The Flawed Logic of the Scottish Media’s Stance on Rangers’ Troubles

As the prospect of Rangers FC ceasing to exist looms ever larger, and is now openly discussed in the mainstream media, it is interesting to see the line which is being taken.


Recently I have had the pleasure of attending a couple of meetings of the Scottish Press Club, where some of the machinations of the media are laid bare. Two recent speakers are, I think, relevant to this discussion.

First of all James Doleman wrote the terrific Sheridan Trial Blog. That had a large part to play in making me start my own, so he is the man to blame!

James sat in the Tommy Sheridan trial for its entire duration, reported thoroughly and correctly every day, and was able to observe the antics of the traditional media. He noticed that there was a “herd instinct” whereby there seemed a reluctance to be the person striking out in a different direction with the story. James had the feeling that there was a “safety in numbers” approach. If a reporter took a different tack from the rest, then he ran the risk of being wrong – if the general “spin” on the story was the same, them slight variation was in order, but no-one could be faulted for sticking to the “party line”.

It was also James’ view that this was not because of journalists trying to fit the story within their particular organisation’s viewpoint, but a recognition that there is “safety in numbers”.  (James – if you feel I have misinterpreted what you said, apologies, and I will correct it.)


Secondly, I was very impressed by Professor Greg Philo from the Glasgow University Media Group. His point (one amongst many) was that what the media failed to report was more important than what actually made it into the papers and on to the TV. He discussed various stories, dating back to the 1970’s, where the facts were simply not reported at all, leading to people forming views about, for example, Trades Union power or productivity of British workers, which (a) were factually incorrect and (b) have formed the general view of these matters in the UK now, almost 40 years on.


What does this have to do, you might ask, with the state of Scottish football and the media coverage thereof?


The story of the tax case facing Rangers was broken, I understand, on the Kerrydale Street website. It seems to have been picked up soon afterwards by Darrell King of the Evening Times. My knowledge of it came through the Rangers Tax Case Blog and via Phil Mac Giolla Bhain’s website.

The mainstream reaction to the story seems, from my observations at the time, to have been to ignore it. Bearing in mind that, in a time of financial austerity, it was being alleged that “one of the two most important institutions in Scotland” (as I believe some refer to Rangers) had taken part in a scheme (a) illegally to reduce its tax liabilities by over £20 million and (b) which had the effect of giving them a massive financial advantage over even its closest rivals, it seems astonishing that the media were not poring over the story, and having comment from tax lawyers and accountants about what it meant. The fact that the tax appeal took place in private did not mean that the issues raised could not be discussed.

There were no issues of contempt of court, as long as the privacy of the hearing was respected. If, for example, RTC had detailed the evidence of a witness to the appeal, then I am sure that some form of action would have been taken. Governments and law enforcement agencies can easily penetrate the anonymity of the Internet, if so required.

If an anonymous blogger can provide huge amounts of analysis, and have contributors who are versed in the various areas chip in with their thoughts and input, why not the mainstream press?

I do not think that a message went out from the various editors saying “We are all Rangers supporters, so do not write about them.” However, there was probably a “nod and a wink” to the idea of sitting tight on the story, and for letting someone else take the flak. The reaction by some groups of Rangers fans to what they perceive as negative stories r actions about them, such as the threatened boycott of Lloyd TSB for trying to control the Rangers debt situation, probably made editors think that the risk of a drop in sales, even for telling the truth, was not worth it.

In addition, sports writers traditionally have not come from a business or legal background. Would the City Editor of the Herald be expected to pop over to Firhill and write a match report on a Thistle v Hamilton game? But the media has access to all sorts of experts (so-called) and this seems a story ripe for detailed exposition and analysis.


Against that background, what do we see now that the story is being talked about?

It seems to be the “party line” that Rangers must survive in the SPL in some form, whether as a newco or the existing team. This is not, of course, for the good of Rangers, but for the “good of Scottish football”.

