and Celtic are acting well within their rights. This is not a story. It is a shameless effort to stir up a controversy, ahead of a game which is explosive enough already. You talk about bloggers? I put up a post at the weekend which was a venomous response to Ally McCoist’s own remarks. When it was pointed out to me that it was potentially inflammatory and open to misinterpretation Itook it down and clarified what I’d written. I’ve seen guys on CQN and elsewhere do that on any number of occasions. Yet when the Daily Record – your newspaper – ran with a flagrantly provocative “Who is hated more at Ibrox” headline last year one of your writers went onto Radio Clyde and his only defence against such a piece of gutter journalism was that it did not inspire hatred because “hatred is part of that game.” You people are gutter scum.
CELTIC, THOUGH, WANT TO UNDERLINE THAT IF IT HADN’T BEEN MADE OBVIOUS THE AGREEMENT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS AVOIDING ADMINISTRATION THEN IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
And you don’t accept Celtic at their word on that?
RANGERS SAY THEY ARE UNAWARE OF ANY CONDITION ATTACHED TO THE ARRANGEMENT BUT IT CHANGES NOTHING.
They would say that though. They are a shambles, and anything that diverts some of the criticism is obviously going to be very appealing. Don’t you look for motivations when you are talking to sources? Don’t you wonder if you’re being played, or used to promote an agenda? Oh no, I forgot. You are all about integrity. You are all about the truth. Only bloggers get turned out like cheap street walkers. That never happens to the press, “Motherwell born billionaire” and “Martin O’Neill’s secret Bayern Munich contract” notwithstanding, eah?
LET’S JUST SAY, FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT YOU UNDERSTAND, THAT THE DEAL WAS CONDITIONAL ON RANGERS REMAINING OUT OF THE ADMINISTRATORS’ HANDS. EVEN IF IT WAS, THE AGREEMENT MUST STILL HAVE BEEN BROKEN BECAUSE RANGERS WERE NOT IN ADMINISTRATION WHEN CELTIC WERE ASKED TO PAY UP.
Fantastic logic there chief. Had we paid up by then? No. This isn’t like we arrested people’s bank accounts and scooped the money out. The circumstances changed.
THE REQUEST FOR THE CASH WAS MADE 24 DAYS BEFORE RANGERS WERE TIPPED OVER. OF COURSE WE’D ALL BEEN EXPECTING RANGERS TO GO UNDER BUT THE FACT IS THEY WERE STILL RUNNING UNDER THEIR OWN STEAM WHEN THEY ASKED FOR THE TICKET MONEY IN ADVANCE.
First you admit everyone knew Rangers were on the verge. Celtic certainly did. We also know that HMRC would have submitted their petition for an administration order the very next morning. We also know that rumour of this was rife in Glasgow; certainly Rangers knew it, which is why they moved first. Perhaps Celtic did too. Or perhaps your “24 hours before” information is a load of old cobblers. Did neither of those ideas cross your mind?
THEREFORE, EVEN ALLOWING FOR THE CAVEAT THAT CELTIC INSIST WOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF THE DEAL, THEY CHOSE NOT TO PROCEED WITH THE ARRANGEMENT.
Of course we didn’t! Rangers were in administration! The agreement, if one ever existed, was dead and buried! Is this really all you’ve got? Is this what they pay you for? Seriously?
THAT IS ALL WE EVER SAID. AND THAT IS THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER.
You wouldn’t know truth if it sank its iron jaws into your ample rear end. This is one of the worst articles I’ve ever read, and an insult to journalism.
oglach on 5 March, 2012 at 14:34 said:
Anyone else bought the Ivory Coast away kit yet, just how cool is it? it even has a single star embroidered.
Wife not happy another green and white hooped football top added to the collection
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bought it before the 2010 ACoN.
It’s a belter,can wear it to wind up my hun mates without being accused of wearing a Celtic top.
A bit like a few years back when I walked into the Vic in Kilwinning with a lovely green and white top,proudly displaying a shamrock on the crest.
Belonging to a club who had just gubbed the huns in Europe………..
Sorry James just had to print that out again !!!
Well said sir !!!
There’s a huge media presence outside Murray Park at the moment. If there’s no announcements I can see them bereally cheesed off.
INTEGRITY IS NAME OF OUR GAME
BY JIM TRAYNOR ON MAR 5, 12 07:30 AM IN
THE MAIN CURRENCY, IN FACT THE ONLY CURRENCY ANY OF US IN THE NEWSPAPER GAME SHOULD HAVE IN OUR MORAL BANKS MUST BE INTEGRITY.
Agree 100%. Happy to hear that. It should come before pay cheques, before concerns over upsetting people. Truth to power is a vital component of a democracy. So, good start. Let’s see where you are going with this.
WITHOUT IT WE, AS JOURNALISTS, ARE OF NO USE TO ANYONE. WE HAVE NO VALUE. NONE AT ALL.
Absolutely correct. Otherwise you are nothing but a wind-sock or worse, a propagandist for people with agendas, nothing but a mouthpiece for them.
WITHOUT INTEGRITY WE FAIL OUR READERS, OUR PAPERS AND OUR EMPLOYERS. BUT JUST AS IMPORTANTLY WE FAIL OURSELVES.
I would argue the latter is more important than the former, but it’s good to hear you have some modicum of personal pride, and a sense of responsibility. Keep it going.
