Did I Miss Anything Today? The Perils of Being a Blogger too Busy to Read Comments!

Well, I said to myself as I said down at the PC tonight with a fine mug of tea at my hand, I wonder if my references to the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform Act have calmed down the tube/tupe debate, and I wonder if anyone has had anything to say about JohnBhoy’s post?

About 90 minutes later, I have made it up to date.

I remember when I gave up on reading all the comments on RTC’s blog. I don’t manage to keep up with the comments at all on TSFM.

However, as this blog has my name on it, I need at least to skim over comments, if possible. I understand what I heard once in an email from RTC – namely that comments eventually hit a critical mass where it becomes impossible to screen them. For fear of that (and I am sure I am a long way short of RTC in readers) I have always taken the decision to trust people. I do not even have the patented RTC method of catching posts which included words like “hundred”, “shunned”, “hunter” and “chunder”. Unless you mention Rosencran*z, your post will usually go through.

My expectation that legislation about mortgages would have a tranquillising effect seem to have failed however.

I want to throw out a few quick comments about today’s discussions, for those who are interested.

To quote Dermot O’Leary from that awful X Factor show “in no particular order” here are my thoughts:-

Leeds United

I might make an exception to my rule and add “Leeds” as one of the words that catches a post for approval. Not because I do not like Leeds, but because, unless someone wants to do an extended piece about their plight, then I think Marching on Together has, over some considerable time, made it clear that Leeds United now is treated by everyone as the same as Leeds United then.

The involvement of Mr Bates has prompted excellent writers like David Conn of the Guardian to look into the apparently opaque ownership structure, but, for the purposes of this blog, as I said earlier, Leeds then = Leeds now.

I did have a soft spot for Leeds in my very young day. I think it stemmed from playing Casdon Soccer. As the picture below shows, Bobby Charlton was the “face of Casdon”. I think I thought that the red team represented Manchester United, and the white Leeds, because of Jack Charlton. I might have been wrong, but many a tense Man U v Leeds game was played out between the McConville brothers.

Casdon Soccer

I also, in what might be a painful recollection for the Hearts fans who read here, remember playing a game of Casdon soccer whilst listening to a radio report on January 1, 1973, which was describing a remarkable score – Hearts 0 – Hibs 7. The fact that there is a book out as the 40th anniversary of that game approaches is a fine sign of the passage of time, as also is the fact that I discovered yesterday that the scarf I was wearing in the bitter Glasgow morning was in fact older than my work colleague. Just call me Methuselah!

I also remember, just before then in 1972, the famous match between Leeds and Southampton, where Leeds played keep-ball brilliantly, in a way which would have purists purring if Barcelona did it today.

There were many exciting players at Leeds then, from Bremner to Clarke, from Lorimer, with his unsurpassed shooting power, to Norman “Bites Your Legs” Hunter. I felt sorry for Leeds losing to the only goal of the game in the 1973 Cup Final – I can still hear David Coleman shouting “PORTERFIELD” as the winning goal went in.

I wasn’t aware then of the stories that circulated about alleged bribes to referees and the arrogance of Leeds. I read about all that later. But as time went on, after Don Revie left, and Clough and Stein came and went, my liking for Leeds dropped, and as the years have gone on there has been a processions of characters and events surrounding Elland Road which mean that the depths to which this formerly great club descended gave me a smile, including the remarkable involvement of Ken Bates (remember he wanted to buy Partick Thistle, and also to electrify the fences at Stamford Bridge – what a guy!). We also can never forget Peter Ridsdale “living the dream”.

I do not know how many Scottish football fans would classify Leeds as their “English” team of choice. Maybe I should have a poll about it – I will see if I can work the technology!

So, after that meander through table football games and remarkable matches, we come back to my point.



In a big-headed way, and I know MoT disagrees with me, I think I might be ion to something here. The issue of continuity of a football team has never really been an issue before. There has therefore been no need for football’s authorities to come up with a definitive process for deciding the issue. As I said this morning, that does not mean that Rangers “died”.

It might also mean that no one has really asked the question because the answer is so obvious.

As I have said a few times here, although my view has fluctuated at times, the fact that the Rangers supporters believe it is the same outfit almost makes any legal argument either way redundant. It is reminiscent (and I mean no offence when I say so) of the moment in Peter Pan when Tinkerbell starts to die, and is saved only by the profession of faith by people around her that they believed in fairies. There is a similarity there, I feel.

Until and unless a relevant footballing body declares otherwise, we should work on the basis that Rangers then = Rangers now.

Calling Up Notices

On the conveyancing point, despite MoT’s comment that he thought that it was only a few mortgage company lawyers who were chancing their arm, the whole business of mortgage re-possession was carried out on a basis which the Supreme Court declared to have been flawed for 40 years. Just because something has been done a particular way for a long time – it does not necessarily mean it is correct!

JohnBhoy’s Post

First, for the attention of Adam, JohnBhoy does not have a “duplicate log in” to the site. I am not aware of anyone having one. I can assure people that, unless there is very clever computing trickery going on, like using two computers, Ecojon, cam, Alex and mick are NOT the same person.

There is a JimBhoy as well as a JohnBhoy., but again they are different.

I did think about posting JohnBhoy’s piece. To be frank, if it had been a rant without quotes and references, I probably would not have put it up. It was not a rant however, and it was sourced and referenced. That is not to say that I necessarily agree with everything it said, or that I expected everyone else, or indeed anyone else, to do so.

I am happy overall about the discussion it provoked though, as is human nature, some folk veered a bit close to the edge, close to the bone and near the knuckle.

I think it is testimony to the quality of commenter here that the discussion did not descend into what can be found in other sites when issues like this are raised. Thanks to you all.

More Stuff

I se that Mr Green has announced that his team will refuse tickets for the Scottish Cup match with Dundee United. I think his statement is worth a few comments, but that can wait for the morning.

I see that HMRC is asking for leave to appeal the Big Tax Case, but that too can wait.

I hear (has anyone confirmed it) that James Traynor, latterly of the Record, is off to Ibrox in an official capacity. Some thoughts on his valedictory column will have to wait too.