As has been predicted on RTC by various contributors for some time now, this is the “herd instinct” kicking in. The accepted wisdom is that, of course, there must be a “Rangers” in the SPL. There has been little or no mainstream analysis of the issues behind the question.

I try, when writing, to start with a question, look at the evidence, and then reach a conclusion. That might seem old fashioned, but the media view of Rangers and their present predicament seems to have jumped straight to the answer without any analysis to get there.

We are told that Scottish football will wither and die without Rangers on the SPL.

It is funny, but I cannot seem to recall the floods of stories from Messrs Traynor, Keevins, English et alia warning that the desire of Celtic and/or Rangers to leave the SPL and play in England, or the Atlantic League, or the Inter-Galactic Footie Bowl would kill Scottish football stone dead.

I may well be wrong, and there are archives full of articles warning of this very fate, but my recollection is that the media saw this generally as (a) a good thing for the Old Firm as they would have better competition and more money and (b) a good thing for Scottish football.

Now, with the prospect of Rangers disappearing entirely, or else dropping all the way to Division 3 of the SFL, the absence of the Ibrox team (for what might only be three years) will be fatal for Scottish football.

I will leave the analysis of this to wiser people, but it seems to me that the following “logic” lies behind the present media view.


A If Rangers AND Celtic leave the SPL, this would be a good thing.

B If only Rangers leaves the SPL, that will be a bad thing.

C Therefore Celtic remaining on its own in the SPL is a bad thing.


Frankly that “logic“ can only be the result of (a) flawed thinking or (b) anti-Celtic bias. If the contention is that it would leave an uneven playing field and that Celtic would win all of the trophies all of the time, then, frankly, why does Scottish football not turn into a competition where Rangers and Celtic play only each other?

There were no clamours for the playing field to be levelled when Rangers were winning nine consecutive Championships, nor indeed when Celtic won their nine in a row. (In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s the standard of Scottish football was very high, and there was a lot of European success).

At the end of the day, it appears that Rangers, through financial mismanagement, have brought about a situation, no matter what happens with the tax case, where it cannot live within its means. Motherwell, Dundee (twice), Gretna, Airdrieonians and, in the mists of time, Third Lanark all paid the price for similar failure.

Would the media be clamouring for the rules to be changed if, as a result of bad play and bad management, Celtic or Rangers faced relegation? Logic would suggest that the same arguments should be deployed. However, that shows the moral bankruptcy of the argument.

We still need, perhaps even more than ever, the likes if Phil and RTC to keep up their coverage of these issues, or else the facts will be drowned out by the pre-set media agenda.



And talking of the pre-set media agenda, I note today that the Scotsman website has a story regarding some of Rangers “targets” including Jorge Claros, the midfielder from Honduras who had a trial with the team earlier this month.

Ally McCoist is quoted as saying “We are not just in a position to offer him a contract yet”. He then goes on to suggest that other areas of the team are a higher priority.

The article goes on to say:-

“Claros has returned to his Honduran club Motagua and their manager, Pepe Trevino, is unhappy at the player’s treatment. He said: “Jorge has a great future and will sign for a good club in Europe soon. Maybe it was not his time at Rangers – I don’t know why they didn’t sign him. Rangers took him for two weeks and now say they have money problems. They should have told him before that. He is a very good player and deserves to be treated better than this.” (Emphasis added)

Mr McCoist’s words ”We are not just in a position to offer him a contract yet” seems to corroborate what Senor Trevino has to say. It does not appear that he was asked why Rangers was not in position to offer a contract, rather than saying that they did not want, just now, to do so.

It might be seen as worthy of comment that Rangers cannot afford to sign Senor Claros. But no.

It is all business as usual – nothing to see here – move along please.


I am sure that the tide will turn and that the media will give this story the attention is deserves. Probably though, it will not happen till the liquidator or receiver is installed in the fine offices at Ibrox.




