Avoiding the Spotlights

You can hold whatever view you like on the Celtic FC abuse scandal but, whatever that may be, there is one question which should be universal – how can that club not be punished over this?

Anyone on twitter should be following the @spotlight_CFC66 account – this provides a melt-water of information from the glaciers of abuse that span decades. Much of the content comes as a revelation as the subject has been given relatively scant exposure in the Scottish press. Overall, it draws a vivid picture of the streams and tributaries of the very singular Celtic entity that enabled and facilitated the abuse, with the 70s and 80s appearing particularly depraved. And within that picture there is a trend that is equally clear – the Celtic top brass at the time were very heavily involved with both the boy’s clubs and the abusers. There was little or no separation of entities in any practical sense. A fact that was very much used and exploited by the undesirables.

I’ve written on this a few times and attracted a bit of ire, particularly with accusations of point-scoring or tribal spite. I can see now that the aspersions are designed to curb any discussion and exposure of the subject where Celtic are involved. The point-scoring may be true and may even have been the original driver, but over time I have been made aware of the views of the victims and as I learned more then so my sense of both empathy and real injustice have grown exponentially. It is clear that the victims voice has not been given any oxygen at all and for many long years and no-one has listened to them, simply because there’s been no exposure to listen to. One can only imagine the frustration and hurt endured as door after door has been closed on them – for this alone we should listen and support them. From what I can tell, it has only been in recent years that have podcasts and interviews have started to appear, but even then, that has been on the fringes and far from the mainstream.

For me one recent tweet from the Spotlight account really stood out and it related to an internal investigating at Celtic FC in 1987.

A few points. Why are Celtic investigating what they now claim is a completely separate entity?

The internal investigation was bad enough in its own right because it was so obviously a paper-thin deception. Ultimately, a cover-up – which conveniently managed to overlook and avert attention from so many cases of abuse that have since been proven in court. And arguably worse still, it provided cover for further abuse to continue. How can the club not be punished for this?

Sadly, this is far from an isolated incidence of cover-up from Celtic FC, fast-forward 30 years and we have Celtic FC playing the same tired worn cards. Without exaggeration they currently have three or four internal investigations ongoing – all throw out to deflect and deceive. We never hear or see the results of these investigations and it’s all merely pretence – a fiction that it’s been dealt with in-house which is too easily accepted by a servile press. None of the current stable of Celtic investigations is more serious than their latest investigation into the mountain of child abuse and their handling of child abuse. Let’s be honest, this is an investigation which was only dreamt up in 2017 when some heat reappeared. Once again the victims and wider public are fobbed off with a fantasy investigation which will achieve nothing but to deflect and put time and distance between Celtic and any tricky questions. Celtic FC have no desire to find truth or right wrongs (we know this because the victims have told us – how thorough can an investigation be that fails to consult the victims?). Celtic FCs only desire is to protect the club, their friends at the club and ultimately avoid the heavy punishments that they know are due.

This is crux for me. We can see what they are up to, it is really that transparent. Celtic FC have worked tirelessly for decades to cover this up. It’s just another layer of immoral, criminal activity on top of the horrific crimes of abuse that ruined so many lives, and it’s one that football surely has to act on clear the air?

It should be devastating for them. But part of the web they’ve woven over the years also provides their multiple safety nets. People exist on the Celtic FC board who put Celtic before everything and so the same applies outside. The SFA, an organisation distinguished by its lack of real comment and action, has seen a stream of Celtic people who have a vested interested in dampening any justice where it looks like breaking out – with hindsight it’s fairly logical to see this as just an extension of the cover up. The same goes for Holyrood as it goes for the press. Any talk is curtailed and played down, and the obvious, rational progression to the question of punishment never materialises.

Similar to the doubtful intent of the internal investigations, concerns also apply to those of any external investigations where they appear. Certain characters and certain remits don’t ring remotely true or trustworthy. Once you start looking then conflicts of interest start to appear regularly around this subject. Are the stance of silence of BBC Scotland or Clyde FM by accident or design? Once you’ve made that first big deceit it’s then a small step to carry that out elsewhere and it’s naive to think it won’t occur. This is the discussion that Scotland really needs to have about Celtic.

Of course, with no trace of irony this is the very cultural omertà that enabled the original abuse. The club always comes first and shall be protected with any dissenters pushed out and rejected. Yet another layer of injustice that needs exposed, shamed, eradicated and redressed.

40 Second Segment

A quick glance behind, barely a dart of the eyes but it’s enough to register if there are any vehicles behind. Although at this speed it doesn’t really matter. One final big drag of air – slow and methodical. The lungs filled and rib-cage stretched to capture and contain that exaggerated draw. As it tops out you can feel it across the back of the shoulders. A feeling of bristling meditation develops as the oxygen enriches the blood. The exaggeration continues on the outwards purge. Jaw slacked and any unwanted tension dropping away.

You’ve studied the segment and are familiar with it having rode it many times. A left hand turn followed by a straight 400m at roughly 4% gradient. But you’ve not yet attacked it at KOM pace before. You know pace of the existing record holder. You know what the top speed should be. The wind is favourable. The road is dry. You know the gear ratio you want. You have to carry maximum speed into the segment – in the physics of the sprint that makes momentum so important. If you lose a few mph then valuable power is used to accelerate to a higher speed, you might eventually reach the same top speed but essential seconds have ticked away trying to get there. Your virtual rival was at that point before you and it’ll take something extraordinary to make it up. The area under the speed vs time graph has to be maximised.

