26th of foot 6,019 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 The Scottish legal system's most high profile chutney sniper has utilised the opportunity provided by BBC Radio Scotland, to spit venom upon the decisions reached this afternoon by the SFA's Disciplinary Committee. My sources tell me that BBC Scotland's Chris McLaughlin contacted McBride by telephone asking for his opinions on Ally McCoist having his two match ban overturned on appeal, and both Bougherra and Diouf being subjected to heavy fines, as opposed to bans. At this point, I should remind Gersnetters what Jim Traynor said earlier this season regarding his colleague, Chris McLaughlin, "clearly, he is a sill for Celtic football club". The telephone was handed to fellow Sellik supporter, Kheredine Idessane who provided the required lubrication for McBride's hissing fit. The QC stated, "the SFA are the laughing stock of world football". He goes on, "any sensible person will conclude the SFA are dishonest". Further, he concludes, "the SFA have shown themselves to be not only disfunctional but bias". Now, I am positive I read at the weekend that ra Sellik had proclaimed their war of words with the SFA was over? McBride's state of tumescence is becomming more obvious. He was first introduced as, 'someone close to the Celtic Board' late last year in the immediate wake of Dougie McDonald's and Hugh Dallas's resignations. Increasingly, his utterances allow ra Sellik to abdicate their responsibilities. He has no official connection, other than being Neil Lennon's lawyer. He is free to toss hand grenades, he is the IRA to ra Sellik's Sinn Fein. As much as he would enjoy the experience, the SFA cannot dsiciplne McBride. I suspect the QC has lost his discipline because he adopted the role of Sellik's attack dog, he confirmed his rabid credentials by sinking his teeth into Rangers. McBride questions the words used by McCoist to stimulate Lennon's angry response, wants to know why Bougherra confronted the Celtic Physio' in the tunnel, and demands why Diouf was allowed to contradict a Match Commander;s decision and manhandled the referee. McBride wonders aloud as to the consequences of Celtic players behaving likewise tonight in Perth? It may be convenient for ra jobby jabber to say the things ra Sellik Board think, but I suspect the real reason for McBride's venom is bad advice offered to Neil Lennon. Ally McCoist appealed after taking counsel, he succeeded, his ban overturned. Lennon did not appeal on advice from McBride, and thus has sustained a two match ban(concurrently). Neil Lennon must feel shafted! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 You've got a few things wrong there 26th 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
metlika 0 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Its nothing to do with him but yet again BBC Scotland give them a platform clearly greeting, good. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 You are correct, Derek Ogg QC is a bigger pooftah and McBride does not toss hand grenades, he tosses young Bhoys. Does QC mean Queer cunt then?:smile: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
26th of foot 6,019 Posted April 12, 2011 Author Share Posted April 12, 2011 Does QC mean Queer cunt then?:smile: Absolutely. A couple of years past, he asked the PF office in Glasgow to drop charges against Douglas Haggarty, the Legal Services Chief of the Scottish Legal Aid Board(SLAB). Now, Paul McBride was a member of the SLAB Board too. He advocated there was not enough evidence to convict his chum on the charge of soliciting a teenage rent boy in the toilets of the St Enoch centre. Despite two Security Guards and two Police officers following Haggarty and the boy into the toilets, the PF agreed with McBride's request and all charges were dropped. A Fiscal fine was deemed more appropriate than court proceedings, thus avoiding bad publicity for SLAB. In 2009, Paul McBride's earnings from Legal Aid fees exceeded �£200,000. Now, if McBride thinks the SFA are corrupt and bias, what does he say about his involvement with SLAB? We should be told. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,685 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Its nothing to do with him but yet again BBC Scotland give them a platform clearly greeting, good. Why is the BBC,media,SFA ect not coming out and questioning this???,it shows how desperate all the BHEASTS are to sink so low as to call the SFA bias/cheats. I didn't think they get stoop any lower, after using the death of POD to get a game called off and their tour of Japan........... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yieldshields loyal 0 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Why is the BBC,media,SFA ect not coming out and questioning this???,it shows how desperate all the BHEASTS are to sink so low as to call the SFA bias/cheats. I didn't think they get stoop any lower, after using the death of POD to get a game called off and their tour of Japan........... If I was the SFA, I would be putting together a slander case on this rat McBride - the problem is, he thinks/knows he's almost untouchable within the QC. I would say though - Never stop your enemy in the process of making a mistake 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,685 Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Paul McBride QC today refused to back down in his war with the SFA – and opted to launch another stinging broadside at chief executive Stewart Regan. Regan released a statement last night threatening legal action after McBride had said the governing body were institutionally dysfunctional, intellectually dishonest and institutionally incapable of coming to reasonable and consistent decisions in the wake of the Disciplinary Commitee’s punishments handed out to Rangers trio Ally McCoist, Madjid Bougherra and El-Hadji Diouf. “It (the SFA) has no credibility whatsoever,” McBride said today. “Nobody now can rely on it at all, and I think even Stewart Regan recognises that himself. I also find it somewhat astonishing that that SFA chief executive, who recently complained about the amount of money being spent on legal advice, has decided to embark on this course of action. Mr Regan must consider if he is fit to be in the job which he apparently has.” In their statement, which noted McBride does not act on behalf of or as a spokesman for Celtic or their manager Neil Lennon, the SFA said they would be making a formal complaint to the Faculty of Advocates. McBride responded by claiming that, as a QC, he could not speak on behalf of anyone else, but that, as a member of the public, he was entitled to make what he would consider to be fair comment. He said of the SFA statement: “My first reaction was it was a missing page of a Monty Python sketch. It is hilarious and ludicrous and bizarre. In the unlikely event that they were mad enough to take legal action against me – and apparently every media outlet who has printed what I said – then I would look forward to vigorously defending my position. “The comments I made about them were fair, they were accurate, they were in the public interest. And the public, I think, would be interested – in the unlikely event of this going to court – seeing behind this inept, incredulous and Neanderthal organisation. “I think I’m entitled, as an ordinary member of the public, to make my views clear, as have journalists all over the country and people on various phone-ins, including Kenny Clark, a former Grade One referee who said their decisions were incompetent and he envisaged the possibility of referees going on strike.” http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/editor-s-picks/paul-mcbride-takes-aim-again-1.1096405 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 ââ?¬Å?I think Iââ?¬â?¢m entitled, as an ordinary member of the public, to make my views clear, as have journalists all over the country and people on various phone-ins, including Kenny Clark, a former Grade One referee who said their decisions were incompetent and he envisaged the possibility of referees going on strike.ââ?¬Â This has no bearing on whether the SFA should sue him or not. The SFA are entitled to sue whomever they choose if they believe they are being slandered. Bringing Kenny Clark into the discussion as justification is, simply, wrong. Clark saying that he felt that the SFA are incompetent, even if it is in unison with McBride saying the same, doesnt mean that they are both right. It could just as easily mean that they are both WRONG, and slanderous at the same time. It could also be that the SFA simply choose to sue only McBride - that is their prerogative. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,553 Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 McBride responded by claiming that, as a QC, he could not speak on behalf of anyone else Looks to me like he's breaking the rules of his profession. He could be in soapy bubble. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.