Filed under Blogging, Football, Press, Rangers

44 responses to “The Flawed Logic of the Scottish Media’s Stance on Rangers’ Troubles

  1. oisin71

    “We still need, perhaps even more than ever, the lkes if Phil and RTC to keep up their coverage of these issues…”….and Paul McConville too.

    Good article Paul, keep getting the message out there.

  2. Odear

    Excellent read, liked the grounding in the Sheridan example and the university analyais. This piece is far above what will be in Scottish newspapers today- an opinion piece with actual opinion backed up by knowledge and logic?

    Shame the traditional media cannot recognise and co-opt bloggers such as yourself, we’d have a higher level of discourse, better debate. The days of ‘controversialist’ ‘journalists’ such as Traynor, who seem to actively despise and condescend to their audience, is closing. There are a lot of grown ups out there with an appetite for mature news and analysis, yes even about football.

    • As regards co-opting bloggers, I think much of the traditional media view us as troublesome nuisances. Where any look to make use of our services, then the prospect of actually paying for a blogger’s content seems beyond them.

      I have bemoaned the declining standards of legal reporting here before, and I think that economics make the same true in other fields of media coverage too.

      If someone wants to pay me for writing about these issues…I would consider it!

  3. Why dont the powers that be at Paradise break out the old `biscuit tin’ to help out their neighbours. It worked for us.

  4. Gavin

    the real issue with all this is that its going over the same old ground again and again, blogging vultures picking at what is actually the same story right from the start. If people want speculation about what will happen, when it will happen and who will make it happen then fair enough but I dont want to see it in the papers because its boring!
    If someone has anything new to say then fair enough but its not. It has turned into a contest now between pseudo journalists and internet gossips as to who broke the story first or who is keeping us all so well informed and up to date with the nothing news about it, its pathetetic in my opinion.
    One thing is for sure though, if rangers win this case OR they go basically unpunished in the SPL there is going to be a lot of silly looking people having shouted their opinions and dreams all over the ‘net…..then of course all the “oh if that was us” nonsense will start.

    HMRC will come to a decision THEN the sentencing will begin, until then……there is nothing to say but gossip.

    • Gavin,
      Thanks for reading and for your comment. I think you are being a bit unfair. I have not noticed a contest to declare who discovered what first. Maybe I am not looking hard enough.

      As for there being no news, it is fair to say that without RTC, Phil and others, we would all have been much more in the dark if forced to rely on traditional media. That is not becoause we have all been specualting all the time, but because many of us have been able to find things which in bygone days would have been unearthed and published in the press.

      As far as the outcome is concerned, I do not have a desired view in sight. I have offered opinions at various times about what could happen. Do you ignore previews written at the start of the football season because no one knows how the games will turn out?

  5. James Williamson

    Had the misfortune to hear the radio yesterday afternoon and was surprised to hear assirted pundits claiming to be surprised at the apathy of Rangers fans re the tax case and suggesting they, the MSM had been probing away to get the truth! Beggars belief.

  6. TheBlackKnight

    Great read and to the point as always Paul

    In describing the Scottish Media’s role in these events I would have just used the word “duplicitous” but (like most of them) it wouldn’t have been much of a read 😉

  7. James Williamson

    One question, forgetting the tax case, if Rangers were to be relegated following a poor season are our beloved media suggesting they should be spared relegation?

  8. Frankie

    There has been an enormous amount of comment on this in the media. Maybe the mainstream media were slow to pick it up or didn’t understand it very well but whoever said the Scottish football media were good?

    As for the possible impact of a Rangers insolvency event, leaving aside the chip on the shoulder stuff, it would potentially be a very serious matter. If you don’t believe me ask the chairmen of the non-Old Firm clubs how they would feel about the possibility of Rangers dropping out of the SPL. For a start the SPL’s TV agreement with Sky would be null and void as that agreement specifies that there must be games between Rangers and Celtic.

