Leaderboard

With that in mind, I've kept a close eye on the recent debate on historic child abuse within Scottish football. Some of the names involved in the subject were familiar to me and I also played for three years at Hutchison Vale, one of the club's highlighted in the yesterday’s SFA report. I was also fortunate enough to play with Dundee Utd for a few years and for Scotland at under 15 and under 16 level. Included in this were travelling to and playing at places such as Northern Ireland, Wales, Italy, Sweden, France, Holland and more. I played against teams from Cameroon, the USA, the Czech Republic, Italy, Thailand and more: enjoying a post-match craic with our opponents, shared language or not. I was managed by Jim McLean, trained with Duncan Ferguson and played against Thierry Henry. I was that good as a 'keeper, I even allowed Phil Neville to score against me at Ibrox. But, hey, so did Stefan Klos. All this happened over a number of years but I never witnessed genuine abuse; sexual or otherwise. Verbal 'bullying' was perhaps as bad as it got and that was something we all dealt with in our younger years at school so wasn't unique to football. You made a mistake; sometimes you got support from your coach and team-mates, sometimes not. We were big boys and could handle it. Fun might have been poked at the lad with the dodgy first touch or fashion sense but it didn't matter on the park. At that point we were a team and everyone stuck together. Background or personality didn’t matter and rarely did I ever witness anything get out of hand. And I was treated brilliantly by almost all the people I worked with. There but for the grace of God it seems… With more specific regard to the SFA’s report, as a young teenager, sexual abuse wasn't something I knew much, if anything, about. I’ve always felt my upbringing was probably as normal as one can have: a loving family, a council house and an estate full of friends (and enemies) with few worries as we explored life with the relative freedom most kids have. I was naïve enough to think when you're in your mid-teens, you don't really worry about much other than homework and a new spot appearing before a school disco. I didn't understand for others it was physical, mental and sexual abuse. But that immaturity was exactly why we all need protecting at that age. Even now, as a father of two kids approaching their teenage trials and tribulations, I don't think I'll ever fully realise how tough it must be for some young people. Times appear somewhat different now and kids seem to be older than their years but other complexities develop: social media and online threats mean regular reminders to my girls explaining the dangers out there are a necessity. Embarrassing such talks may occasionally be but happen they must. Decades past may not have seen parent/child relationships so open or so liberal. Reading the horror stories from people I knew from my time in the game make that clear and it's tragic that so many have suffered and continued to do so because the education wasn't there and modern (though still imperfect) safeguards weren't in place. To that end, culpability can genuinely be tricky to apportion. First and foremost, the blame lies with those that blighted the sport (and society as a whole) but if there's a case to answer for others involved then answer it they must. And the colour of the shirt or standing in the game should not matter to us either. When I stopped playing football twenty years ago, I bought a season ticket for Ibrox as I finally had the time to follow follow my childhood team and I still love doing this two decades on. The pride I have in my club is immense and whilst times have been tough for the last ten years, our form this season and the chance of renewed success has taken away some of the stress and frustration of being unable to attend games because of the pandemic. No matter, I love supporting my club whether at Ibrox or from my RTV subscription. However, that doesn’t mean I can’t see the faults within it. Be it historic bigotry, financial mismanagement or abuse of young people, I’d argue it is a key part of being a supporter to question the club and look for improvement in all areas. In that vein, slowly but surely, the club is becoming more inclusive over the years and I’d like to think that post-2012, today’s and future custodians will be more mindful of its fiscal obligations. I’ve also no doubt the child protections and safeguards we now have are second to none. Even so, Rangers is not perfect and it’s not a weakness to admit such. In that sense, how Rangers react to their part in the SFA report is important. Yes, the club have every right to use legal care in their approach and to protect their (our?) reputation. But we also have a moral duty to examine any allegations and act accordingly if, as may be the case, there were genuine failings under our responsibilities. If that is the case, and where such failings are proven, apologies must be made along suitable reparations. We must do the right thing and be seen to do so. Let us lead from the front on that: no prevarications about Oldco or pointing the finger elsewhere, just solemn acknowledgement where appropriate whilst ensuring we have processes in place so such abuse can never happen again. When our club almost ceased to exist in darker days ten years ago, supporters were keen to cement the idea of Rangers ‘then, now and forever’. That was an admirable slogan during a difficult period to try and ensure we all moved on together. It’s certainly a message that resonated with me and one we should return to if or when any historic abuse failings are discussed. And doing that should be a priority not an after-thought. The past may not always be something we can be proud of but if there’s an opportunity to address our mistakes, grab it we must. We cannot control what happened to these people then but we can do so now and forever.