Brakes feathered, road position and line chosen and we’re coasting into the corner now. Energy is being preserved and these last few seconds are giving the system maximum possible recovery. Hands are placed, fingers and palm are adjusted, grip tested and then reset again on the bars. Full contact, full control. The optimum speed has been reached to allow safe passage through the corner with maximum momentum and placement at the other side. It’s a zen like state now, with sensory systems at full alertness, fuelled by adrenaline – ready for fight and flight in this instance.

Sight and feel deal with the road surface. Information streaming into your brain from every point at super-fast pace. A rough patch. A painted line. A metal hole cover. A small stone pings away from your tyre to some place else. The resulting response is transmitted through the carbon in the wheels and then frame, then saddle and handlebars to your touch. Full tyre traction is resumed. You’re still set and stable. Eyes and ears switch focus to monitor the road ahead. Anything outside of this doesn’t exist. Full commitment will be required and any obstacle or obstruction will see the effort aborted. This action is completed in the blink of an eye. The road opens up.

The centrifugal forces ease, and the bikes tilts back to towards vertical. Your body lifts forward from the saddle. Everything in your being is focused forward. Every part of the bike and your whole body will be part of this effort. The hands clenched and secure, the force driven down through the right leg is both anchored and aided by the arms. The entire body is being recruited at this moment with the intention to put every newton of force into the peddle. In the same motion the left leg is pulling up, it’s part of the reaction, part of maximising power from the body to the bike and to the road. Care and balance is required to ensure the back wheel has the required traction. At this point the cadence still low and resistance is huge. You should feel this resistance as the stroke develops and around the full 360 degree revolution. As the right leg completes its downwards motion the system shifts to engage the left leg. But both sides are still pushing the crank round. The hips switch, different muscles recruit to drag and kick before the main muscle groups fully engage again. The bike frame is thrown to the opposite side. The left leg engages in the downwards assault, the right lifting now. The hips transferring the opposing forces, the back tight from holding the hips and harnessing the input and balance from the upper body.

That first push tells you all you need to know. Have you chosen the correct gear ratio? Too high and the acceleration with be too slow – the area under the graph, you want that top speed as soon as you can. Too low and you’ll spin out too soon – a gear change will be required but can you sacrifice that second or two? And more than that, did you feel strong during that first revolution? Is that spark/twitch/kick there to hit that top speed and hold it on until the end?

There are many reasons to cycle and many reasons to enjoy it. There really is something for everyone, and something for every type of body. Sometimes you find what you’re good at and that gets you hooked. When I got back on the bike after a long time away the leaderboards on Strava were things to observe in awe. That cannot be right? How is that possible?

But you start to figure things out. You train your body and at each stage you reassess what is possible. You get stronger. You get fitter and build the engine. It could be that those first few revolutions of the pedals in a sprint effort that convince you that there’s something there to work on. It’s a feeling you enjoy. A feeling of being in control of both your body and bike. Never take good health for granted.

And this is where discoveries are made on the leaderboards. That first time you leave it in the big ring and sprint up that street or incline. That first time your body fails halfway up but that’s part of the discovery. You lasted twice as long as you did last time. Looking at the data you had matched the KOM time up to that point. The impossible is now, if not possible, then understandable.

And that’s the thrill of the chase. The journey of self-improvement. The road to achievement. Or just bloody-minded competitive spirit. Competition with yourself and any other soul that has tested themselves on that segment.

Back on the road and you’re halfway through the course. You’ve reached the top speed that you had set yourself and things are going well, so you’ll continue the effort. The high torque and huge forces of the start are past by this point. Aerodynamics and efficiency are in your thoughts. You get low, compact and aerodynamic, perhaps perched on the front of the saddle. Peddling is still forced and heavy but it’s largely all in the legs and hips by this point.

The KOM is on and that makes a huge difference to the mental aspect of the effort.  Sprinting can actually be quite enjoyable when kept to 10 or 20 seconds. Beyond that and you’re going to places that most people don’t like to go. There’s a thought that nags sometimes when I look at leaderboards about whether other people can’t do that or just won’t do that – in the end it’s the same thing, just the mental and physical sides of the coin. Your body is giving you 100 signals to stop what you’re doing and at that stage it’s the easiest thing in the world to listen to it. Through training you improve this capacity. The difference between hanging on for 20 seconds and 40 seconds is huge. But you have trained, and you know you can hang on because you’ve done it before. This is another mental crutch to help you to that finish line.

Then it’s over. You shift into the lowest gear and paddle around the kerbside for a few minutes, sucking in oxygen and keeping the legs turning as lightly as possible. Normality returns quickly enough. The numbers looked good, you’re confident you got the KOM. You’ll know when you return home and upload your ride. It’s all part of the routine and part of the thrill. It’s a good feeling and that’s what you’re chasing.

Until some point in the future when you get that “uh oh” message informing you that someone has bettered your time. And then you know that you’ll have to do it all again, only faster next time.

The Lance Armstrong of football.

The Lance Armstrong of football. A common call from celtic fans desperate to try and overstate Rangers FC use of then-legal tax-saving vehicles in the 2000s.