    • TheBlackKnight

      So what happens to “Scottish Football”, as has been touted for many a year by the Scottish Media, if/when Celtic or Rangers leave for a “better” league?

      No consideration given to others in that case? So what is Scottish Football ? Rangers? I certainly don’t believe it is. Nor do I want it to be if they are guilty of tax evasion.

      Celtic were not afforded the same leniency when faced with going to the wall.

      Scottish Football is about the supporters (of ALL clubs). Without them, football is nothing!

    • Frankie,

      I cannot believe that the Sky deal is void if there are not 4 Old Firm league games each year. What is one of the two finished in the bottom 6?

      As the Old Firm games are the best ones for viewer numbers, I suspect (a) that the deal means that Sky, not ESPN, get to show them and (b) if there are not 4 Old Firm games, the sums paid by Sky are reduced as per the contract. Otherwise it would be a TV company running football for its own capitalist ends, which would never do!

    • Frankie
      January 29, 2012 at 12:45 pm

      “If you don’t believe me ask the chairmen of the non-Old Firm clubs how they would feel about the possibility of Rangers dropping out of the SPL. For a start the SPL’s TV agreement with Sky would be null and void as that agreement specifies that there must be games between Rangers and Celtic”.
      18 months on and the reality shows how stupid and gullible Rangers fans were and still are.

      You’re not as indispensable as you think.

      Eat you words Frankie boy.

  9. joemack

    I was thinking about the confidentiality clauses in the employment termination contracts of ex-employees of Rangers FC plc. If this company ceases to exist, would there be anyone with a legal right to still enforce them. Could lead to an opening of a kind of Pandora’s Box of “kick and tell” books/articles.

    Any chance of a few words Paul?

  10. Swirlz

    Has anyone seen a quote or a copy of this sky contract that means Rangers “need” to be in the SPL? All I could find was this quote from Doncaster.

    “This long-term agreement means Sky Sports viewers can continue to enjoy coverage of 30 live matches a season, including each Old Firm head-to-head, across TV, mobile, online and tablet devices.”

    So, it could be three, it could be seven or four. Or if there is none then guess what, there is none. If any clause exists im sure it is along the lines that Sky shows the games if they happen, not ESPN. No hidden meaning or clauses. Imo only, obviously.

  11. Damo Lennon

    There must have been some calls for a levelling of the playing field during the original and best 9 in a row – the ten team Premier Division was a direct result of it.

    • Good point Damo.

      I see reference to the Scottish Premier Division being created because the league was “stagnant” at the time ie Celtic kept winning!

      • Kerrygirl

        I think you will find that there cannot be a comparison between Celtics 9in a row with rangers, the latter was bought , just as you said Paul there were no calls for a change when rangers were racking up huge debts via tame bank managers,to over take Celtics 9 titles, at the time Celtic were a huge force domestically and in Europe, also rangers were in European semis and finals ,so at least there was competition ,you are correct I never heard 1 dissenter in the media when Murray was bouncing the cheques sorry writing them, Celtic financially were out of their leauge ,Mr Stein assembled his team with modest means and out smarted out thought and out played their opponents, to climb to the highest pinnacle of club football,it wasn’t built on the never never

  12. longtimelurker

    Hi Paul and others from therangerstaxcase blog.

    For some reason I’ve been banned from posting comments on that site.

    I post under the name longtimelurker and don’t actually post much however after the ‘fracas’ last Friday it would appear that I’ve been banned under some sort of poster cull by RTC.

    I’ve send him some mails asking why but he’s either ignoring me or hasn’t received them.

    I was wondering if one of you could perhaps ask or at least post a comment on the blog for me?


  13. Veritas

    Paul, I see RTC in his current blog – and now you – are still rattling on about the mainstream media. The pervading view is that the ‘Daily Ranger’, the Sun and all the red tops are useless and anti-Celtic. Then when the broadsheets don’t play ball, it’s them too. So all the print media are either corrupt or incompetent. Or both. Next target is the broadcast and radio media. Yip, they’re all at it too. Dummies everyone.