Excellent stuff as always from @Rick Roberts We (Scottish football collectively) are currently in a place where we have a former chairman of another club coming out and stating that the Celtic Chief Executive Peter Lawwell has been pulling the strings in Hampden. Not many people will dispute this. In real terms this means he’ll look after Celtic's interests - which by nature implies he’s not looking out for the interests of others, or anyone, and often infers that he’ll pull strings to act against others if it suits. We have a compliance system which has been a Celtic-leaning closed shop ever since Paul McBride entered the fray to make it fit for purpose. Or more accurately fit for somebody’s purpose - hold that thought. It’s not stretching things to state that the subsequent Compliance Officers Vincent Lunny, Anthony McGlennan and Clare Whyte are of a narrow demographic. Hand-picked, these individuals certainly don’t showcase the rainbow of diversity that is Scottish football. And all bountifully bolstered by the likes of the SFA's integrity poster-bhoy Rod Mackenzie. Even so, the anomaly of a dynasty of cultural clones and the acknowledged fact that Celtic are pulling strings doesn’t necessarily have to translate to wrong-doing or foul-play. However, the output certainly does. The statistics since the beginning of 2018 are astounding. Not that we'd have read about these in the press. A recent table based on citations from the SFA website suggested that 25% of charges go to Rangers players. That’ll be higher now following Kemar Roofe's ban of this week. The argument that big clubs get more exposure and therefore are more likely to be brought to the attention of the compliance officer is weak on many levels but is obliterated when considering that Celtic are seldom cited. Ryan Christie was cited and banned; of course, this also coincided with him having mid-season surgery. Ajeti was also cited recently for his dive, but no-one was surprised when the charge was dismissed as 'not proved'. The other edge of these stats is that roughly 40% of citations come in games against Celtic. A cynic would say that a non-too-subtle message is being delivered here - to players and referees? Beyond this, we know it’s not because Celtic players aren’t committing citable fouls or acts. We watch the games and we see the clips on the internet - though don't expect too much comment from the Sky or Sportscene commentators. For reference and to keep it topical, at St Mirren (10/02/21) both McGregor and Brown had late and dangerous fouls and a penalty was awarded for yet another dive. This isn’t new, here’s a Gersnet article from early 2019. The same questionable bias, the targeting of our players and the incredulous ignoring of others around Re-refereeing Scottish football. So what is happening? Well, we have a system fit for somebody’s purpose. We have zero transparency in the capture and reporting of incidents, where incidents can be overlooked on a whim and where valid referrals can simply be thrown in the bin, and no-one has to answer for either. The next stage is equally cloudy and any application of the rules can be applied from benign or dismissed to extreme as the panel sees fit. It's all very lawyerly and all very weaselly. The transparency thing has always bothered me. Why wouldn’t it be applied equally to all SPFL Premiership games as it's only six games? Why wouldn’t we want everything to be out in the open? It’s only football. Any decision can be backed up with video evidence, the rulebook and common sense. We would all accept that. There’s no need to hide anything, unless there’s something to hide. So how did we get here? My recollection is that late in 2007 Gordon Smith, the then Chief Executive at the SFA, had proposed a “cheats charter”. This was effectively a mechanism to punish players who’ve gained advantage by diving or tricking the referees. The concept seems fair enough. Gordon Smith then stepped down in April 2010. To be honest, I wasn’t particularly interested in this at the time so never paid it much mind. However, I do remember the feeling that he’d been moved or pushed out. Sections of the press had targeted him. The signing of a confidently cause and reading between the lines of articles at the time, suggests of conflicts within the SFA. With hindsight, we now know that tectonic forces were working on Hampden around this time. Stewart Regan would replace Smith in the role of SFA Chief Executive. Regan was known to Peter Lawwell beforehand and in-situ would prove to be very much his dog. Regan marked his arrival with a friendly cup of tea at Parkhead - contrast this to the cold shoulder shown to the Rangers support genuinely concerned for the future of our club in following years. Moving forward to April 2011 and Paul McBride was locking horns with the SFA. The SFA disciplinary system was creaking from the prodding and pushing from McBride. From memory Celtic and Lennon were almost totally out of control around this time. Again with hindsight, this could easily all have been fabricated pretence, who knows? Regan then starts the ball rolling on 'internal and constitutional reforms which will benefit Scottish football going forward'. The Trojan horse was invited in (and presumably offered tea too). The public were told at the time that the rulebook was outdated and not fit for purpose. We have since been subjected to the likes of Lunny, McGlennan, Whyte and Mackenzie. Each of these in full-time and/or well-paid consultancy positions. How much progress have we seen? How much improvement? How much value for money have this lot provided? It's very similar to Neil Doncaster in that regard, key people are being well rewarded, and protected, for some very poor work. I’m looking at supporters outside of the Old Firm for a reaction by this point. Let’s cut through the sh!t. We get the system they want, a murky and biased system. Scottish football is painfully naïve because it appears to be an amateur game at heart. It relies on trust and honesty and somehow still believes in good intentions and common goals despite Hampden being a self-serving and incompetent basket-case. The problem is it was invaded by a cold, insidious professionalism in 2011. And it hasn’t been able to admit this to itself. I think even the Rangers board has struggled with this leap and possibly still do. The compliance officers and many administrators are mercenaries. Their loyalty is to whoever got them the gig and whoever pulls their strings. It’s certainly not to transparency or justice or parity. I’ve called it corruption and even cheating in the past and that view has only solidified. The farce at the end of last season and the sneering conviction in their actions was just another extension of this toxicity. Institutional bias sounds like something the social justice warriors and perma-woke in the Scottish press pack would surely be triggered by. One group openly discriminating against another, whilst using the games shared, sacred apparatus to do so. I guess principles go out the window when it’s Rangers on the receiving end.