For me, off to bed.

For the night owls reading the blog – welcome, wherever you are!

Posted by Paul Methuselah McConville


Filed under Alleged Humour, Blogging, Football, Nostalgia

283 responses to “Did I Miss Anything Today? The Perils of Being a Blogger too Busy to Read Comments!

  1. Proud Scot


    What about the news that Rangers International Football Club plc will be floated in around 10 days time and will purchase the existing shares of The Rangers Football Club and take over the running of the club as the holding company………

    Curiouser and curiouser…… So finally Sevco fans will know the truth that they WON’T be buying shares in the club but only the holding company – who in theory could sell the club off at any time they like, so its possible that the fans would then own shares in a holding company that er doesn’t actially hold anything (now that would be interesting!)

    • redetin

      The history, the brand, the trophies etc are all with “the club” and can be sold on or transferred, leaving the shareholders with valueless shares, debenture holders with no seats and creditors with no dosh. Is that not what just happened with the old company?

    • Den

      I don’t understand why they need such a complex corporate structure. My first impression when I see that is that they want it impenetrable to the punters.

      At least things are moving on and amazing things may happen.

      Just a thought. How logical is it to buy history, how do you know they haven’t kept a bit back and padded out the package ?

      • redetin

        The sort of thing that can happen, Den, is that a board can issue further large numbers of shares, say in exchange for loan notes, convertible loan note, debentures, etc. I’m sure the financial people can explain how all these instruments work, I only know that it happens. There can eventually be billions of shares issued, the individual share price being reduced to pennies or fractions of a penny. The complex company structure could help the board bury such transactions within company to company deals. Paul did a great post with a link to the companies with Craig Whyte interests. If you ever go to invest in such companies you are well advised to find out where the value is in the shares.

        Click to access cw-corporate-structure.pdf

      • redetin

        Take one of the companies mentioned, Merchant House Group which was listed on AIM, recently suspended then de-listed.
        Shares in issue 4,690,361,459

        Over 4 billion shares!!!!

        • Den

          Exactly my point.

          Rangers are a small operation, why doe they need multi layers, I don’t think they do but if they want to conceal their machinations it is ideal.

    • ecojon

      @ Proud Scot

      I used to feel sorry for them – no longer. They have been warned and have chosen to ignore it so their problem.

  2. radio snyde all about The Rangers tonight the only show in town, selik supporters phonin’ in greetin, is there no supposed tae be a gemme somewhere the night…

  3. JimBhoy

    To all, the Alex man is an attention seeker nothing else, like a spoilt wean who thinks anything he says is funny. He has nothing to add and his carer with put him to his lonely wee room shortly….Even the rangers boys on here distance themselves from him. Might I suggest that everyone just ignore this embarrassment to those who breathe air. I reckon he is the son of Leggo… Just do not reply to his fukin stupidity, in the hope he will go away back to the websites he belongs to… I have a big game to watch Hail Hail and all the best to ALL who have something to offer on this great site.

    • Ernesider


      The Undead have invaded cyberspace. Time we called in Van Helsing.

    • Den

      The only way to deal with trolls is to ignore them.

      • ecojon

        @ Den

        Totally correct – we have some idiots on here who think this is a sewing circle or book reading club and who want us to be all nice to people who refuse to enter into any kind of reaonable debate and yet we are the bad ones.

        Time to ignore them and they will go away eventually and the rest of us can get on with debate and discussion about what is important to Scottish football and what needs to change to make it better.

        People who want to destroy the game or conquer the world should be ignored – I must say though tonight it’s OK for Celtic to conquer Europe and every decent football supporter, including a lot of Bears, will raise a glass to that 🙂

        • Den

          While I don’t think we should be nice to them, being rude feeds them, ignoring them works for me. Sad to think that some people get their kicks from interminable Internet arguments.

          The discussion on here is of a high standard and that really is a draw for the trolls.

          Nothing wrong with wanting to Conquer Europe,

    • JimBhoy

      He is a strange one, let’s ignore….he loves attention< i reckon he masturbates often based on feedback,, i feel bad never commented on anyone

      but i can safely say he is a fukwit..!

  4. a massive game tonight in glasgow ? so why are you lot still talking about a wee diddy team in the third division ? every comment reinforces my long held belief that my wee team are the only show in town .

  5. JimBhoy

    @Carson cos we knew it was coming and us celik minded pray together for a win, honestly.. Hail hail the Celts are here….

  6. carl31

    I agree that there hasn’t been a true legal test of whether a club continues through insolvency, but why is that? Surely a creditor of an ‘oldco’ somewhere down the line has put the question to a lawyer at some point, ‘whats my chances of getting my money i’m owed out of this new club if it’s the same club?’, to be told it’s unlikely since by all the legal measures it’s actually a new club. They just resemble the old one very closely since they have undertaken to do the same thing in the same fashion with much the same assets.

  7. Ernesider

    Things seem to have gone a little quiet around here. Is that distant sound of breaking glass coming from the Louden Bar?

  8. JimBhoy

    Celtic Celtic woooohoooooooo1

  9. JimBhoy

    wow ffs shit performance, just made it, come mon the Celts and Scotland..!

  10. ecojon



  11. ecojon

    And as I go to bed to dream, perhaps of another European Triumph, I leave you to reflect on what the ‘hurting’ are saying on a thread entitled: ‘That Result Tonight’:

    ‘Thought you were referring to that result at Girodome tonight, where Ha Ha Soreass dived, never go booked and won a penalty. We will win the league nae bother’.

    All I can say is you might well win SFL3 but chico and his – about to be financially stuffed followers – will never hear the music that every Celt does at Parkhead on a regular basis 🙂

    Goodnight Bears – enjoy your Hibernation from playing real football – when you get into the top 50 in Europe let us know and we’ll play a benefit match for Dundee United 🙂

  12. ecojon


    Official PerthSaints ‏@St_Johnstone_FC
    Well done to @celticfc on making the last 16 of #ucl

    Ross County FC ‏@TheStaggies
    Congratulations @celticfc on reaching the knockout stages of the Champions League #supportingscottishteamsineurope

    Kilmarnock FC ‏@OfficialKillie
    Congratulations to @celticfc on qualifying for the last 16 of the Champions League. A great achievement, well deserved.