INTEGRITY, HONESTY AND THE DESIRE TO CALL IT OUT NO MATTER THE CONSEQUENCES IS WHAT DEFINES US. THANKFULLY IT’S ALSO WHAT SETS US APART, ESPECIALLY FROM ALL THOSE ‘BRAVE’ KEYBOARD THUMPERS OUT THERE IN THE WORLD OF SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES AND FOOTBALL FORUMS.
Hold the bus …. I get the first three paragraphs, because those are noble sentiments. But are you trying to say you are one of those guys? Oh no, hold the bus … that won’t do at all. You aren’t fit to class yourself in the group … and as to “brave” keyboard thumpers … your sarcasm is shocking, because most of them have more string to their bow than you ever will. Many of these “brave” keyboard thumpers have balls … and brains to go with them.
THEY AREN’T GOVERNED BY THE LAWS WHICH MUST BE OBSERVED BY NEWSPAPERS LIKE THIS ONE AND ARE ALLOWED TO BASH OUT THE MOST INSANE, INSULTING, ILLOGICAL AND CONFUSED MESSAGES.
What absolute nonsense you are talking there. Yes, it’s BS. I know full well that libel laws are the same whether you work for a national newspaper or a regional internet site. I know the same rules govern bloggers as cover national columnists, and if you don’t know that you are incompetent and if you do know it, and I think you do, you are a goddamned shifty eyed liar.
I SHOULDN’T COMPLAIN, THOUGH, BECAUSE IT ALL DEMONSTRATES THEIR LACK OF INTELLECT AND COMMON DECENCY.
The fact you are either deliberately lying or boldly going forward with not even the slightest grasp of your facts demonstrates yours more than anything I write ever could.
WHICH MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY THEY PREFER TO HIDE BEHIND ANONYMITY OR CHILDISH PSEUDONYMS.
I personally post under my own name. Many others do too. And those who don’t have good reason for not wanting to reveal themselves. We know about Levinson. We don’t want people like you raking through our bins, or tapping our phones trying to find scandal. In the newspaper business you protect the anonymity of sources … so what’s the difference? Unless you don’t ….
BUT SADLY THERE ARE SOME HIGH-PROFILE FOOTBALL PEOPLE USING THIS GIFT AS CONDUITS FOR THEIR OWN PROPAGANDA AND IF YOU’VE LOOKED AT SOME OF THESE SITES YOU’LL KNOW JUST HOW EASY IT IS TO INFLUENCE AND STIR UNREST.
You are accusing people in the football business of peddling propaganda? You who’s newspaper accepted the “Craig Whyte is a billionaire”fairy-tale with not even a question? You who have written the most servile, slobbering article in the history of Scottish football journalism, the homo-erotic piece we know as “the succulent lamb” story? You’re having a laugh, right? As to influencing the websites … that cuts both ways. Didn’t you hear about how some of your colleagues were conned a couple of years back into bigging up a Rangers youth player who didn’t exist? I can forward you the information if it’s escaped your notice ….
THERE IS CERTAINLY A LACK OF INTEGRITY IN CYBERSPACE BUT IT’S HONESTY THAT PERSUADES THE EDITORS AT THE DAILY RECORD AND SUNDAY MAIL TO EMPLOY THEIR JOURNALISTS IN THE FIRST PLACE. IT’S WHY THEY TRUST US TO MAKE BEST USE OF THE PLATFORMS GIVEN TO US.
Someone from the media, the disgraced media, being dragged through the gutter of the Levenson Inquiry, is lecturing us on integrity and lack thereof? You, who’s newspaper called the Celtic players Thugs & Thieves, in a story that was 99% lies? Who’s journalist Hugh Keevins was sued by Martin O’Neill not for getting facts wrong, but for making them up entirely? The fact is, your owners might “trust” you, but only to write what they want, only to reflect their own prejudices. The readers certainly don’t trust you … which is why your sales figures are dropping like an elevator with the cord cut , and journos around you are going down like soldiers in an open field automatic weapon kill-zone … that’s the measure of how you’re trusted.
AND IT’S BECAUSE OF THAT INTEGRITY WE STAND BY OUR STORY WHICH REVEALED CELTIC DID NOT FULFIL A TICKET AGREEMENT WITH RANGERS.
It’s because your paper thrives on controversy, and because you, personally, hate Celtic. It’s a non-story and you know it.
LAST WEEK (TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28) WHILE WORKING ON RANGERS’ FINANCIAL MELTDOWN, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED THAT CELTIC HAD DECIDED NOT TO PAY IN ADVANCE FOR THEIR TICKET ALLOCATION FOR THE OLD FIRM MATCH AT IBROX ON MARCH 25. RANGERS BELIEVED THERE WAS A VERBAL AGREEMENT IN PLACE FOR CELTIC TO DO SO.
A verbal agreement isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. I remember a columnist from your paper going on the radio and saying if Celtic signed Thomas Gravesen he would quit his job and join the circus. He is still writing for your paper and appearing on Clyde and has not, to the best of my knowledge, donned the clown’s suit yet … although he writes and talks as if he had.
I ALONG WITH KEITH JACKSON RAN THE STORY ON OUR BACK PAGE AND THAT MORNING CELTIC REACTED STRONGLY, INSISTING NO SUCH ASSURANCE HAD BEEN GIVEN.