    Let me say this – have you ever seriously wondered why all the stuff on RTC is not in the media every day? Well, I know you have because posters go on incessantly about it – lambasting journalists as poodles, lickspittles, lackeys, thickos, running dogs of the Protestant press (I made that last one up). Yawn, yawn.

    It’s because most of it is flights of fancy. All posters have a massive advantage on here over journalists – you do not have lawyers poring over your words every day and striking out anything that doesn’t hold up to the utmost editorial and legal scrutiny. I’m afraid your continual dismissive sniping only betrays a woeful ignorance about how real journalism works.

    One of the great modern myths – papers print a pack of lies. No they don’t. They would be sued out of business in a month if they did.

    Let me point something out very clearly. If there is a major event at Rangers it will be massive news and the culprits exposed mercilessly. For months.

    Last week, Gordon Waddell in the Sunday Mail and Jim Traynor in the Daily Record didn’t hold back on events at Ibrox and attacked David Murray and Craig Whyte. So much for being in their pockets. Why? Because the FTT ended that week so it was newsworthy.

    Until something criminal is uncovered on blogs then they will continue to be nothing but opinion and speculation. Entertaining too, I admit – if you like that sort of thing. But of little interest to the mainstream media. That’s why the title-tattle – akin to fifth-form juvenile jousting – is not being reported.

    Not because Mark Guidi loves Rangers and hates Celtic. As it happens, he’s from a family of Italian restaurateurs so no prizes for guessing which team he favours. And he’s a real nice guy to boot who’s neither dumb nor bigoted. Journalists, like everyone else, get stuff wrong. But not because they have an agenda. They don’t. For commercial reasons alone in the West of Scotland that would be suicidal.

    • TheBlackKnight

      What? With headlines “WHO IS MORE HATED, LENNON OR THE TAXMAN”

      Guess the lawyers had a day off!

    • Veritas, even if there was any basis to support your questionable claim that newspapers do not print a pack of lies, they don’t really need to most of the time. You ignore the glaringly obvious matter that wilfully ignoring the main stories is an equally effective way of distorting the perception of reality; it is arguably even more effective because it avoids the need to have clearance from the legal department before it is not published.

      Most people would recognise the following story as factually correct but it would hardly be a reasonable account of the truth:

      “The Texas Record,
      23rd November 1963
      Political campaigning continued in downtown Houston yesterday as large crowds turned out on the streets to witness an impressive motorcade in which Governor Connolly was riding. The vast majority of the crowd were well-behaved but a man was later arrested in connection with an incident which took place in Dealey Plaza.
      In other news, John F Kennedy will not be seeking re-election to the White House. Lyndon Johnson has been sworn in as the 36th President of the United States.
      The weather is expected to remain clear for the rest of the week.”

      That is not an unreasonable parallel to the Scottish media’s approach to the disaster that is looming for Rangers.
      It is almost ten years since Hugh Adam sounded the alarm as he left the Rangers board and sold his shares in the club. After one, solitary piece about his reasons for leaving, the media let the story starve to death.
      It is only a few months since Alistair Johnson sounded the alarm about Craig Whyte and warned Rangers supporters to be very vigilant. That was a clear cue for the media to investigate the credentials of the new owner but they refused to take it. Where it would have been perfectly legitimate for them to shed some light on the kind of work that a standard issue, asset-stripping, vulture capitalist engages in, they instead manufactured the myth that Rangers had been acquired by a billionaire who also happened to be die-hard fan. “Pack of lies,” anyone?

      You say, “If there is a major event at Rangers it will be massive news and the culprits exposed mercilessly.”
      There is no “if” about it. There has been an ongoing major event at Rangers for over a decade, even before Hugh Adam broke ranks, but the press have chosen not to address it. Gazza and Five-Bellies were deemed more newsworthy.
      There was and still is enough libel-proof material on Dave King alone to justify forensic scrutiny of his involvement with Rangers and, by extension, Murray’s general stewardship of his business. Jim White asking Brian Laudrup why he is so wonderful doesn’t really cover that angle well enough.