    Ross County FC ‏@TheStaggies
    Dear Rangers fans, I’m not congratulating Celtic to “suck up”, it’s called mutual respect. Last 16 is good for the Scottish game.

    Aberdeen FC‏@AberdeenFC
    Well done to all our friends @celticfc! #greatforScottishfootball

    Motherwell FC‏@MotherwellFC
    Well done to @celticfc on qualifying for the last sixteen of the UEFA Champions League. Great for Scottish football!

    Inverness CT Fans‏@ictfans
    hanks for the £235,000 Celtic. And well done! Doing Scotland proud!!
    I hope you don’t intend boycotting Tynecastle is they don’t tweet something similar 🙂

  13. Cam

    I feel shovelsful of humble pie might be on the way.

    • cam

      Why Violet?,,,to do with the score?,,nothing to do with me,i’m a Gers man.

      • Cam

        Another fine morning I hope. Re. shovelsful of humble pie. Because of the document Ecojon gave us a link to yesterday. I asked if it was a spoof and have had no reply. If it is real it looks to me to mean that the Rangers float is being guaranteed and will be a success. I will be one of the first reaching for a spoon.

        • cam

          Aaah,,i’m sorry, i missed the link.His usage of smileys has the same effect as canned laughter and makes me skim his chunterings.
          If the Gers flotation is a success then it will surely be down to some kind of cheating,voodoo economics,masonic conspiracy or evil doing by the warlike Ibrox hordes.
          Shall you have custard or cream with the pie?

          • cam

            I know that Leggo does amuse you and his “style” is unique but my inside info reveals that the old buffer may have added a laser sight to his weapon of mass insanity.
            This info is very taxing to the mind and requires lying down in a small dark room to process.

  14. lordmac

    thanks to celtic for putting a bit of money back into the spl £235 ,000
    is not alot but if it keeps the wee tea lady in a job well done celtic

  15. Jamie

    I’ll bet the back page of the Daily Sevco will run with the Elgin story

  16. Steven brennan

    I have been trying to get a wee look at THE PROSPECTUS, cannot find it on the internetmebob.
    Probably because I was out having a wee party in the Chamions league
    But seriously, is it downloadable?
    And is that a real word?

  17. cam

    I’m hoping to contact Chico later to convince him to arrange a charity game at Ibrox on the day of the DU cup game.
    £5 a head or whatever you can afford,kids v ex players all proceeds to be given to Sandy Jardine and various cancer charities.
    Send a cheque to DU for any costs incurred for policing,tickets,catering etc.

  18. ecojon

    Rangers’ value rockets from £5.5m to £50m


    Piece by Neil Patey, of Ernst & Young, on Rangers’ flotation which is worth a read.

    • redetin

      So my question has to be what does the company have now that supports the £50 million value of the shares?
      If I had held shares in The Rangers Football Club plc, I’d be asking myself how come Craig Whyte’s Wavetower bought 85% of the shares for £1. Is it just the suits that have changed?

      • ecojon

        @ redetin

        It has to be underpinned by the asset value of Murray Park and Ibrox – I still don’t know the score with the Albion carpark but these purposes possibly doesn’t matter.

        But I think from my quick read of yesterday’s notice that accounts or accounting details are only made up to the end of August 2012 – which would mean that we three months of the team playing but no accounting details. If I am right in this, and I will check shortly, I am amazed that Patey didn’t mention that.

        If those 3 months aren’t included how could any institutional investor make an informed investment decision on how the new Rangers is actually doing financially while playing football. Seems very strange to me but perhaps in my rush to keep an important appointment last night coupled with rising hysteria I could have got it wrong 🙂

        • Clarkeng

          I suupose the answer to the question might be found by comparing the share value at Celtic after the man wi the bunnet worked his trick.
          Shares are only worth what people are prepared to pay and it seems the investors believe this is a deal to go with.

          • ecojon

            @ Clarkeng

            I think it might be better to wait and see what institutional investors actually do at flotation and more importantly what they do following flotation. I have heard many pronouncement from chico on various issues and will wait and see what the eventual reality is.

            As to fans well their decision is almost 100% emotional and personal financial return doesn’t come into it. But I think if they are wise they will demand to know where their share money will go. This should be revealed in the Prospectus as should the important issue on whether the shares have voting rights.

          • ecojon

            @ clarkeng

            green apple and oranges comparism I’m afraid.

            Patey, who I don’t really rate, I think gets it right discussing company values in the here and now re Celtic and the proposed Rangers newco.

            But we both know it all depends what the post-flotation price for Rangers newco settles at and maybe more importantly if the shares are walked-down. It appears that the 22+ million shares held by the original investors will be swapped on a 1for1 basis with the floated Rangers newco.

            That could be a bit dodgy for them but we don’t know what the condition were on the original loans or investments they made. We then have Imran Ahmad’s statement about the original consortium members paid 50p a share but later investors paid £1.

            So are these ‘later’ shareholders going to take a 30p a share drop. And even the 50p original shareholders will only make 20p a share which doesn’t quite ‘double their money’ a chico claimed.

            Of course we don’t know whether the original shareholders had the advantage of the buy 1 get 1 free scheme outlined in the May AIM marketing presentation. Just another little mystery like the identity of major shareholders.

            And votes – do the shares have voting rights and why are the Bears and those who purport to act for them in fan groups curiously silent on this issue? And chico’ shares – has he paid for them and, if so, at what price or is there some other arrangement?

          • redetin

            Some investors may be unconcerned about making a capital loss on their shareholding if and when they sell, as they can subtract it from capital gains on transactions for tax purposes.
            The ordinary punter, the man that slings in his £500 from his hard earned wage, is going to have an expensive swim among the sharks.
            (At least with MKS the shareholder can walk into their stores, see the quality of the goods. observe the customer activity, and benefit from a decent dividend every year. You know exactly where the value is behind your shares).