What amazes me is it took two of you to come up with that. Did one of you hold the paper whilst the other held the pencil? I could have come up with something better, on my own, during one of my Kit-Kat and coffee breaks. I would suggest Celtic’s reaction boils down to no such agreement being in existence. I say again, a verbal agreement? How can anyone prove such a thing exists?
THEN THEY SAID THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT BUT LATER ADDED IT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS NOT BEING IN ADMINISTRATION. WHICH, OF COURSE, THEY ARE TODAY.
I don’t recall Celtic admitting there was an agreement, but even if there was … Rangers are in administration, as you’ve said, and with other creditors being treated like mugs why the Hell would we be daft enough to hand this money over without iron clad guarantees?
BUT AT NO TIME IN MY CONVERSATION WITH CELTIC ON THE DAY THE STORY APPEARED WAS IT STATED THE AGREEMENT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS’ REMAINING SOLVENT. THAT CAVEAT WAS NEVER MENTIONED.
Did you ask the right questions? I remember you pulling Chick Young up for that, saying that unless the journalist asks the questions which will stand up his story properly the story has no legs.
HOWEVER, IT WAS ADMITTED THERE WAS SOME AGREEMENT AND THAT CONFIRMED WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN OUR PAPER. NOT THAT WE REQUIRED FURTHER PROOF.
A verbal agreement, dependant on a number of variables? And that constitutes proof that said agreement was broken? Even though one of those variables had come into play? This has to be one of the flimsiest grounds for a news story ever conceived.
THE AGREEMENT WHICH RANGERS INSIST WAS IN PLACE AND WHICH CELTIC CONTINUE TO PROTEST DIDN’T EXIST WAS THE RESULT OF THE PARKHEAD CLUB DEMANDING PAYMENT UP FRONT FROM RANGERS FOR THEIR ALLOCATION OF TICKETS FOR THE OLD FIRM GAME AT CELTIC PARK ON DECEMBER 28.
Celtic wanted the money from Rangers because there was a danger the match might not go ahead. Celtic are with-holding this money for the same reason. Are you really too stupid that you haven’t figured that out? Celtic’s position has been entirely consistent here, from the word go. We are protecting our own interests, as we are entitled to do.
IT SHOULD BE STRESSED MOST OF US AGREED THAT IT WAS WISE FOR CELTIC TO HAVE ASKED TO SEE THE MONEY FIRST BECAUSE OF THE FRAGILE STATE OF RANGERS’ FINANCES.
Then what’s the problem here? Why the self-righteous indignation?
BUT OUR INFORMATION SAYS THAT BOTH CLUBS AGREED CELTIC WOULD ALSO PAY IN ADVANCE FOR THIS MONTH’S MATCH.
Aaaah now we come to it. And that information came from where? The administrators? Where would they get proof of a “verbal agreement”? How do they know such a thing existed? The only people who could have provided you that information are the hierarchy at Rangers … you know, those untrustworthy unscrupulous base liars who the entire media acknowledges cannot be trusted at all. Or is it someone else inside Rangers, someone who perhaps wants to deflect attention away from the crap performances on the park which are partly responsible for this god-awful shambles they are in? Iron-clad sources … not.
INDEED, ON JANUARY 21 RANGERS REQUESTED PAYMENT AHEAD OF THE TICKETS BEING ISSUED IN A MESSAGE WHICH STATED IT HAD BEEN AGREED. ABOUT 50 MINUTES LATER CELTIC RESPONDED BY THANKING RANGERS FOR THEIR INVOICE AND ADDED IT WOULD BE PASSED ON TO FINANCE FOR PAYMENT TO BE MADE AS SOON AS.
I won’t ask where you got that information. Have you heard of uttering? I suggest you look it up, as even documents stamped at Ibrox have to be viewed with suspicion these days.
PERHAPS IT WOULD ALSO HELP JOG MEMORIES IF IT IS POINTED OUT THAT FIVE DAYS EARLIER ALI RUSSELL, WHO WAS RANGERS’ CHIEF OPERATIONS MANAGER AT THE TIME, TOLD HIS TICKET OFFICE STAFF THAT CELTIC HAD AGREED THEY WOULD PAY IN ADVANCE.
And he told the Rangers fans in the same month that players were being vigorously pursued, and his boss told the press that the club as not in imminent threat of administration … oh I could go on, but you get the point already ….
CELTIC DIDN’T PAY AND NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY JUMP UP AND DOWN IN PROTEST THAT IS THE WAY IT IS. RANGERS PAID UP FRONT, CELTIC DIDN’T.
And I say again, Celtic were correct to ask Rangers to pay upfront and they were equally correct to refuse to give Rangers money for a game which might not happen. Celtic have acted with total probity throughout here. They have acted in the interests of their shareholders and fans, and with no legal contract governing this process they were quite entitled to do so. Celtic have grave doubts about the March 25 game, as they had doubts about the December 28 match, and when you hear Rangers administrators dismissively suggesting creditors will have to accept pence in the pound after they tried to sign a player at £7000 a week, how can they muster the brass neck to actually question our club and the way we conduct our affairs?
INCIDENTALLY, IT’S EASY TO UNDERSTAND WHY CELTIC WOULD HAVE BEEN RELUCTANT TO PAY IN ADVANCE. ANY BUSINESS WOULD BE EXTREMELY WORRIED ABOUT HANDING OVER MONEY TO RANGERS AT THIS TIME BUT THE IBROX CLUB HAVE NO DOUBT THEY HAD A DEAL.