It misses the mark on many points, but crucially a truer parallel meriting the sobriquet would be their own club – Celtic FC.

The parallel of doping in cycling would be doping in football. And doping programmes for footballers almost certainly exist at the top end of the sport. But that’s not the charge here.

Blood doping in cycling had a huge effect on the athletes and in the 90s it was rife. A sizeable majority of top riders and teams had their own doping programmes – which, in its own ironic way actually removes doping as Armstrong’s “biggest crime”. Facts are all of his main rivals at the time were doping. It’s true that without EPO and other aids then Armstrong wouldn’t have been able to compete. But then neither would his rivals, so in that regard the playing field was warped but fair.

So the slur falls back to financial doping. The only problem with that is that football is inherently financially unfair. Everybody is striving to improve their lot and any number of means are applied to extract advantage, which often fail the most basic morality tests. At the top of the pyramid teams arbitrarily have billions of pounds pumped in from oligarchs and sheikhs, similarly others have governments write off similar amounts in tax and to assist where they can. Football in the 90s and 00s were marked by players contracts getting more inventive. Media rights and all sorts of sponsorship monies and add-ons where being protected by well-payed tax experts and lawyers for their very well-payed clients. EBTs weren’t uncommon and were widely used in the UK. This is the context.

If tax avoidance and the public purse is your moral ad ethical gripe then plenty sought to dodge the public purse through fanciful film schemes, a loophole which was also closed up with time. But we know that for Rangers biggest detractors, it’s was never really about ethics or doing the right thing.

It is widely held view that Armstrong’s biggest crimes were his bullying and links with governing and anti-doping bodies – which is to say corruption. Armstrong is/was an alpha male and a very domineering and controlling figure. He literally forced riders out of races and out of the sport. He humiliated any one that stood up to him, let alone expose his methods. It got to the stage where press conferences attendance lists were personally approved by Armstrong. And he was able to lever this control by the force of his personality and from the weight of the money he brought into the sport. The equation is tried and tested – he made people money, so they backed him. Other teams saw benefit in this status quo. Manufacturers. Broadcasters. Sponsors. And presidents of the UCI and WADA.

Does this sound like anyone in Scottish football at the moment?

The links with UCI and WADA got a little too cosy. Arrangements were made that enabled, if not green-lighted, Armstrong’s programme. But perhaps his most reprehensible act is the accusation that he used the doping testing agency against his rivals. Perhaps he felt threatened as they were becoming too strong and offered a little bit too much of a challenge to his crown, perhaps he just liked the fact that he had control and could use it. Before that point the cycling doping omertà was very much honour amongst thieves – to then break that code sets Armstrong apart, it’s a departure from striving to improve your own lot to improving your lot through damaging your rivals.

I don’t know how common examples like this are in world sport or football, presumably the number of teams and vested interests form a natural barrier to corruption and an independent governing body prevails. However, i do suspect very similar plots have been hatched and carried through in Scottish football.

Anyone that follows the game in Scotland will be no stranger to patterns of proven unprofessional behaviour from celtic supporters targeting Rangers FC through their positions of employment. This goes from the man in the street, to the decision makers in the press, to people who held positions of considerable power at Westminster. It certainly makes the following both possible and probable.

In 2011 the sale of Rangers FC to somebody was inevitable. Murray wanted to sell and Lloyds Banking Group wanted him to sell. The sale to Craig Whyte may have all been above board in that respect. What’s more debatable is who brought Whyte to the table. With hindsight his remit was pretty clear, take Rangers into admin and eventually liquidation – in short, commence a campaign of wanton corporate vandalism against the club from the inside. The thing is this guy is a nobody, with little means, less clout, and no history or interest in football. And yet the sea parted for him to allow the devastation to unfold. It’s difficult to see how he could have arranged all of that on his own?

The Ticketus money. Duff and Phelps. Hand-picked administrators who only wanted to talk to Charles Green. Green and Whyte. The fact HMRC overlooked unpaid PAYE until it got to a level that gave them leverage in admin. A closed shop from the moment LBG facilitated the sale. One that left the club an empty shell and one saddled with burdens that would last until celtic planned to pick up their 10th title. So many coincidences. In the years preceding a former Home Secretary had been been on the celtic board. A man of means and contacts to open many doors. It’s almost certain that he spent his time lining up ducks, which would then be shot down in 2011.

Why did HMRC choose Rangers to make a point over EBTs? Like so many stories, the names and nature of the people involved in the key decisions come out over time and it’s easy to put two and two together and get the wrong answer. However, when people connected to celtic crop up at every single stage on the journey then you’re allowed to question coincidence. Were these people simply involved in process, or did they make themselves involved and push things in a certain direction?

The BBC for example. Members of their sports team certainly threw themselves to the fore to tell their side of the Rangers story (and still do). But it isn’t necessarily the merit or veracity of any story that rankles with Rangers supporters, it’s the fact that we know they would never deal with other clubs or subjects in the same manner. It’s bias. It’s hypocrisy. And given that the driver is tribal and the target is their rivals, then it’s an abuse and misuse of a position of trust. All at the tax payers expense I may add.

The import of the press cannot be over-looked. It’s a blanket to cover improper behaviour. It’s a mask to convince the public that certain actions are justified whilst conveniently omitting other details that damage the argument. It’s a form of corruption in itself and it’s often an integral part of the actual act of corruption, part of the fraud.