            • Clarkeng

              @ecojon and redetin
              As you say many unanswered points and as in any transaction –
              Caveat Emptor.
              However based on what I have read this morning it would seem to be on course and will most likely exceed the original forecasts.
              At the same stage in the Celtic example I recall various uncertainties and unknowns and I do not agree we are not comparing like for like – at least not yet.
              The basis on which the institutional investors will take up the issue will relate entirely to calculated risks based on varying evisaged scenarios and timings. They will have considered and evaluated the effect of early selling on and other such events which will affect the price and will have satisfied themselves that the potential result of any foreseen event is accounted for in the calculations. They will also have evaluated potentially unforeseen events using a risk and probability analysis and whilst it is possible they could miss something looking at the pot of companies involved and their experience in such markets I think that this would need to be a far flung catastrophic event such as the Mayan prediction to cause problems in the short term.
              The ordinary punter as you say will be swimming with the sharks but will still have the cover or protection afforded by the institutional investments which will largely dictate the price and the trends of future values.
              Like the Celtic example they will be emotional investors and in the same ilk will probably never be able to wrest control of the club from those with the larger percentage holdings so they go in with their eyes wide open.
              Regardless of this they are fodder for the money men as they were in all previous situations like this.

            • ecojon

              @ clarkeng

              I think I a more apt expression rather than swimming with sharks is the old Chinese one: ‘Better to fish in muddy waters – easier to catch fish’.

  19. ecojon

    I should have mentioned that Neil, labelled as a football accountancy expert and often wheeled-out by STV has made a whopper of a mistake or inadvertantly revealed another new Rangers company formed by someone as yet unknown.

    To explain – Neil talks about ‘Rangers Football Club Ltd’ as the existing company which owns and operates Rangers Football Club. But ‘Rangers Football Club Ltd’ doen’t actually exist. The company which does exist and which runs and possibly owns Rangers Football Club is ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’.

    So has Patey just got it wrong or will ‘Rangers Football Club Ltd’ now be formed as the company which runs and might own Rangers Football Club?

    Another clue is found in the AIM pre-admission regulatory notice served on the London Stock Exchange yesterday. It also refers to ‘Rangers Football Club Ltd’ and not to ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’. The problem with the clue is that there is still no overall clear picture and much remains a mystery so we haven’t a clue where the clue fits 🙂

    So have Cenkos got it wrong as well? Or is another layer of company formation about to be added to an already complex ituation?

    And still no mention yet whether the shares have voting rights or not.

  20. Clarkeng

    It seems now that DU want the SFA to change the rules ( again ) and deprive Rangers of their share of the gate.
    Mr Thomson seeems to think that by refusing the allocation of tickets because the fans have stated they will not buy them that Rangers are doing something wrong.
    Surely that is a sensible approach and minimises admin costs for both clubs.
    If the SFA do change the rules then Rangers should simply accept the allocation and then return them unsold in line with normal arrangements between the clubs.
    If DU need the money that much maybe Rangers will forego it.
    I do not think they should and would much rather see Rangers accept it and donate it to charity.
    After all we dont need it – do we?
    The rules laid down for the clubs cannot control where the fans spend their hard earned cash and neither can the SFA or the individual clubs.
    Mr Thomson should remember every customer is a paying customer and if they choose not to visit because of his actions of for whatever reason then that is their right.
    For far too many years clubs have relied on Rangers fans to provided golden paydays and the sentiment expressed lately was that these were no longer required for these clubs.
    My advice to Mr Thomson would be to take the medicine and learn from it.
    The blue pound should not be taken for granted.

    • cam

      Not one thin dime!

    • waterygrave21


      According to SFA’s rules they can change the rules but not until the AGM next year, however this being the SFA they might just change the rules on changing the rules

      • cam

        Stewpot awaits his call from central command.

        the woods are lovely,dark and deep
        but i have promises to keep
        and miles to go before i sleep
        and miles to go before i sleep

    • ecojon

      @ Clarkeng

      I think you probably intentionally miss the important issues here. The boycott of a cup competition strikes at the continuation of the competition. If Rangers the club wish to take part in the competition then they should support it.

      If they don’t wish to support it that’s fine just don’t enter. If they do wish to enter it they have to send a clear and unequivocal message to their fans that a boycott is wrong.

      We all know the game chico is playing and when he departs with his pay-off and some sanity returns to Ibrox the cottish Football fans that are left will have to try and repair the damage he has done.

      And we also know that the refual to take-up the allocation is more to do with the televised scenes of Rangers supporters fighting each other on the picket line. This issue, and it’s a pleaant surprise to me, seems to have enegised a lot of decent Rangers fans who opposed the boycott and it’s a pity chico went with the rest but, as we all know, it suits his agenda.

      If you want to argue the detail of the Rangers v Dundee Utd situation you may get a clearer reponse from Dundee Utd fan forums but perhaps you would rather stay here 🙂

      • waterygrave21

        Rangers are not boycotting the competition, only one fixture.

        • ecojon

          @ waterygrave21

          Incorrect – see what the Rangers fan group is stating – I posted the link on this post yesterday afternoon. It doesn’t help to state facts that are incorrect as true because it casts dubiety on objectivity and motives of the poster.

          • ecojon

            @ waterygrave21

            I have copied yesterday’s post for you and I see it was morning rather than afternoon – you mut forgive me but yesterday wa a most special day 🙂

            December 5, 2012 at 9:09 am

            Rangers could boycott all SPL grounds in the William Hill Scottish Cup this season – including Parkhead.


            There is a imple answer to all this and that is to immediately remove Rangers from the cup competition. No group of football fans can be allowed to hold Scottish Football to ransom and even the weak and lily-livered SFA know they have no alternative but to act.

            As I said yesterday the genie’s out of the bottle and chico had an opportunity to put it back in and he chose not to – he must now be called to account for his failure of leadership and lack of courage and declared ‘not a fit and proper person’ to be in charge of a Scottish Football Club.

            Sadly, further down the line, decent Bears will see what a disaster this period has become in their club history. Murray & Whyte are right to be castigated over financial issues but when the dust settles and vision returns then it will be discovered that Green is responsible for ripping the heart and soul out of Rangers.