And Celtic say they didn’t. You can believe the people inside a club who’s lies, who’s arrogance, who’s ego and who’s overall conduct has propelled Scottish football to the edge of the greatest crisis in its history, or you can believe the people inside Celtic who have acted perfectly responsibly and reasonably throughout. Who do you choose to trust? I think your choice is clear, and that tells us everything we need to know about your motivations here.
SO, TOO, DO RANGERS’ ADMINISTRATORS DUFF AND PHELPS WHO SAID THROUGH A SPOKESMAN: ‘IT IS REGRETTABLE THAT AN APPARENT INITIAL AGREEMENT WAS UNFULFILLED.’ CELTIC MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ALSO THAT THEY WERE BEING BLAMED FOR COSTING JOBS AT IBROX AND MURRAY PARK BUT NO ONE HERE SUGGESTED THAT. LET’S BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR ON THIS, RANGERS AND RANGERS ALONE ARE TO BLAME FOR THEIR DECLINE INTO ADMINISTRATION AND ANY JOB LOSSES.
I ask again; how do Duff and Phelps know this existed? A verbal agreement is, by its nature, unwritten, and they cannot trust anything the old board has said. You are damned right Celtic are not to blame for anything that happens at Rangers. Our concern is to make sure our fans don’t join the list of creditors, which will shortly stretch from Govan to Girvan.
NONE OF THIS IS THE FAULT OF CELTIC OR ANYONE AT THAT CLUB.
Oh that much is clear to you, is it?
BUT OUR EVIDENCE AND THE CONTENT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH RANGERS AND CELTIC MADE IT CLEAR AN AGREEMENT WAS IN PLACE.
And I say again, even if you are right SO WHAT? Circumstances have changed, changed utterly, and Celtic are acting well within their rights. This is not a story. It is a shameless effort to stir up a controversy, ahead of a game which is explosive enough already. You talk about bloggers? I put up a post at the weekend which was a venomous response to Ally McCoist’s own remarks. When it was pointed out to me that it was potentially inflammatory and open to misinterpretation Itook it down and clarified what I’d written. I’ve seen guys on CQN and elsewhere do that on any number of occasions. Yet when the Daily Record – your newspaper – ran with a flagrantly provocative “Who is hated more at Ibrox” headline last year one of your writers went onto Radio Clyde and his only defence against such a piece of gutter journalism was that it did not inspire hatred because “hatred is part of that game.” You people are gutter scum.
CELTIC, THOUGH, WANT TO UNDERLINE THAT IF IT HADN’T BEEN MADE OBVIOUS THE AGREEMENT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS AVOIDING ADMINISTRATION THEN IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
And you don’t accept Celtic at their word on that?
RANGERS SAY THEY ARE UNAWARE OF ANY CONDITION ATTACHED TO THE ARRANGEMENT BUT IT CHANGES NOTHING.
They would say that though. They are a shambles, and anything that diverts some of the criticism is obviously going to be very appealing. Don’t you look for motivations when you are talking to sources? Don’t you wonder if you’re being played, or used to promote an agenda? Oh no, I forgot. You are all about integrity. You are all about the truth. Only bloggers get turned out like cheap street walkers. That never happens to the press, “Motherwell born billionaire” and “Martin O’Neill’s secret Bayern Munich contract” notwithstanding, eah?
LET’S JUST SAY, FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT YOU UNDERSTAND, THAT THE DEAL WAS CONDITIONAL ON RANGERS REMAINING OUT OF THE ADMINISTRATORS’ HANDS. EVEN IF IT WAS, THE AGREEMENT MUST STILL HAVE BEEN BROKEN BECAUSE RANGERS WERE NOT IN ADMINISTRATION WHEN CELTIC WERE ASKED TO PAY UP.
Fantastic logic there chief. Had we paid up by then? No. This isn’t like we arrested people’s bank accounts and scooped the money out. The circumstances changed.
THE REQUEST FOR THE CASH WAS MADE 24 DAYS BEFORE RANGERS WERE TIPPED OVER. OF COURSE WE’D ALL BEEN EXPECTING RANGERS TO GO UNDER BUT THE FACT IS THEY WERE STILL RUNNING UNDER THEIR OWN STEAM WHEN THEY ASKED FOR THE TICKET MONEY IN ADVANCE.
First you admit everyone knew Rangers were on the verge. Celtic certainly did. We also know that HMRC would have submitted their petition for an administration order the very next morning. We also know that rumour of this was rife in Glasgow; certainly Rangers knew it, which is why they moved first. Perhaps Celtic did too. Or perhaps your “24 hours before” information is a load of old cobblers. Did neither of those ideas cross your mind?
THEREFORE, EVEN ALLOWING FOR THE CAVEAT THAT CELTIC INSIST WOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF THE DEAL, THEY CHOSE NOT TO PROCEED WITH THE ARRANGEMENT.
Of course we didn’t! Rangers were in administration! The agreement, if one ever existed, was dead and buried! Is this really all you’ve got? Is this what they pay you for? Seriously?
THAT IS ALL WE EVER SAID. AND THAT IS THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER.
You wouldn’t know truth if it sank its iron jaws into your ample rear end. This is one of the worst articles I’ve ever read, and an insult to journalism.