None more so than the recent 10th April, 2020, SPFL vote. This is the part where I copy and paste definitions from the internet.

What Constitutes a Bribe? Broadly, the Act defines bribery as giving or receiving a financial or other advantage in connection with the “improper performance” of a position of trust, or a function that is expected to be performed impartially or in good faith.

Bribery – means giving or receiving an unearned reward to influence someone’s behaviour. One common form of bribery is a “kickback” – an unearned reward following favourable treatment. Both are corrupt.

Corruption – is any unlawful or improper behaviour that seeks to gain an advantage through illegitimate means. Bribery, abuse of power, extortion, fraud, deception, collusion, cartels, embezzlement and money laundering are all forms of corruption.

It’s difficult to look at the actions of SPFL chief executive Neil Doncasters, his remuneration compared to his performance and come to any other conclusion than the SPFL is corrupt. Most of the definitions listed above resonant with him and his controlling cronies. The same few familiar faces and persons of conflicted interest that hold court at the SPFL and the SFA – and whatever they are up to it isn’t performance driven. The ONLY explanation for their rush to harry through the season-ending vote in April 2020 was that they, Doncaster/MacKenzie/MacLennan, wanted to ensure that celtic were ensured the title by avoiding the possible risk of the season being declared null and void due to the COVID pandemic. Celtic pretty much rubber stanmped the corrupt by speaking out against an independent investigation into the farce. The recent vote held parallels to the Whyte fiasco, in that the SPFL enjoyed the backing of a sizeable chunk of the media. Almost unconditionally, regardless of subject. The obvious explanation is that the actions are being carried out for the benefit of celtic, so they were gifted their press bloc to hide the bodies.

Armstrong, doping, winning, money, press, governing bodies, corruption – repeat. So a similar cycle repeats with celtic, money, press, governing bodies, corruption, which leads to winning.

Armstrong had it all figured out. For a period of time he was untouchable. But he pushed it too far. He stepped over too many people. And eventually told one lie too many when eventually the right people started asking questions.

Celtic FC are in a similar position. Lift the veil from their recent silverware and what sits underneath doesn’t glisten quite as much. The facts are that whatever has been won has been won in the boardroom. Maybe Rangers were due a fall, careless/reckless, but their main rivals conspiring to facilitate that push should see celtic as pariahs in football. The most reprehensible act. The punch from behind. The stick in the spokes.

From that moment forward they benefited, and anything after is tainted.

To make matters worse the corruption doesn’t end there. Rangers recovered, worked back and returned to the top flight. Still far from a full power and it was debatable whether Rangers were even yet a viable title challenger, such was the gap in club finances and the inferior starting point. Celtic too hadn’t been idle, their people in positions of influence around sport had grown. The Compliance Officer at the SFA in 2018/2019 season saw over 10 citations for Rangers players, which eventually led to key players missing matches. Celtic had no citations despite involvement in incidents of similar nature (note: this is fourth celtic supporter in a row to occupy this role, formed after celtic caused a referee strike in 2010, just in time for Rangers troubles!). It’s worth mentioning that much of the COs work came on the back of what the press (primarily BBC Sportscene) decided was an issue, where some of the editing is of questionable balance to say the least. Each of these systems are autonomous in their own right, but equally each of them has a duty to identify and prevent improper behaviour. But here, together, they were working is tandem to corrupt the game and apply favour.

The statistics on the performance from the referees makes worrying reading; namely, teams have been allowed rough treatment against Rangers, yet Rangers players are more readily booked. Celtic figures show the opposite. This could be dismissed as an anomaly is one or even ten matches, but it’s there like a background noise, and in 2019, like 2020,  the effects were key players suspended after the turn of the year. Subtle yet effective. And wilfully eroding the spirit of football. You could argue if this is due to extreme external pressure from the press and supporters or an indicator of something more systematic at the SFA – either way, improper behaviour that seeks to gain an advantage through illegitimate means.

Another example, and a different angle of attack. Indirectly, the politicking continued at pace. The sectarian background to Rangers and celtic is no secret. And from that a campaign was waged to have Rangers more robust language punished, whilst celtics was quietly mitigated in the background. A campaign waged largely in the Scottish press and through outlets in Holyrood. But which achieved a level of success where by UEFA turned an eye to Ibrox, and thanks to persistently keen and dedicated hearing from celtic supporters acting for FARE (sic), they managed to extract fines and stadium closures from Rangers. Which affects football on the pitch, very much, directly.

I know I see these things from a Rangers point of view. Sometimes its an easy fit and convenient fit. But there’s not much of this article that is up for debate. Culturally, there exist people going out of their way to wilfully attacking Rangers FC. Maybe that’s the rival fans lot. Maybe not. Maybe it’s only a problem when the management or editorially level of companies and governing bodies start to allow the bias and unprofessional behaviour more fitting to the pubs after a match. Usually there are checks and balances to prevent that, but sometimes corruption succeeds. Certainly in Scottish football, many bodies of influence have went bad – they’ve forgotten what their role is and what sport actually is.

So the next time someone mentions a Lance Armstrong of football. You can look past the administrative paperwork to extract benefit from legal tax loopholes. And look instead at the systematic corruption of Scottish football and its supporting industries by celtic FC and its supporters.