            The Scottish MSM also carry a huge amount of blame on their shoulders for their failure to report the whole saga in a balanced & objective manner which would have done so much to establish the actual facts. They have just filled their pages with partisan comments without any analysis or without even questioning many of the outlandish statements made.

            This created an angry Rangers support who felt they were being cheated and their probably justified paranoia was never actually addressed by the media who wanted to keep them bitter and hurting because it was better for the story even though it endangered the club.

        • Is that the same as the groin brigade boycotting their own club and ground, or is it worse.

          Rather severe hangover today, my two good “real” selik supporting mates appeared late last night after the game with a few of our other “bear” mates in tow, copious amounts of alcohol and large amounts of piss taking was
          taken and dished out, the way it should be and the way it used to be.

          The Rangers hating scribblers here would have no idea of such camaraderie……..and it shows.

      • Clarkeng

        I think it is you who is missing the important issue.
        The club is not boycotting the competition – they will play the game regardless of the gate.
        They will also be entitled to their share of the gate even if no Rangers fans attend unless the rules are changed again because it is Rangers who are involved.
        The fans are exercising their right to decide which games they attend.
        They collectively have decided not to purchase tickets for this game.
        Why is that wrong?
        What happened to freedom of choice for the individual or group of individuals?
        Does that only apply when Rangers and their fans are not involved?
        Apart from the fact “Chico” has said that the club therefore will support the fans in their actions on this occasion is really a demonstration that even he does not control the actions of the fans and by refusing the allocation he is preventing unnecessary cost and delay to both clubs in settling arrangements for the match.
        In the same way as the chairmen of other clubs stated their actions were based on the wishes of the fans of their respective clubs then surely it is a bit hypocritical to criticise Rangers for the same sentiment.
        That they accede to the wishes or support the actions of their fans is a millenium away from boycotting the competition which I would consider to be a refusal to play the match by the club.
        You seem to speculate idly about fighting on the picket lines and damage done to Scottish Football with no evidence that either event is likely.
        From what I see if or when he leaves Rangers just as when the man wi the bunnet left Celtic they will be in a healthy financial position and the investors and fans can look forward to the future with confidence.
        But with one huge difference – he will not be walking away with £50m.
        As for arguing the situation between DU and Rangers on their forum I have not even looked at it – it has been widely discussed on here by others who support neither club so my intention was to put some perspective back into the discussion – which has been sadly lacking.

        • ecojon

          @ Clarkeng

          I have heard your take on Fergus many many times and have no interest in your view on the matter and no intention of dicussing it. One thing where chico and the Wee Man were very similar was that they were both the only game in town.

          I have no problem in chico earning whatever he earns from Rangers – after all the Rangers Millionaires walked away from their club. And I have no problem with what Fergus made either.

          What has to be considered is what was left behind – that is obvious with Celtic but not yet known with chico. Come back after chico has gone and we’ll see how things stack-up. It may well be that chico’s lasting legacy to Rangers might be in involving Ashley and I have said repeatedly, since the first mention of his name, that he would make a great owner of Rangers.

          However, he will need to be well innoculated against that highly contagious Rangeritis which seems to affect everyone who ascends the marble staircase.

          You obviously, again I would think intentionally, miss the difference between the proposed Sporting Integrity boycotts which fans aimed at their own clubs and not those of the opposition. The driving force was for them to be allowed a say or a vote in what the club should do and it did actually release a whiff of Democracy.

          The Rangers boycott is to financially cripple opposition ‘enemy’ clubs pure and simple for perceived hurt or malice towards Rangers. That bit of the story is a waste of time debating because it would appear that Rangers fans have one view and virtually every other Scottish football fan has another.

          No one is saying that fans don’t have a complete right to decide on whether to attend a football match or indeed which one. Well, that’s not strictly true as some Rangers fans thought they had the right to mount a picket line to prevent their fellow Bears attending the Dundee Utd game with a whiff of violence thrown in for good measure to deter the faint-hearted.

          Where chico has erred is that he has failed to condemn the boycott and is about to pass the baton to mob-rule as he has virtually completed his leg of the race so it doesn’t matter to him anymore.

          • Clarkeng


            We seem to be crossing with replies.
            Lets agree to disagree like adults do.
            A reasonable debate is healthy.
            The bile and bigotry from other posts on here does not make for reasonable debate.
            As you say we shall see what is left.
            We have seen what McCann left and Celtic fans should enjoy the moment.
            If in three years time we are back in the same position I will be happy.

            • ecojon

              @ Clarkeng

              You know I have no problems in discussing isues with you and I trust we both respect each other’s differing positions. Certainly I would think that in the next 12-18 months things should become clearer as to what direction Rangers has gone or is heading and I don’t mean on the playing side.

        • “From what I see if or when he leaves Rangers just as when the man wi the bunnet left Celtic they will be in a healthy financial position and the investors and fans can look forward to the future with confidence.”

          Sheffield United fans thought the same when Green first came on the scene. Unortunately for them it didn’t quite turn out that way.

          • Clarkeng

            Rab what are doing on here at this time on a Friday night? Why are you not out fleecing the good people of Glasgow?
            Sorry sorry I apologise I meant to say providing your public with your services.
            I also apologise for categorising you – I have it in my head you are a black hack driver in Glasgow but am probably way off the mark.
            As you may also be.
            I don’t care about Sheffield Utd.
            I care about Rangers.
            Everybody has had ups and downs in their careers but as long as they have not criminally affected people then I feel that is part of business.
            When wee Fergus came back to Glasgow people ( mostly supporters of the original board ) were happy to rake over his business failures and suggest he would not be good for Celtic.
            Look what happened.
            Not only did he walk away with £50m.
            He also built a new stadium and left Celtic with a business model that has allowed the club to develop and reach the last 16 in the Champions League.
            You do not know and neither do I whether Green will deliver the goods.
            On the face of it he is making good progress.
            Don’t be another one of those bigots on here – there are enough of them already.
            Make a factual point or express an opinion based on the information available.
            Idle speculation based on bile and bigotry not only destroys the credibilty of the post but also demeans your intelligence.