Ok the bold tags are not working James !!!!!
Why I dont know
TEST: BIG BOLD WRITING
test any use
Awe_Naw
Bold tags worked on my PC (both times)
Mort
Awe_Naw
Italics working here too.
Mort
NTEGRITY IS NAME OF OUR GAME
BY JIM TRAYNOR ON MAR 5, 12 07:30 AM IN
THE MAIN CURRENCY, IN FACT THE ONLY CURRENCY ANY OF US IN THE NEWSPAPER GAME SHOULD HAVE IN OUR MORAL BANKS MUST BE INTEGRITY.
Agree 100%. Happy to hear that. It should come before pay cheques, before concerns over upsetting people. Truth to power is a vital component of a democracy. So, good start. Let’s see where you are going with this.
WITHOUT IT WE, AS JOURNALISTS, ARE OF NO USE TO ANYONE. WE HAVE NO VALUE. NONE AT ALL.
Absolutely correct. Otherwise you are nothing but a wind-sock or worse, a propagandist for people with agendas, nothing but a mouthpiece for them.
WITHOUT INTEGRITY WE FAIL OUR READERS, OUR PAPERS AND OUR EMPLOYERS. BUT JUST AS IMPORTANTLY WE FAIL OURSELVES.
I would argue the latter is more important than the former, but it’s good to hear you have some modicum of personal pride, and a sense of responsibility. Keep it going.
INTEGRITY, HONESTY AND THE DESIRE TO CALL IT OUT NO MATTER THE CONSEQUENCES IS WHAT DEFINES US. THANKFULLY IT’S ALSO WHAT SETS US APART, ESPECIALLY FROM ALL THOSE ‘BRAVE’ KEYBOARD THUMPERS OUT THERE IN THE WORLD OF SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES AND FOOTBALL FORUMS.
Hold the bus …. I get the first three paragraphs, because those are noble sentiments. But are you trying to say you are one of those guys? Oh no, hold the bus … that won’t do at all. You aren’t fit to class yourself in the group … and as to “brave” keyboard thumpers … your sarcasm is shocking, because most of them have more string to their bow than you ever will. Many of these “brave” keyboard thumpers have balls … and brains to go with them.
THEY AREN’T GOVERNED BY THE LAWS WHICH MUST BE OBSERVED BY NEWSPAPERS LIKE THIS ONE AND ARE ALLOWED TO BASH OUT THE MOST INSANE, INSULTING, ILLOGICAL AND CONFUSED MESSAGES.
What absolute nonsense you are talking there. Yes, it’s BS. I know full well that libel laws are the same whether you work for a national newspaper or a regional internet site. I know the same rules govern bloggers as cover national columnists, and if you don’t know that you are incompetent and if you do know it, and I think you do, you are a goddamned shifty eyed liar.
I SHOULDN’T COMPLAIN, THOUGH, BECAUSE IT ALL DEMONSTRATES THEIR LACK OF INTELLECT AND COMMON DECENCY.
The fact you are either deliberately lying or boldly going forward with not even the slightest grasp of your facts demonstrates yours more than anything I write ever could.
WHICH MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY THEY PREFER TO HIDE BEHIND ANONYMITY OR CHILDISH PSEUDONYMS.
I personally post under my own name. Many others do too. And those who don’t have good reason for not wanting to reveal themselves. We know about Levinson. We don’t want people like you raking through our bins, or tapping our phones trying to find scandal. In the newspaper business you protect the anonymity of sources … so what’s the difference? Unless you don’t ….
BUT SADLY THERE ARE SOME HIGH-PROFILE FOOTBALL PEOPLE USING THIS GIFT AS CONDUITS FOR THEIR OWN PROPAGANDA AND IF YOU’VE LOOKED AT SOME OF THESE SITES YOU’LL KNOW JUST HOW EASY IT IS TO INFLUENCE AND STIR UNREST.
You are accusing people in the football business of peddling propaganda? You who’s newspaper accepted the “Craig Whyte is a billionaire”fairy-tale with not even a question? You who have written the most servile, slobbering article in the history of Scottish football journalism, the homo-erotic piece we know as “the succulent lamb” story? You’re having a laugh, right? As to influencing the websites … that cuts both ways. Didn’t you hear about how some of your colleagues were conned a couple of years back into bigging up a Rangers youth player who didn’t exist? I can forward you the information if it’s escaped your notice ….
THERE IS CERTAINLY A LACK OF INTEGRITY IN CYBERSPACE BUT IT’S HONESTY THAT PERSUADES THE EDITORS AT THE DAILY RECORD AND SUNDAY MAIL TO EMPLOY THEIR JOURNALISTS IN THE FIRST PLACE. IT’S WHY THEY TRUST US TO MAKE BEST USE OF THE PLATFORMS GIVEN TO US.
Someone from the media, the disgraced media, being dragged through the gutter of the Levenson Inquiry, is lecturing us on integrity and lack thereof? You, who’s newspaper called the Celtic players Thugs & Thieves, in a story that was 99% lies? Who’s journalist Hugh Keevins was sued by Martin O’Neill not for getting facts wrong, but for making them up entirely? The fact is, your owners might “trust” you, but only to write what they want, only to reflect their own prejudices. The readers certainly don’t trust you … which is why your sales figures are dropping like an elevator with the cord cut , and journos around you are going down like soldiers in an open field automatic weapon kill-zone … that’s the measure of how you’re trusted.