In the spirit of Frankie's post. I played organised football from the age of 8-9 years. It started with the Cubs, then at primary school, and stepped up a level at Uddingston Amateurs. A local pro, played Keeper for Hamilton Acas for a dozen years, Billy Lamont founded Uddy Amateurs with a couple of fellow Pro's to put something back, given the circumstances it was a Sunday club, comprising two teams, under 11s and under 13s. I played at Secondary school and in second year, along with half-a-dozen others, left Uddingston Amateurs for Motherwell's official youth team, Fir Park Boys' Club. I moved through the under 15s, under 17s, and under 18s over three and half years. We were coached by two Motherwell first team players, the then best player to have not received a cap, Joe Wark and two dozen Northern Ireland capped Sammy Campbell. It was a decade of full on organised football, training three times a week in evenings and playing at least twice over the weekends. It was a football life. At Fir Park Boys' Club, we had a good, moderately successful team. The usual gig was surviving all cup competitions until you met Celtic Boys Club, occasionally this happened in a final, where you lost by three a three goal margin. Playing Celtic Boys Club in those days, the early 70s was an experience. We had a team of 13 getting stripped, another couple of lads turned up in expectation. Celtic Boys Club also stripped 13, but had another three dozen standing around the pitch. They all appeared in green blazer, club tie, grey flannels, polished shoes, and with CSC flight bag over their shoulders. The majority of those sidelined lads could have walked into our team. The motivation was desperation to play. Of course, I knew several of the CBC lads, played against them in both schools and amateur games, played alongside them in Lanarkshire Schools selections. There was one, a tremendous talent who signed for Celtic as a 14 year old. He was a genial lad, encouraging and good natured. He had a nickname that derived from his pudding bowl hairstyle. I was shocked at a change in his behaviour in a schools senior game, he was demonstrative and bullying of fellow team mates at the loss of a couple of goals. I won't name him, but he did testify along side Alan Brazil in Torbet's first appearance in courts for abuse(rape) twenty-five years past. His career was abruptly ended by a thrombosis at the age of 17. He was the standout in a Scottish schoolboys international 5-3 victory at Wembley. I moved on the Uni' and represented the Wednesday side in both league and Uni' Shield games. A new manager at St Mirren spotted me and a long term mate in a match against the Agricultural College. We signed part-time year long deals the following Saturday. I did not make a St Mirren first team appearance, never got near it, I played half-a-dozen Reserve matches, mostly I was confined to the third team playing in the Combination league. The lad playing behind me, at right back had been signed from CBC. Further, he was full time tertiary education too, attending Paisley College of Technology. He was a Renfrewshire boy and a truly wonderful player. Again, I won't name him, as it happens he is long gone. I was released at the end of my year, and true to the words you hear about Sir Awex, he found me a club, Shettleston Juniors. I was to replace a player who had left for Rangers, Bobby Russell. I hated Junior football and did not last the year. A name might be familiar to some Gersnetters, Sid Sage? He was a John Cleese lookalike with Roger de Courcey's haircut. A game at Forth Wanderers in the Red Hackle League Cup, he approached me pre-match, asked me to confirm my name, then told me if I ran past him, "ah'll fcuking stab ye". Effectively, I had been bullied, and stayed bullied. Sid had spent two decades playing in the lower reaches of senior football(Albion Rovers, Stenny, East Stirling, ...etc) and some years in the better paying Junior ranks. Back to the Renfrewshire boy, I could never understand why he didn't progress? A decade after sharing the same strip, I ran into a former Uni' mate in an Edinburgh restaurant. I was based at Redford Barracks for a month or so, she was a burgeoning senior civil servant. Further, she had been the Renfrewshire boy's girlfriend for 18 months. I asked about him, his progress. She told me he had been deceased some four years, suicide. He had not recovered from his boys club experiences. Knowing what we know now, you wonder how you negotiated the minefields that was Boys Club/Youth football without serious incident? Another sequence that was prevalent back in the day, was after games, we went to the bus stop to await public transport back home. Most of the opposition lads would be standing beside you and we all witnessed two or three cars passing with several green blazers sitting behind Cairney and Torbet. I could recognise Torbet because he was a weel kent face on the scene; I knew Cairney because he came from Tannochside, a mile and a half up the road. Getting stripped gained you a lift home post-match, and mostly meant a forfeit that would haunt the rest of your life. Rangers involvement with Gordon Neely means our club has questions to answer. Those answers will be beyond dark, meaning some lads lost their dignity, their minds, and their futures. We should do the right thing by lads only desperate to play football.