            • “Rab what are doing on here at this time on a Friday night? Why are you not out fleecing the good people of Glasgow?
              Sorry sorry I apologise I meant to say providing your public with your services.
              I also apologise for categorising you – I have it in my head you are a black hack driver in Glasgow but am probably way off the mark.”

              Considering I haven’t lived in Scotland for 26 years then yeah, way off the mark. You & your assumptions eh?

              !Don’t be another one of those bigots on here – there are enough of them already.
              Make a factual point or express an opinion based on the information available.
              Idle speculation based on bile and bigotry not only destroys the credibilty of the post but also demeans your intelligence.”

              !. Like to point out where I’ve said anything bigoted on this post, or indeed any post at all?

              2. Try reading some of the Blades fan forums; my favourite quote?:
              “When Green came to Sheffield we were £4m in debt, but owned the stadium. By the time he left we were still £4m in debt and leasing the stadium.”

              3. Bile & bigotry? Refer to point 1.

  21. ecojon

    @ clarkeng

    I asume that you wouldn’t endorse the undernoted view from the Darkside about the Dundee Utd boycott, or would you?


    ‘it’s about knocking the c*nts to the gutter n leaving them to die as we move to the next scummy club for vitriolic absolution’.

    Btw I added the asterix to the offensive word in case you thought it wa a sensitive soul posting 🙂

    Of course I also forgot to mention that a major Rangers fan group – can’t remember which one as there are so many – yeterday said there would be further boycotts against other SPL teams which they will decide on.

    Chico has surrendered to mob-rule and should either tell the fans to get stuffed or withdraw from the competition. He won’t as money is involved and to do either of what I suggested takes courage and honour which appear to be in very short supply at Ibrox these days.

    • waterygrave21


      You got there first, thanks.

      • waterygrave21


        Very few people and no one in their right mind would condone that point of view. It seems the same kind of view that some Celtic fans had about Rangers demise.

        Surrendering to mob rule?, suggests what you think about all Rangers fans and not the minority. All fans have the right to appeal the the powerbrokers of any club if they think it is in the best interest of their club.

        • ecojon

          @ waterygrave21

          You are quick to judgement and mistaken – I made it quite clear that there were differing opinions in the Ibrox support on the boycott issue and I can only conclude that if there weren’t then there would have been no need to start discussing the issue of a boycott.

          I cannot be held responsible for anyone else’s view but where I reckon it is a scum opinion I say so and totally ignore that poster again if there is no change in their utterances. On this site there are no Celtic supporters in that category but there are some Rangers ones.

          I should make it clear that since the Rangers thing began I have supported the position that a strong Rangers is essential for Scottish Football with the caveat that the Triumphalism and utter contempt of many supporters to other fans wasn’t acceptable and I’m not talking about banter. I genuinely believed the drop to SFL3 would give decent Bears the chance to reclaim their club.

          Sadly, that hasn’t happened and Scottish Football increasingly doesn’t need the Rangers that we now see. However, I tend to try and take long positions (why I would never buy any chico shares btw) and I know this current Rangers will not survive. I believe the majority of Rangers fans are decent but they are cowed – you and I know why and you know exactly the ‘mob’ I speak of.

          That ‘mob’ of a few hundred to posibly 1,000 appear to be currently in control at Ibrox and their agenda has little if anything to do with football. That’s what differentiates the decent Bear from them – for the moment the decent Bears are waiting for a new day to dawn at Ibrox and the good news is, it will – when chico’s circus rolls out of town.

          Unfortunately, I don’t know how long the hibernation will need to last and I don’t know what assets will be left – we will need to just wait and see.

          • ecojon

            @ waterygrave21


            First par hould have ended: ‘. . . there would have been no need to start discussing the issue of a picket’ intead of ‘there would have been no need to start discussing the issue of a boycott’

          • Ernesider


            ” That ‘mob’ of a few hundred to posibly 1,000 appear to be currently in control at Ibrox”

            I know that you bend over backward to try and be fair to the Rangers’ supporters who contribute on here. But do really believe that the problem is that insignificant? My firm belief is that you should multiply the larger estimate by at least 20 to get a credible figure.

      • ecojon

        @ waterygrave21

        Still all sharing the 1 PR statement are we or is it that group mind phenomena which seems to affect a large percentage of Bears.

        • waterygrave21

          I do not share any any points of view that Rangers supporters may hold, I only have my point of view, and if they happen to be the same then so be it and if it happens not to conform with your opinion then I could not care less. This blog is a discussion space for any one and I will continue to contribute my point of view whether it upsets any one or supports any one.

          • ecojon

            @ waterygrave21

            Has anyone said you couldn’t state your opinion and discuss it and the opinions of others?

            It’s just that we tend to see a scripted approach coming from the majority of Rangers posters on here IMHO. I’m glad to see that you’re independently-minded and hope to enjoy plenty of discussions with you on that basis.

            If I thought you were talking sh*te I would ignore you – which is obviously my right.

          • ecojon

            @ waterygrave21

            I have now read clarkeng stating: ‘No I do not subscribe to anything of that ilk from anyone’.

            I now realise what you were saying in context as I had mistakenly thought that you were referring to the complete post and I apologise for being wrong in that 😦

    • Clarkeng

      No I do not subscribe to anything of that ilk from anyone.
      You mentioned in your previous post that when “Chico” left Rangers that Scottish Football Fans would be left to pick up the mess.
      I also do not subscibe to this although it is a nice sentiment.
      You are more than aware from your experience on here that the only people who will save Rangers will be Rangers minded people.
      Fans from other clubs will not lift a finger to help, in fact, based on the commentary on here they would deliberately hinder if they were able to get involved.
      That is not a criticism – that is the way it is.
      Like you I have a suspicious nature and sometimes when I hear “Chico” commenting things just don’t seem right, however, as I pointed out to you before, this also happened when Fergus McCann first arrived on the scene and he was advised to employ Peter McLean to put his message across.
      So far despite the commentary on here, including your own, “Chico” has been able to deliver on the share issue and on the face of it the club will go forward from what has been a disastrous period.
      If he makes £3.5m and goes quickly leaving the structure of investors in place would that be a problem?
      I suspect not.
      If he decides to stay and the stability of the financial side of the business is consolidated by further investment whether it be in a holding co as Fergus employed or directly into Rangers that would also be ok.
      He may or may not turn out to be as shrewd as McCann – only time will tell.
      One thing is for sure he won’t be walking away with £50m of our money and we will not have to kid on we were happy that he did.