Power Corrupts (the SPFL)

Whatever happens here, and whether Rangers were right or wrong, there exists the unfortunate truth that many SPFL teams simply won’t back anything from Rangers. A solid chunk of rival clubs fan-base has been conditioned to dislike Rangers, fair enough, and that is a strong force for any club board to resist. This means that all other things being equal then the easy default is to fall in with the herd, as per routine, and stand against Rangers.

Unfortunately for us, the opposite of backing us is to simply lump in with celtic. They hold the reigns to many of the horses and that means they get to decide which direction those horses take and when. Others might not like that, but they seldom speak up. When they do it’s typically a lone voice and it gets shut down and quietly swept away, it’s not worth the hassle.

In a way, many clubs or supports may feel that most of the issues don’t really affect their clubs, certainly not the day to day running of their club. They don’t see the big picture or look far into the future. TV deals, sponsorship, league structure, they probably don’t feel they can get involved and won’t have much input anyways, so just leave it to others to deal with. Whether the SPFL is competent, or as corrupt as it currently appears, then it doesn’t necessarily have any bearing on those clubs or their supports. In many cases they even get passed a few crumbs to look the other way – so are happy with the status quo.

Many aspects of Rangers car crash in 2011 didn’t ring true. I could put theories to what happened and why, but I will never really know. Similar to the questionable SPFL vote. I was recently reading about corruption of the Mexican government and security forces by drug cartels and many similarities appeared. There’s always a reason to corrupt and that is clearly to derive benefits from that corruption. Scottish football has relatively closed and well-defined market, once that has been maximised then advantages will naturally be sought elsewhere. That obviously applies to anything connected with the game. Media. Governing bodies. Referees. Government. Advantages can be eked out of all of these, if they can be controlled.

One point that resonated was the turning point when one powerful cartel started using its influence and control of the governments police and forces to target its competitors. It’s an escalation in power and the abuse and misuse of that power. Of course, from the outside it’s almost a perfect crime and it can all be explained away – after all, we have the police working against traffickers and bad guys, so it’s all ok right? That’s not quite true when you factor in who has been pulling the strings and that it’s the result of been some heavy-duty corruption.

This all seems a bit extreme and a bit far removed from Scottish football, but it’s the same mechanisms and drivers. It’s humans and politics and greed and power. The latest SPFL vote appears to be a case of corrupt individuals over-reaching and their actions breaking the surface of fit and proper administration. This is why it is important. Anybody corrupting a neutral governing body needs weeding out. Corrupted actions then throw shade over anything that individual(s) have been involved in. When did it start? Were they already in place when they went off track? Or were they brought in specifically to look after the interests of one certain club?

And it goes on from that. What else could’ve been corrupted? Could certain referees have been fast-tracked because they would bend with the wind, would he throw in a homer when required? Is it possible that the Compliance Officer was position created with the remit of looking after the interests of the controlling entity and being directed against the competition?

I have seen signs of uneven treatment in many places since 2011 but few of greater direct influence than the referees in recent seasons. Rangers play up hill, the numbers prove it. Celtic play downhill, again, the numbers prove it. But with this the other clubs are not necessarily unhappy as they get more free hits against Rangers. Breath-taking displays of leniency sit in contrast to hair-trigger cards for our players, therefore a better chance of points. This status quo suits them so why make an issue out of it. From the outside it’s just Rangers fans complaining about referees and it’s all probably a good laugh for rival fans.

In 2012, the carrots placed before rival clubs were obvious, if transparently short term. Rangers punted out to the long grass made the it an automatic 1 place jump up the table for most clubs. Clubs are that small-minded. The cups would be more open, that one’s true up to a point. If laughing at Rangers expense wasn’t enough then to further sweeten the deal the SPL reallocated some of the 2nd place prize money. This would’ve equated to £50,000 extra per club. I believe celtic even played to benevolent card with a slight reduction in first prize money – gift to all other clubs. Of course, small potatoes compared to the real prize, the £30m in unchallenged Champions Leagues bounty.

There is a point here that the media don’t mention. The total money in the game has went down. TV deals shrank. Sponsorship disappeared. Gates reduced. After 2012, most SPFL clubs had less money. Scottish football was a poorer place. The lower leagues benefited, of course, when Rangers came to town; TV interest, exposure, novelty, etc. You’d think the rival club Chairmen would’ve noticed this and perhaps questioned their unthinking allegiances?

So back the SPFL. We now have Neil Doncaster on £400k per year. We have MacLennan, McCluskey and Mackenzie all batting for celtic. We’ve had Vincent Lunny, Anthony McGlennan and Clare White all taking money out of the game – what did any of them improve, where’s the value? (there’s then the demographical question in all of those appointments). Elsewhere, we have people like Mike Mulraney having a say in the national game.

The SPFLs recent wobble is just an indication that the SPFL has been ran for celtic for a long time. And for Doncaster’s £400k we are regularly rewarded with competitions without sponsors. We have paltry TV deals, despite Rangers being back and the appearance of box office like Gerrard and even Rodgers. No talk of improvement or brainstorming or reconstruction during the intervening years. Only now in a crisis to cover up the celtic title grab.

That’s why they are there. To look after celtics interests. And it IS costing the other clubs money. Sadly, until the other clubs realise that, and care about that, then it’ll just be more of the same.