AND IT’S BECAUSE OF THAT INTEGRITY WE STAND BY OUR STORY WHICH REVEALED CELTIC DID NOT FULFIL A TICKET AGREEMENT WITH RANGERS.
It’s because your paper thrives on controversy, and because you, personally, hate Celtic. It’s a non-story and you know it.
LAST WEEK (TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28) WHILE WORKING ON RANGERS’ FINANCIAL MELTDOWN, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED THAT CELTIC HAD DECIDED NOT TO PAY IN ADVANCE FOR THEIR TICKET ALLOCATION FOR THE OLD FIRM MATCH AT IBROX ON MARCH 25. RANGERS BELIEVED THERE WAS A VERBAL AGREEMENT IN PLACE FOR CELTIC TO DO SO.
A verbal agreement isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. I remember a columnist from your paper going on the radio and saying if Celtic signed Thomas Gravesen he would quit his job and join the circus. He is still writing for your paper and appearing on Clyde and has not, to the best of my knowledge, donned the clown’s suit yet … although he writes and talks as if he had.
I ALONG WITH KEITH JACKSON RAN THE STORY ON OUR BACK PAGE AND THAT MORNING CELTIC REACTED STRONGLY, INSISTING NO SUCH ASSURANCE HAD BEEN GIVEN.
What amazes me is it took two of you to come up with that. Did one of you hold the paper whilst the other held the pencil? I could have come up with something better, on my own, during one of my Kit-Kat and coffee breaks. I would suggest Celtic’s reaction boils down to no such agreement being in existence. I say again, a verbal agreement? How can anyone prove such a thing exists?
THEN THEY SAID THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT BUT LATER ADDED IT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS NOT BEING IN ADMINISTRATION. WHICH, OF COURSE, THEY ARE TODAY.
I don’t recall Celtic admitting there was an agreement, but even if there was … Rangers are in administration, as you’ve said, and with other creditors being treated like mugs why the Hell would we be daft enough to hand this money over without iron clad guarantees?
BUT AT NO TIME IN MY CONVERSATION WITH CELTIC ON THE DAY THE STORY APPEARED WAS IT STATED THE AGREEMENT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS’ REMAINING SOLVENT. THAT CAVEAT WAS NEVER MENTIONED.
Did you ask the right questions? I remember you pulling Chick Young up for that, saying that unless the journalist asks the questions which will stand up his story properly the story has no legs.
HOWEVER, IT WAS ADMITTED THERE WAS SOME AGREEMENT AND THAT CONFIRMED WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN OUR PAPER. NOT THAT WE REQUIRED FURTHER PROOF.
A verbal agreement, dependant on a number of variables? And that constitutes proof that said agreement was broken? Even though one of those variables had come into play? This has to be one of the flimsiest grounds for a news story ever conceived.
THE AGREEMENT WHICH RANGERS INSIST WAS IN PLACE AND WHICH CELTIC CONTINUE TO PROTEST DIDN’T EXIST WAS THE RESULT OF THE PARKHEAD CLUB DEMANDING PAYMENT UP FRONT FROM RANGERS FOR THEIR ALLOCATION OF TICKETS FOR THE OLD FIRM GAME AT CELTIC PARK ON DECEMBER 28.
Celtic wanted the money from Rangers because there was a danger the match might not go ahead. Celtic are with-holding this money for the same reason. Are you really too stupid that you haven’t figured that out? Celtic’s position has been entirely consistent here, from the word go. We are protecting our own interests, as we are entitled to do.
IT SHOULD BE STRESSED MOST OF US AGREED THAT IT WAS WISE FOR CELTIC TO HAVE ASKED TO SEE THE MONEY FIRST BECAUSE OF THE FRAGILE STATE OF RANGERS’ FINANCES.
Then what’s the problem here? Why the self-righteous indignation?
BUT OUR INFORMATION SAYS THAT BOTH CLUBS AGREED CELTIC WOULD ALSO PAY IN ADVANCE FOR THIS MONTH’S MATCH.
Aaaah now we come to it. And that information came from where? The administrators? Where would they get proof of a “verbal agreement”? How do they know such a thing existed? The only people who could have provided you that information are the hierarchy at Rangers … you know, those untrustworthy unscrupulous base liars who the entire media acknowledges cannot be trusted at all. Or is it someone else inside Rangers, someone who perhaps wants to deflect attention away from the crap performances on the park which are partly responsible for this god-awful shambles they are in? Iron-clad sources … not.
INDEED, ON JANUARY 21 RANGERS REQUESTED PAYMENT AHEAD OF THE TICKETS BEING ISSUED IN A MESSAGE WHICH STATED IT HAD BEEN AGREED. ABOUT 50 MINUTES LATER CELTIC RESPONDED BY THANKING RANGERS FOR THEIR INVOICE AND ADDED IT WOULD BE PASSED ON TO FINANCE FOR PAYMENT TO BE MADE AS SOON AS.
I won’t ask where you got that information. Have you heard of uttering? I suggest you look it up, as even documents stamped at Ibrox have to be viewed with suspicion these days.