      No excuses. There have been countless opportunities for journalists to do their job properly and they simply haven’t even come close to taking them. They deserve all the contempt they get and then some.

      • JockHigh

        Brilliant post, Henry. I agree with every word and thoroughly enjoyed your portrayal of events in Dallas a while ago.

        Having had some experience of the press’s reporting of events during the Sheridan Trial, I can only back up Mr Doleman’s observation regarding the herd instinct of journalists. Agreement on the exact quotes to use, rather than the small variations you might expect from handwritten notes (I didn’t observe very much shorthand going on in the press area!) served to unify the press view of the days proceedings. The agreement of the line to take in the limited space they had available for printing or broadcasting was quite noticable on days when a variety of witnesses produced quite distinct evidence that was relevant to the case, but only a tiny sample was reported and was of the “Liar Liar Pants On Fire” style of quote rather than evidence that might indicate guilt or innocence.

        Sports journalists are probably having nightmares about the RFC situation right now as it must be pushing them miles outside their comfort zone. You must have a thick hide to be in that game in Scotland as whatever you print, particularly regarding the Old Firm, is liable to attract hostile attention from someone, often unreasonable, biased, ignorant and offensive attention. I fear the Scottish sports journalism fraternity have a developed a hide so thick that no critical response to their writing is able to penetrate, and they have severe difficulty accepting valid criticism or admit any professional shortcomings and gaps in knowledge that might lead them to seek specialist help from others at their paper.

  14. Thank you Veritas.

    I have spoken to journalists about the issues I mention and you discuss. As I said, there is not an “I am a Rangers fan and so I will not write about them negatively” approach. Instead there is a mindset, or “herd instinct” which guides what is, and is not, published.

    As Prof Philo said, what is not printed is more interesting than what is! You say that the traditional media have lawyers poring over their work and “striking out anything that doesn’t hold up to the utmost editorial and legal scrutiny”. I must have the bad luck then to read the papers that do not do that. The Press are happy to write about people who are in no position to defend themselves, and do not really care about the consequences. If it involves someone rich enough to sue, then different standards might prevail.

    It would be a sweeping generalisation (and unfair) to tar all journalsits with the same brush. However, it would also be untrue to represent the entre profession as paragons of virtue.

    I have great respect for the hard working reporters being called upon to do more and more in less and less time. However, I have been able to locate some things from public records in a matter of minutes which (a) would make a good story and (b) require no great work more than seeing a case on a court list, or checking Companies House (and you can sign up to be sent an email when anything is recorded there regarding any compoany one cares to name).

    Many newspapers defame people on a weekly if not daily basis. Football reporters tell lies, or more charitably are misled by PR people or agents, and print transfer speculation with no basis in fact for the story at all.

    I could go on, but it is late.

    The point of mentioning Prof Philo and James Doleman is that they both, in their very different experiences and fields, have experienced and witnessed the same things which RTC and I have criticied the media for. Why is it that the best coverage of the Rangers troubles in the Herald, for example, has come from their local government correspondent?

    Why have none of the reporters who have had the chance to interview Mr Whyte put these stories (which they now seem to be claiming they knew all along) to him in interviews?

    Why, for example, when Craig Whyte effectively told Tom English to f@@@ off, when he asked about his various companies, did Mr Enfglish put to Mr Whyte what RTC, Phil Mac Giolla Bhain and others had discovered FROM PUBLIC RECORDS?

    Maybe thisngs are not as bad as I painted, though this conclusion was based upon various sources. I am sure though that it is far worse than you envisage.

    • I have posted many times, and in many different places around the media and the tax case. I neither wish or need to cover old ground on my feelings.