This may seem like a small and petty battle but if it goes unchecked then there will be other issues manipulated and spirited away in the future. That may in the form of  frivolous fines to Rangers, it may be ignoring some seriously flawed refereeing performances, overlooking indiscretions when self-interest suits. If you ask me, then the current crop of undesirables are currently tasked with holding back the tide on far more important and serious issues, namely due process on the celtics historic child abuse scandal. If these guys are compromised then there is no way they can be trusted or impartial on something as serious as that, something that will damage their puppet master. After all, what’s the point of corruption if you can’t extract benefit from it?

Somethings just aren’t FARE

You’ll know what happened with FARE by now. Club1872 cover it well here. In short, a celtic supporter (of the more virulent variety) who is FAREs acting representative in Scotland, forgot to log out of his celtic-minded account and retweeted some anti-Rangers bile on the official FARE twitter account. FARE have apologised and claimed this was an accident.

As folk have pointed out online this wasn’t an accident, it couldn’t be n accident. Retweeting on a phone takes 2 steps and that would be a very unusual and unlikely. And then follow the uncomfortable truth – that the person involved must follow that person or that type of account on twitter and then have engaged with that particular tweet. Accepting that the retweet wasn’t a mistake then the explanation is that he shared the tweet to the followers of his celtic-minded account, and presumably shared the views in the tweet and the purpose of the video – which was to excuse Scott Browns sectarian singing by applying 30 year old dollop of whataboutery.

This on its own tells us all we need to know about FAREs rep. Online has provided more flavour and it suggests that his political ideals are diametrically opposed to the existence of Rangers football club. This explains why he is so keen to play a part in a system to punish the club and support. Not an unusual impulse for celtic fans, we will see.

It of course leads to many more questions. How and why has FARE allowed this blatant and obvious example of prejudice and persecution to go unchecked? What influence has this individual had? Surely a review of his work at FARE is a minimum?

And of greater significance to Rangers, surely a review of UEFAs own rules and guidelines and how they came about is justified? Have FARE or this type of celtic-minded zealot (s) been  present since the beginning? Rangers fans, and the club itself, have long suspected mischief and injustice in how the cards have fallen on this subject. Is it any surprised that a politically comprised celtic fan has no problem, and no desire to see celtic potentially punished, with chants about huns (the equivalent of fenian) or orange bastards (an unarguably sectarian phrase) or the IRA. Where as Rangers go-to offensive phrase (fenian) is elevated to taboo level.

Also worth noting that this individual places himself within the support to carry out his FARE work. Do we know what he’s hearing and reporting? Do we know he’s not instigating chants or responses?

Of course, Rangers fans are only too familiar with this kind of behaviour and consequences. From the top of my head serious questions need asked about the systems and motives of the people involved in:

– The HMRC tweets on Rangers affairs a few weeks ago.

– The decisions involving the HMRC and Rangers going back 12 years.

– The BBCs ongoing boycott on Ibrox and Rangers (now approaching 4 years – 4 years for a national broadcaster to ignore a major professional football club because of some celtic supporters in its operation decided that it would be appropriate).

– Chris McLaughlin himself. The “source” of the boycott. A celtic fan who has proven he can not deal with Rangers stories in a fair, balanced or professional manner. He’s not exactly alone across Scotland’s media.

– The celtic supporting editors at the BBC who seem to consider it their job to edit the highlights to show and magnify any disputable incident for Rangers and quietly hide any injustice against. Whilst, and equally importantly, applying the opposite for celtic. Anyone who watched live football in Scotland in 2018/2019 would’ve been aware of this and much of their handy work ended up with the compliance officer. The practise was dubbed Trial by Sportscene.

– Celtic supporting Clare Whyte is the SFAs compliance officer and the latest in a line of celtic supporters to occupy this role. As above, 2018/2019 was a season of outstanding bias. The statistics prove this – with Rangers brought up for charges at every opportunity and others overlooked. Personally, I feel this had a tangible influence in the title race and it definitely put stress on the Rangers first team. In 2019/2020 she has went to ground. I guess this level of corruption and cheating is simply unsustainable.

– On the back of the FARE led punishments of Rangers there has been calls for strict liability to be applied to Scottish clubs. The end game of this presumably fines, stadium closures and points reductions for Rangers. The main protagonists are unsurprisingly celtic supporting MSPs and similar minded media mouth pieces.

It shouldn’t pass you by that much of this clamour for punishment (arguably excessive and disproportionate punishment) is built upon the definition on one word. A definition that doesn’t accurately reflect the usage or the intent of the football crowd using it. Hindsight and this slip up by FARE goes some way to explaining why some have tried so hard to convince the world what they need the word to mean.

Scott Brown – A Symptom of Endemic Sectarian Attitudes

So Scott Brown has been singing sectarian songs? He’s not alone, as every week thousands of others will too. That’s not the point though.

If we cared to admit it then Scottish society has had the same problem for centuries, with different tribal streams cutting their way down the lowland plains. It’s always the same battles. Always from the same place. There are things that could be done to break down barriers. The shedding of old prejudice and mistrust would be essential, not easy but not impossible, by redirecting or filling the physical and cultural channels that run through society. And there are plenty if you cared to look for them. The natural aim in the long term is the integration of both streams, which calls for a bit of give and take all round

We could keep the streams separate, of course. That is possible. Rangers and Celtic aren’t going to merge so a truce has to be agreed. Adherence to this truce gradually grows respect. Further work and progress can then be built upon these foundations. However, one of Scotland’s problems is that divides are bigger than and not limited to just two football teams; and this is where the spinning plates of any truce begin to multiply.