  22. charliedon

    We can argue all we want about whether boycotts are supportable or whether any rules have technically been broken etc. But the principle is that that Rangers’ fans and management are setting out their strategy of non-cooperation with the sole intention of harming other clubs in the same sporting competition. The crux of the matter is that the other clubs will not want this selfish and vindictive lot in their competitions and should seek a method of kicking them out. If they want to (and who wouldn’t) then I am sure they will find a way.

    • Clarkeng

      Rules are not being broken technically or otherwise.
      Rangers are not boycotting the competition.
      Their fans have decided they do not want to go to this game.
      Reasons for this are unimportant.
      The crux of this matter lies in the fact that DU are losing out on a bumper payday ( which incidentally they previously said they could live without as their business model would take account of Rangers being demoted to the SFL ).
      Would the same hoo haa have been raised if they had been drawn against Annan and they had said they did not want the ticket allocation because they could not possibly hope to sell it.
      Of course not.
      Is there ever any hoo haa when clubs such as DU cannot sell their allocation of tickets for games at Ibrox.
      Of course not.
      Why does this happen?
      Because fans do not want to attend the match – thats why!
      Rangers fans have told the club they do not want to but tickets for this game.
      It would be stupid for Rangers to accept the allocation and then have to return it – unsold.
      Get Real!!

      • Rules are based on principles of fair play and natural justice. The expectation is that all participating clubs will recognise those principles.

        I have no problem with Rangers fans not wishing to contribute to the income of Dundee United, that is up to them. I do have a problem of Rangers as a club claiming the share of income to which they have not contributed a penny, the underlying principle and expectation beneath the rules being that clubs would act in a fair and sporting manner. In that respect The Rangers behaviour suggests new rules are needed for when a club ignores the unstated principle.

        That Rangers have belatedly recognised this principle by donating the income the never would have earned going to a charity rather than the club, if I am being charitable, is a good thing. However being cynical I think it was a belated recognition that unless they did so they would continue to be branded as a club who were quite happy to use other people’s money for their own ends.

        Rangers men are always certain on the rules but when it comes to the principles and moral values such rules were intended to convey they appear lost.

        • Clarkeng

          Well you know it seems to me that if the rule is written in plain English there is no requirement to consider any unstated principal – simply that the clubs will follow the rules.
          Here we have a club following the rules ( i.e. Rangers ) and one who is asking the SFA for advice on their position having already told that in accordance with the rules Rangers would be taking their percentage of the gate.
          On how many occasions previously have DU been the benefactor of the Rangers fans and have Rangers ever asked for this to be reversed when only 1000 DU fans have turned up at Ibrox or 7000 at Tannadice when the visiting support dwarfed them.
          The answers are many many times and never.
          Now you say the rules need to be rewritten to force either the Rangers fans to attend or for Rangers to give up to DU what is rightfully theirs under the rules.
          You go on to say “we are only certain on the rules” but then go on and seek to impose your version of what the rules were intended to convey.
          Break the rules – be punished. Play by the rules – be punished.
          Oh I forgot it’s Rangers. That will be ok then. Who are you kidding?
          The issue here remains a simple one.
          Rangers fans have been treated badly in the past by DU and they do not want DU to prosper at their expense.
          Rangers fans were angered by the statements made whilst the club was at it’s lowest ebb by DU fans and their chairman.
          The bluster issued back then ” we don’t need you” etc etc is coming back to haunt DU and perhaps they will now realise that for every action there is an equal ( or perhaps in this case larger ) reaction.
          Let Mr Thomson prove his point and live with the reduced revenue.
          If that is not possible a simple apology for his previous conduct and utterances might well go some way to resolve things
          My final point is this – there are no clubs in Scotland who can say they are owed anything by the Rangers fans – they – Rangers fans – have consistently since 1873 provided revenue streams ( even in the face of being fleeced ) in one case equal to but in every other case in excess of those returned by visiting clubs.

    • ecojon

      @ charliedon

      Well it appear that fans of clubs all over Scotland don’t want to go and watch the mighty Rangers – I wonder why that might be? 🙂

      • Clarkeng

        Sorry I only just seen this post and felt I should respond.
        I think we know the answer to why might that be – however.
        The fans of clubs all over Scotland have not been criticised for failing to support a club brought to its knees by criminal mismanagement.
        What has happened to Scottish Football clearing up the mess?
        The sad facts of life are that the other clubs except Celtic need Rangers and their fans despite the rehetoric previously spewed.
        Perhaps as little empathy with Rangers fans and appreciation of their predicament would have helped rather than the continous stream of antipathy and bile.

  23. So you can say you read it here first. The Rangers will receive the allocated split of gate money for the dundee hibs cup tie, no rules have been breached or broken,SFA to announce shortly.

    Do enjoy reading.

  24. Clarkeng
    December 6, 2012 at 12:50 pm

    Lets hope all these wonderful people with dundee hibs and Scottish football at heart buy up all the tickets a complete sellout, no pun intended, every extra pound into our cut of the gate is very welcome from whatever source.

    Do you think they will carry out their request…..perhaps not…


    • Ernesider


      ” my two good “real” selik supporting mates appeared late last night…… camaraderie” etc

      I wonder, if they exist at all, (which I very much doubt) do they understand what a nasty piece of work you really are?