      However, the one phrase that I have used over and over is simple : never bite the hand that feeds!

      Whilst I have previously criticised mainstream media- albeit for different reasons, I think a more simplistic approach to understanding the tax issue would have been beneficial for most. Not least of all the many people that post on rtc blog with scores of rubbish and fantastic theories with absolutely no merit.

      However, on the other hand I have sympathised with them. We need no reminding how small
      Minded football fans, especially it would seem those in the west of Scotland, can be. As I am sure I have said elsewhere: I prob pay wouldn’t have written about it myself I’d employed by a large business. Too many small minded people who’s 35p everyday would be sorely missed en masse.

      Opinion it would seem, will be forever divided on this issue. Infact- in recent times it is THIS that seems to be the issue of biggest bugbear to many. Not the tax case itself haha

      • Sorry, just to clarify something there. The scores of rubbish I refer to is not the rtc blog itself- rather some of the comments made by others.

        Also apologies for the awful spelling I am writing this on my phone that decides to play god with both grammar and spelling.

      • Garry Macinnes
        January 30, 2012 at 12:56 am

        …”many people that post on RTC’s blog with scores of rubbish and fantastic theories with absolutely no merit.

        Opinion it would seem, will be forever divided on this issue. In fact- in recent times it is THIS that seems to be the issue of biggest bugbear to many. Not the tax case itself” ha ha
        I wonder if you still hold the same opinion twelve months after Rangers were put into liquidation.

        The factual stories about the antics of Rangers that have emerged over that period have been spectacularly more bizarre than the “scores of rubbish and fantastic theories with absolutely no merit”.

  15. StevieBC

    Hi Paul,
    thanks for another thought provoking article.

    Your comment about Professor Philo’s observation about what is not reported resonates with me.
    Most reasonable consumers – IMO – should take all the ‘MSM’ output with a pinch of salt, due to expected, inherent bias and/or spin.

    However, as a follower of RTC and this site, I am now painfully aware how the general public must be ignorant of many significant issues – especially when the MSM collectively suppressed the RFC story which is ‘only’ about football and taxes.

    Would be very interested on your views of e.g. SOPA/PIPA, ACTA and the perceived threats of Internet censorship.

  16. Torquemada

    Hi Paul, regular reader but first time poster to your excellent blog. Congratulations. But I have to engage with one of your posters. I have rarely read a more naive and idealistic offering than that from Veritas. After a lifetime working in national newspapers in England, Ireland, Scotland and Canada, I can assure Veritas that he is far from the mark. It should be lIke that, Veritas, but it’s not. I would have thought you’d know that.

    A favour, Paul: like longtimelurker, I too seem to have been culled from RTC’s brilliant blog. Only one of half a dozen posts in the past week has made it through. If you could check with him, I’d be grateful. If I have been culled, at least I’ll know. It won’t stop me reading it, mind. lol!

  17. One thing is becoming apparent about the RTC blog recently that i find interesting.

    Of course, with such a high volume of posters voicing their sentiment there is going to be a vast array of dick heads who’s, probably bigoted, opinion does not reach the final cut so to speak.We all know what i mean by that.

    However, somewhere along thee line there is more being culled – reasonable opinion that just doesn’t suit the author.

    The RTC blog is becoming a very strange place these days. Interesting.

  18. What a great article.

    So many relevant points.

    The end is near…..

  19. Lazesaint

    Fight the power

  20. jinky44

    Have the good folks in Berwick,Stranraer.Annan,Elgin,Peterhead.Montrose,Alloa etc been alerted to who’s about to visit them next season?

  21. Pingback: Did Rangers Mortgage Their Season Ticket Income For Four Years – And Is It All Spent? | Random Thoughts Re Scots (and Other) Law

  22. Pingback: Who Will Break the Silence on “Charlotte Fakes”? Step Forward David Leggat! | Random Thoughts Re Scots Law by Paul McConville

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s