Any truce, any seize-fire relies on trust, with clear rules and both sides abiding. The Scottish medias prevailing attitudes and strategy to sectarian singing has failed miserably. We know this with hindsight, for it was never intended to solve any problems. Some happy to stir up news and stories, some happy to just go along with it and some with more targeted and cynical interests. Although dressed up as an issue of social conscience it has been far from that for many. It was often solely a stick to beat Rangers with – as simple as that. It has been a ruse built around an apparently noble cause and seasoned with enough truth to beat away detractors for as long as possible.

Singing at football. A vital exercise and component in social and cultural bonding. Part celebration, part spectacle and part intimidation. We have seen the quintessential example of this turned into a hate crime. Where as there’s no doubt over the occasionally anti-social and deliberately offensive nature of the Billy Boys, it existed in a hail of crossfire from one side to the other. That is the context and the environment. The cultural and human shortcomings in offensive expressions exist in both sides, and other supports. Any solution, if we’re deciding that one is required, is about attitudes and bringing the whole pot down off the boil. It’s about identifying what’s wrong, negative or offensive and deciding if it’s really necessary.

Now many would say that twisting football slang into political and cultural point scoring isn’t adhering to any truce. Drafting in experts, politicians or religious figures and spokesman to bolster that chosen stance isn’t adherence to a truce. It’s a witch-hunt. Especially as those figures are loath to make concessions on their own side’s behaviour. This building walls higher, dragging in other identities as reinforcement and then lobby rocks across the divides. It’s about labelling and defining others. Growing distances. Not exactly conducive to building respect and trust.

It did have a purpose of course and it hoped to gain on many fronts. Damage to reputation being the most obvious. The column inches and news bulletins occupied by the Billy Boys has been frightening. Designed to blacken one side, whilst ignoring the other side attempts to whitewash them in the contrast. The work and effort to define fenian as meaning catholic in a football setting was quite something, especially as Rangers would have many catholic players on the pitch (many of whom were idolised and free to express their religion) and when simpler and more accurate definitions clearly existed i.e. celtic. But then mundane football or “political” definitions wouldn’t have derived the same leverage or been remotely useful. And having been able to contort and force the word into its minority, out of context placing then further points could be scored.

They convinced to world of a meaning of their choice and having it signed off in the rule books and public consciousness as the greater evil has caused many problems for Rangers. Financially the club as been fined, on numerous occasions. It has had to spent considerable time and effort in fighting fires and explaining itself. The politicking and lobbying of UEFA and FARE has caused us some real concerns in recent years. A partial ground closure, the threat of escalating sanctions is a source of worry. This is then compounded by further financial and reputational damage, especially with UEFA classing, or being convinced to class, that particular expression of sectarianism as a subset of racism. An added bonus for the architects and bricklayers of the whole enterprise – and with these results you can see why they have worked so hard to make this an issue.

As I said above, there’s a kernel of truth is every good lie. It’s not that offensive singing can always be defended or condoned. Besides, the rule-book and punishments of today are real and must be obeyed. It’s that equally offensive and sectarian words and actions haven’t been addressed and elevated and outlawed, for the very reasons listed above. This is hypocrisy and a two-tier system. The mitigations readily applied in defence of hun and other chants could have equally been applied to fenian, but they aren’t and that is damning of those pretending otherwise. Pretending that they’re doing society a favour whilst making excuses for the inexcusable. Pretending that one side is worse. One set of humans worse than another. That one side is incapable of that behaviour and that those failings don’t apply to them – when they clearly do and clearly always have. That kind of view is as sectarian in itself as it is insulting.

So we now see video footage of Scott Brown singing fuck the huns in public. This is certainly not unusual behaviour in Scotland. Hun is a sectarian word and is being sung with sectarian intent. This is the Celtic captain using sectarian language (which UEFA and FARE might well classify as racist). Hurling the proverbial rocks from behind the dividing wall. And with regular singing from the support, alongside orange bastard chants, this certainly appears to be an endemic problem –  “a vermin rump” to paraphrase the words used by one prominent journalistic commentator. Part of the problem is that press have hidden and defended it from this source for so long that they genuinely appear to believe that it isn’t sectarian. How can you solve a problem if you won’t admit that you have a problem?

No one is really offended – but it is isn’t about that. That’s not what the game has been about. This is now about equal treatment and due process. We will wait and see if those with a vested interest, those driving the campaigns and headlines and rule-books, are in it for the right reasons. Or if they’ll disrespect Scotland’s sectarian tensions in favour of continued point-scoring?

Hiding in plain sight…

We all know Scotland’s history; every decent account of it covers it – even my kids’ encyclopaedia spells it out. A tug-of-war played out between two sides. Your place in that picture is an accident of birth and a political choice for adults in Scotland (depending on your views of whether there is any freedom of choice after a life-time of conditioning).

Hundreds of years with an ever-changing cast of actors as the population opts in to the conflicts and bows out through boredom, revulsion or death. But the two main teams stay the same. That’s how it has been up here and Scotland is not unique in that state of affairs. It is human nature, or the nature of human society. It is human history, everywhere, and in Scotland, like elsewhere, it cannot be written off, under-played or ignored.