Great article, Frankie!

Jesus. Grow a pair or turn the volume off. The best response to these 2 is to wrap up title 55.

My feeling is that we either bring in the travesty that is VAR (which no doubt will cause more controversy when our refs still make bad errors), or retrospective action is only used for off the ball incidents and dives. Re-refereeing every foul is just crazy.

I always thought this long overdue report would be nothing more than an attempt to implicate as many clubs as possible & deflect attention away from where the biggest problem was i.e. Celtic

......unless celtic don’t like it. I finished that for you!

Couldn't agree more. A difficult and emotive subject handled brilliantly, well done Frankie.

Best to get back to a referee in charge and his decision is final .

So... I got the date wrong, and the bloody opponent wrong!?

The raw data from the Cup results. @Gribz 8 @compo 8 Scott7 8 Remarkable but the refined data adding the Ten Point Extra for the correct score in any Welsh/English tie puts Scott7 up to 18. I did tell you about the Extra didn’t I? Might have overlooked it.

Apologies. I'm a bit late - I thought we played Sunday. I usually like to give you two days, plus match-day, to post your predictions. Rangers 1 - 0 Kilmarnock FGS Itten

Spot on the money Frankie.

Handy lad for the last day relegation decider.

Match was last week and still couldn't get the correct result, at least you got the FGS. ??

Yes, it's strange how we keep on having to re-invent what we once decided was wrong and threw away. I think that's the one consistent aspect of society that never changes. The mistake was giving plebs and women the vote ?

Some deflection excercise in this article, with Thistle being named in the headline ...