PERHAPS IT WOULD ALSO HELP JOG MEMORIES IF IT IS POINTED OUT THAT FIVE DAYS EARLIER ALI RUSSELL, WHO WAS RANGERS’ CHIEF OPERATIONS MANAGER AT THE TIME, TOLD HIS TICKET OFFICE STAFF THAT CELTIC HAD AGREED THEY WOULD PAY IN ADVANCE.
And he told the Rangers fans in the same month that players were being vigorously pursued, and his boss told the press that the club as not in imminent threat of administration … oh I could go on, but you get the point already ….
CELTIC DIDN’T PAY AND NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY JUMP UP AND DOWN IN PROTEST THAT IS THE WAY IT IS. RANGERS PAID UP FRONT, CELTIC DIDN’T.
And I say again, Celtic were correct to ask Rangers to pay upfront and they were equally correct to refuse to give Rangers money for a game which might not happen. Celtic have acted with total probity throughout here. They have acted in the interests of their shareholders and fans, and with no legal contract governing this process they were quite entitled to do so. Celtic have grave doubts about the March 25 game, as they had doubts about the December 28 match, and when you hear Rangers administrators dismissively suggesting creditors will have to accept pence in the pound after they tried to sign a player at £7000 a week, how can they muster the brass neck to actually question our club and the way we conduct our affairs?
INCIDENTALLY, IT’S EASY TO UNDERSTAND WHY CELTIC WOULD HAVE BEEN RELUCTANT TO PAY IN ADVANCE. ANY BUSINESS WOULD BE EXTREMELY WORRIED ABOUT HANDING OVER MONEY TO RANGERS AT THIS TIME BUT THE IBROX CLUB HAVE NO DOUBT THEY HAD A DEAL.
And Celtic say they didn’t. You can believe the people inside a club who’s lies, who’s arrogance, who’s ego and who’s overall conduct has propelled Scottish football to the edge of the greatest crisis in its history, or you can believe the people inside Celtic who have acted perfectly responsibly and reasonably throughout. Who do you choose to trust? I think your choice is clear, and that tells us everything we need to know about your motivations here.
SO, TOO, DO RANGERS’ ADMINISTRATORS DUFF AND PHELPS WHO SAID THROUGH A SPOKESMAN: ‘IT IS REGRETTABLE THAT AN APPARENT INITIAL AGREEMENT WAS UNFULFILLED.’ CELTIC MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ALSO THAT THEY WERE BEING BLAMED FOR COSTING JOBS AT IBROX AND MURRAY PARK BUT NO ONE HERE SUGGESTED THAT. LET’S BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR ON THIS, RANGERS AND RANGERS ALONE ARE TO BLAME FOR THEIR DECLINE INTO ADMINISTRATION AND ANY JOB LOSSES.
I ask again; how do Duff and Phelps know this existed? A verbal agreement is, by its nature, unwritten, and they cannot trust anything the old board has said. You are damned right Celtic are not to blame for anything that happens at Rangers. Our concern is to make sure our fans don’t join the list of creditors, which will shortly stretch from Govan to Girvan.
NONE OF THIS IS THE FAULT OF CELTIC OR ANYONE AT THAT CLUB.
Oh that much is clear to you, is it?
BUT OUR EVIDENCE AND THE CONTENT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH RANGERS AND CELTIC MADE IT CLEAR AN AGREEMENT WAS IN PLACE.
And I say again, even if you are right SO WHAT? Circumstances have changed, changed utterly, and Celtic are acting well within their rights. This is not a story. It is a shameless effort to stir up a controversy, ahead of a game which is explosive enough already. You talk about bloggers? I put up a post at the weekend which was a venomous response to Ally McCoist’s own remarks. When it was pointed out to me that it was potentially inflammatory and open to misinterpretation Itook it down and clarified what I’d written. I’ve seen guys on CQN and elsewhere do that on any number of occasions. Yet when the Daily Record – your newspaper – ran with a flagrantly provocative “Who is hated more at Ibrox” headline last year one of your writers went onto Radio Clyde and his only defence against such a piece of gutter journalism was that it did not inspire hatred because “hatred is part of that game.” You people are gutter scum.
CELTIC, THOUGH, WANT TO UNDERLINE THAT IF IT HADN’T BEEN MADE OBVIOUS THE AGREEMENT WAS DEPENDENT ON RANGERS AVOIDING ADMINISTRATION THEN IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
And you don’t accept Celtic at their word on that?
RANGERS SAY THEY ARE UNAWARE OF ANY CONDITION ATTACHED TO THE ARRANGEMENT BUT IT CHANGES NOTHING.
They would say that though. They are a shambles, and anything that diverts some of the criticism is obviously going to be very appealing. Don’t you look for motivations when you are talking to sources? Don’t you wonder if you’re being played, or used to promote an agenda? Oh no, I forgot. You are all about integrity. You are all about the truth. Only bloggers get turned out like cheap street walkers. That never happens to the press, “Motherwell born billionaire” and “Martin O’Neill’s secret Bayern Munich contract” notwithstanding, eah?
LET’S JUST SAY, FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT YOU UNDERSTAND, THAT THE DEAL WAS CONDITIONAL ON RANGERS REMAINING OUT OF THE ADMINISTRATORS’ HANDS. EVEN IF IT WAS, THE AGREEMENT MUST STILL HAVE BEEN BROKEN BECAUSE RANGERS WERE NOT IN ADMINISTRATION WHEN CELTIC WERE ASKED TO PAY UP.