    • Clarkeng


      Naw Alex they are gonnae rewrite the rules because they apparently really mean something else!!??
      Aaaand we are breaking the something else????
      WTF is wrong with people?
      Why can’t they just accept that Rangers fans in the main do not want to buy tickets for this game and that under the rules Rangers are entitled to their share of the gate regardless of how many of either set of fans attend.
      End of!!!
      I personally support the right to picket peacefully but the chances of that happening are pretty close to zero therefore I would prefer if that threat was dropped and Rangers fans stayed at home or went to the pub to watch the match.
      Maybe Rangers could show it on the big screens at Ibrox.
      I also support the right of Rangers fans to buy a ticket and attend if they want to but let DU administer this.
      So in conclusion – no actual rules broken- only peoples opinion of what the rules say.
      DU will not prosper at the Rangers fans expense – they don’t need it anyway. Aye right!!
      Rangers generosity to two good causes at this time of year should be praised.
      Oh and thanks to DU too!!
      What do you mean there is no Santa?

  25. charliedon


    You are missing my point entirely. Individual fans have, of course, every right not to attend any particular match for whatever reason. It is less acceptable, in my opinion, when supporters associations start organising mass boycotts, encouraging, and in some cases bullying, others to join in. It becomes very unacceptable when the “owner” of the club joins in and makes the boycott official, rather than taking the responsible route and appealing to the fans to turn out and support the team. He has also suggested they will do the same to other SPL teams. It is no longer just a supporters issue, but the management of a club adopting a strategy attempting to bring about the ruin of other clubs in the SPORTING competition they have willingly entered.
    Think about it mate.

    • Clarkeng


      Charlie or is it loon?
      I have not missed your point.
      I also agree that bullying is unacceptable.
      I disagree that the supporters associations should not have a say as they are the only vehicles available to ordinary fans.
      The owner of the club in this case is between a rock and a hard place and I say again what would be the point in accepting an allocation which will not be sold.
      Green has positioned himself on the side of the Rangers fans as he must to retain their support until the financial issues are settled and the club has a solid future.
      The club have not adopted a boycott of the competition.
      They will play wherever and in front of whatever crowd there is.
      In this competition they will be entitled to 40% of the gate for doing so.
      You are correct to say that this is a sporting competition but where does that impose any responsibility on one club to provide an attendance.
      If they chose not to do so they severely disadvantage themselves only.
      There is no god given right to a bumper payday in a cup tie.
      Maybe in the future fans of clubs and their chairmen will realise that they are all dependant on the fans of other clubs for financial survival and act accordingly.
      The point you miss is that fans have choice whether to attend and the club hs little or no influence on this – just take the example of recent home matches at Celtic and at Ibrox last Saturday.
      Did we hear Arbroath and Elgin kicking up because the home fans did not turn up?
      No we did’nt.
      Because they know that is is beyond individual club’s control.
      It is not so long ago that some chairmen of other clubs were publicly stating they did not want a travelling support from Rangers or Celtic.
      And certainly the hostility of home fans when either set visits is beyond comprehension – considering they need these gates to survive!!

      • ecojon

        @ clarkeng

        Surprised at you resorting to ‘loon’. However it wa clear from Rangers fan posting there were plenty of Bears wanting to ignore the boycott. Indeed this is what sparked the picket idea which really kicked things off.

        So that raises the issue of who spoke for the Bears that wanted to go to the game and destroys you argument that no tickets would have been sold by Rangers. And who knows where we will be by February anyway.

        Chico could easily have said we will sleep on this until January and get a better idea of the fan poition – not just the hyped-up vocal and organised minority.

        But there wa a problem to that – guess what it was? Yip the share flotation. If Green had blinked his fliotation might have suffered. IMHO principles and courage went right out the window.

        You keep trying to switch this onto fans and their right to do what they want – no one disputes that except, of course, the Rangers Flying Pickets. But it is the responsibility of owners and management of a club not to act in a way that can hurt other clubs in the Association.

        Chico could have said to his fans – it’s your decision whether to boycott or not but I would urge against it. He didn’t do that and he is creating a ‘monster’ that the next owner of Rangers will need to deal with. Of course fans hould have a say but that is different from stating they have the right to determine club policy.

        They would have if they were the majority shareholding but they ain’t going to be the way the deal is structured – you know that and I know that.

  26. The boycott will happen or it won’t happen. RFC will be fined/banned for life or something and we, me included, can speculate or moan all we like. Events will unfold.

    What I am surprised is not being discussed is the strong possibility that the IPO will be a success. Given all that has been written, some of it by me, pouring scorn on the IPO, it seems strange that we are not collectively wringing our hands and asking why? I can only speculate that the institutional investors have been so beguiled by Mr Green’s valuations that they have said – me too. Where are BDO while all this is going on?

    Cam – can I delay my decision about the cream/custard with my share of the humble pie.

  27. ecojon

    Well movement in the Blue or should that be Green Empire prior to the AIM Flotation.


    Chico and Brian Stockbridge have been appointed directors of the company wef 4 December and Stockbridge is additionally appointed secretary.

    Wef 4 December appointment of FFW SECRETARIES LIMITED as director and secretary has been terminated as has directorship of Edward Lumb of FFW SECRETARIES LIMITED.


    Paperwork lodged with Companies House on 4 December shows that on 29 May 2012 a resolution was passed which sub-divided the existing shareholding of 2 x £1 shares into 200 x £0.01 shares.

    Another ordinary reolution granted power to the board of directors to allot and grant rights to subscribe for shares up to an aggregate nominal amount of £100,000,000.

    There is a further Special Resolution authorising directors of the company to allot ordinary shares for cash.

    The shares, according to Companies House documentation, have a right to declared dividend and each share carries one vote at a shareholders’ meeting on a poll vote – on a show of hands each shareholder has one vote.

    I can still find no mention of where the 22+ million shares paid for and alloted to the original shareholding consortium members reside.

  28. tigertim

    Charles Green being very fly here once again, his statement says “It has been decided by the board that any proceeds from gate receipts due to the Club…. “,

    I don’t know if THE club would be due any tv money due, but if they were, I take it the tv money would not be going to charity???

    If the quote is correct then the players could not be promised a win bonus, as there would be nothing to pay them with, therefore no incentive!!!

  29. lordmac

    why would this company be late with accounts if there where a share issue coming up and only 2 directors

  30. Pingback: Language – That terrible barrier – by Guest Post by Jer Feelgood | Random Thoughts Re Scots Law by Paul McConville

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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