"Lord Mulholland was lord advocate when the case against Paul Clark and David Whitehouse was brought" Good Lord, the good Lord speaks! Or, rather, has his man speak for him, which is rarely a good look, to the man on the Cessnock Subway. He seems, from The Times' report, below, rather aerated by the current Lord Advocate's statement to Parliament, and by some of the questioning. He sees these as personal attacks, although, it appears, he is not willing to share his thoughts in an open and transparent manner. However, he does endorse a Public Enquiry (The Times' report, quoting his solicitor, says "the public inquiry", which is an entirely different matter from "a" public inquiry; Mulholland and his man either know something, or it is a slip of the tongue or a typo. Ah dinna ken, me.) His statement is quite unambiguous in regard of his support of an investigation, nonetheless. The current Chief Constable, who was not, as far as I recall, the incumbent when the pursuit of Whitehouse, Clarke, Green, Ahmed, Grier et alia, commenced, also supports inquiry into the events. Whitehouse and Grier, out of court, have trousered up to £75K, each, from the public purse, for wrongful arrests, incarceration, inhuman treatment, and whatnot. Lord Mulholland rejects ‘false and scandalous’ attacks over Rangers FC case Craig Paton Friday February 12 2021, 12.00am, The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mulholland-rejects-false-and-scandalous-attacks-over-rangers-fc-case-prw8r5s6p Lord Mulholland was lord advocate when the case against Paul Clark and David Whitehouse was brought Scotland’s former lord advocate has broken his silence to push back against “false and scandalous” attacks on him over the malicious prosecution of two Rangers FC administrators. Paul Clark and David Whitehouse were awarded more than £20 million after charges brought against them in their 2014 indictment were dropped or dismissed. After they were cleared they pursued a civil action against the Crown Office and Police Scotland. James Wolffe, QC, the present lord advocate, admitted liability last year and this week apologised at Holyrood to the two men. The Scottish Conservatives held a debate in parliament calling for a judge-led inquiry into the matter. Lord Mulholland, who was lord advocate at the time of the prosecution, gave a statement through his lawyer. David McKie said: “In light of the unfounded personal attack made on my client in the Scottish parliament on Wednesday, he requires to take the unusual step of responding publicly to the false and scandalous statements made under the protection of parliamentary privilege.” The statement did not elaborate on which remarks Mulholland considered to have been a personal attack. McKie said Mulholland, who is now a judge, supported calls for an inquiry. These are also supported by Wolffe and by Iain Livingstone, chief constable of Police Scotland. “He wishes to make it clear that he welcomes the independent public inquiry and it carries his unequivocal support,” Mulholland’s lawyer said. “My client looks forward to participating in its proceedings to the fullest possible extent. “He believes that the fullest possible degree of transparency is required and strongly supports robust and thorough interrogation of the full facts. “Given the importance of this matter, and the public interest in a full examination of the circumstances, it is imperative that the remit of any inquiry also specifically extends to the handling of the recent civil case, not least given the sums of public money involved. “His view is that any inquiry should also include a public and open review of the entirety of the evidence at the time of indictment, and a detailed examination of all of the case’s processes prior to the decision to proceed.” Livingstone backed an inquiry when he appeared before the public audit and post-legislative scrutiny committee at Holyrood yesterday. “I did listen to the debate in the Scottish parliament and heard from the lord advocate and a number of members,” he said. “I shared the levels of concern that were expressed and I also share what was the will of parliament that the role of Police Scotland would be included with any judicial inquiry that is then established. “I give my full commitment to participate fully with that, I agree that there should be an inquiry into the circumstances and I give my commitment that the Police Service of Scotland will contribute to and co-operate fully with any inquiry that arises.” Livingstone said he had authorised a financial settlement for both men, although he was not allowed to say how much it was. “I was able, through my representatives, to engage and make reparation in regard to both Mr Clark and Mr Whitehouse within the limits of my authority. “I’m allowed to settle issues if I think it is legitimate to do so, and I did do it in this case, and that was within my limit, which was £75,000 in respect of each individual. In the interests of full transparency I also authorised a commensurate payment of legal expenses in regard of both individuals.”

Rangers need to put a response out on this asap. Thistle did so some 9 hrs ago. 9hrs ago Rangers were tweeting about their new fucking app. Disappointed, angered and embarrassed massively by this.

Won'tbe in the accounts mate.

If I remember correctly the victim's father was a police officer - if so it doesn't even seem plausible that the incident could have been kept from the police.

Predictably worthless.

You can still get a handsome 50/1 for Celtic to win the league if we drop some more points and they keep up their revival those odds will tumble so cover your self with a small wager

The only surprise about this whole episode is that it's taken them this long to do it to us this season.