Fantastic logic there chief. Had we paid up by then? No. This isn’t like we arrested people’s bank accounts and scooped the money out. The circumstances changed.
THE REQUEST FOR THE CASH WAS MADE 24 DAYS BEFORE RANGERS WERE TIPPED OVER. OF COURSE WE’D ALL BEEN EXPECTING RANGERS TO GO UNDER BUT THE FACT IS THEY WERE STILL RUNNING UNDER THEIR OWN STEAM WHEN THEY ASKED FOR THE TICKET MONEY IN ADVANCE.
First you admit everyone knew Rangers were on the verge. Celtic certainly did. We also know that HMRC would have submitted their petition for an administration order the very next morning. We also know that rumour of this was rife in Glasgow; certainly Rangers knew it, which is why they moved first. Perhaps Celtic did too. Or perhaps your “24 hours before” information is a load of old cobblers. Did neither of those ideas cross your mind?
THEREFORE, EVEN ALLOWING FOR THE CAVEAT THAT CELTIC INSIST WOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF THE DEAL, THEY CHOSE NOT TO PROCEED WITH THE ARRANGEMENT.
Of course we didn’t! Rangers were in administration! The agreement, if one ever existed, was dead and buried! Is this really all you’ve got? Is this what they pay you for? Seriously?
THAT IS ALL WE EVER SAID. AND THAT IS THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER.
You wouldn’t know truth if it sank its iron jaws into your ample rear end. This is one of the worst articles I’ve ever read, and an insult to journalism.
Ok that´s better
Paul67 moderator … please remove the previous posts of James without the italics
AWE NAW
Agreed. Superb piece of work.
SPL investigation going back to 1July 1998.
Mort
1 July 1998 ? Protects their 9.
Anyone not sure that Rangers and dignity are an example of oxymoron should check out the Falling Masonry article on Celtic Wiki here: http://www.thecelticwiki.com/page/Rangers+-+Falling+Masonry
tic tock on 5 March, 2012 at 15:19
Post of the day – Miss Celtic, wow!!!
Sir Paul
Don’t tell me..that ye don’t know that The Record.. is not right?
Say.. Wait a Tick..
Let me run that by… ME… again.
Hmmmmm Hmmmmmmm Hmmmmmm..
“Do NOT Tell Me.. That You Do NOT Know, that the Record.. is NOT Right…?”
Na.. Ma frettin’ over that Line. turned oot tae be NO Necessary..
fur..
Nutsy,jist told me..
“It Make Perfect Sense To Me, pal”
And.. as ye know.. Nutsy, ALWAYS is the Final Arbitrator..
when it comes doon tae Vetting Ma Syntax.
Although, his Main Joab,in the Organization.. is that o’ Ma Gamblin’ Guru.. he Also… Doubles as Ma Editor..
.
Yep.. You are Right,Kiddo…
The Record, is just Muck Rakin’,as is thur Wont.. and
is also..
Jist Daein’ whit they Dae,Dae..
Kojo
Still Laughin’..
P.S.
Nae PRONOUNCEMENT…. coming Fae the Administrators, Yet?
Ah dinna want nae Stinkin’.. Announcement,frum Them…fur
Announcements, ur Ten a Penny…
It’s .. A Guid Old Definite..
PRONOUNCEMENT.. that WE ur Waitin’ Fur..
“Announcements”, usually , Dinna Amount tae A HIll of Beans.
Right?
Darned Right!
jock steins celtic
SPL didn’t exist prior to then so it would be up to SFL/SFA to undertake review of their “9 in a row”
Mort
SSN ………………………
SPL to investigate huns payments to players
BigJoeJelllllyyyyyyandiceCreamALLdayLONG
Rangers Tax-Case @rangerstaxcase Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
The longer this process goes without cost cuts, the more that liquidation looks inevitable. Weird that player consent is being sought.
MORT
I think it could reasonably go back further than that.
I mentioned the Gazza interview where,incoherently,he denied he was skint as he “still had a couple of million offshore”
Others have cited the famous contract shown as evidence in court that Goram was on a grand a week in 1996-that’s a particularly dangerous route to go down if it was ever proven to be a lie.
Nacho Novo,similar.
There is a house of cards which will tumble,and a few peepil will undoubtedly turn Queen’s Evidence in order to save their own skin.
It will be interesting to discover who breaks cover first.
One’s called Ronald…
Just received below note from follow follow..do you think I should ask if I get my money back when they die?scared incase I get banned?
Special subscription offer to FollowFollow.com users
The cover price of Follow Follow fanzine recently rose to £3.
But we have a special offer available to our website users – you can get a ten-issue subscription for the old price of £24 for the UK and £30 overseas.
Click on the links below to take advantage of the reduce rates:-
http://tinyurl.com/followfollowsubuk
http://tinyurl.com/followfollowsubworld
Or to purchase a single copy of our latest edition click on the link below:-
http://tinyurl.com/followfollow229
Forward Message
David Cowan @stvdavidc Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
#Rangers talks still ongoing at Murray Park. Might be an announcement today…but further delay until tomorrow can’t be ruled out.
When,oh when,are thae numpties gonnae be dumped in the blender & liquidised?
After a surfeit of j&i,I really want to get back to talking about The Bhoys.
I’ve started having dreams about this whole stramash….disturbing.
If he had two contracts, would Boyd’s goals record be nullified?
Am I getting greedy?