History repeats. Feuds don’t die away, certainly not if they’re not allowed to. While it can be argued that the tussle has drifted into welcome peace and moderate civility it hasn’t gone away. It has been there all along bubbling away under the surface. We have too many institutions build around it to ensure that is so. One side will always be looking to  gain ground. Vying for the upper hand. Let’s at least be honest with ourselves about that.

If you care to look then there has been plenty of going on in the name of Scotland’s troublesome burden. The same two old sides. Protestant and Catholic. The general population might be dismissive, ambivalent or blissfully naive but that doesn’t change the facts. People are fighting these old battles right in front of Scotland’s eyes.

Personally, I know I live in something of an online echo chamber. My news is filtered; therefore, my views take on that colour. There is certainly limited feedback from other views. Sometimes two plus two does equal five. And although I like to think that I can stand back and see the whole picture it probably shapes me more than I’d like to admit. One example recently that got me thinking.

I live in a world where I know that Michael Stewart is biased and playing out an agenda. I don’t consider it for a second that i’m mistaken – I have seen snide remark after snide remark for year after year of proof to secure that thinking. I have also seen examples where Rangers players get singled out for some treatment from some sections of Scotland supporters (or at least people commenting on Scottish football). McBurnie getting singled out for his performance in a game of many sub-standard Scotland performances didn’t come as a surprise. Especially when Michael Stewart led that charge (and I can guess the calibre and motives of follower that steamed in behind him). What surprised me slightly was Ewan Murray dismissing or downplaying the response.

So was I wrong here? Is questioning anything in the mainstream media really that unusual or taboo? Is it really only the “lunatic fringe” that would do such a thing?

An obvious answer would be Murray’s comments could be explained by him backing up a fellow journo/broadcaster, even if its seems far-fetched to suggest that Stewart or others aren’t swayed or driven by agendas. It suggests a couple of things, one, that Murray doesn’t follow Stewart’s work enough to notice the obvious contradictions, or that the mainstream presents information in a way that anyone who isn’t looking for agendas simply won’t notice them – partly that they’re not looking for it and partly because they don’t want to see it or even enjoy seeing it, and therefore aren’t particularly bothered by it.

This is the power of the press.

And it makes you wonder about other going-ons, things that seem so obvious or transparent when you watch them, but then it appears that the general public didn’t have a clue. They can’t have because there’s no reaction. Minimal kick-back. Not even murmur or a ripple.

A key example is the recent play against the Orange Orders marches. I put some thoughts together on it here. And here.

To summarise, it looks like a script that had been thought-out step by step and written down before. The curtains opened. The play began and the key players stood up and read out their lines. Most importantly for the participants is that their goal appears to have been achieved. And apparently the public haven’t noticed or cared, at least not enough to make a difference. To most it was just a show playing out in the background. More life unfolding. And hey presto, Orange Walks have been curtailed.

I said it before that the Orange Walks aren’t my bag. It’s not something I was brought up with. I think they need a revamp and some thorough public relations work. But going back to Scotland’s historic divides, the detractors here with their none too subtle play obviously hail form the other side, the opposing trench. They will see it as a battle to win, a win for the catholic/republican cause. And of course, where there’s a winner there must be a loser, in this case the protestant/unionist cause. We can give it different labels all we want, we can paint and deny things and tie ourselves in knots, but this is who made the play and that is ultimately their cause. With due respect to the Orange Order they’ve been asleep at the wheel here, they’ve allowed themselves to become marginalised and distanced from the Scottish mainstream. Beyond that they’ve then allowed that distance to be rotated to an angle where it can then be attacked from the direction of mainstream (sound familiar Rangers fans?).

The SNP, with it’s newly recruited republican friends. It’s added muscle and backing to the catholic side of the struggle. Simplistic but true. The list of characters making the public political plays are strongly rooted in that tradition. Many of whom have been imported from across the waters, where anything goes and it’s not unfair to say that Scotland isn’t aware or awake to the tactics and simply doesn’t recognise the game that’s been played.

So the power of the press, when you own the news and the narrative you can dictate what is allowed to happen and even boldly just hide it in plain sight. As an example, somehow celtic fc, through its well-placed supporters and cynical politicking, managed to walk away from the Commonwealth games with millions of pounds worth of upgrades to both stadium and surrounding area. The unprecedented use of a different stadium for opening and closing ceremonies allowed them upgrades and benefits as well as a very high level of exposure on an international level. These are the benefits that we know about, I’m sure from the near half a billion-pound budget that there’s plenty more we’ll never be aware of. That stadium and surroundings certainly fared better than the national stadium at Hampden, you know, the actual venue for the games. And all of this without a whimper in the press, no questioning or criticism. And a public none the wiser. An impressive trick. The perfect crime.

If you wanted you can throw plenty more examples into the bucket. The ease of attack on Scottish institutions from dubious sources. A chipping away at the Protestant block, designed to convince anyone not identifying with the (admittedly failingly spiritless) Church of Scotland that they’re not on that side, therefore by default on the other side. A thousand cuts and we should know where that leads. A plethora of expendable campaign and charity groups working under banners such as racism and sectarianism, but ultimately carrying out their own one-sided witch-hunts. The selective representation of Scotland’s history and one-eyed presenting of it. Seeming trivia like Gaelic road signs in areas where no one speaks it and never will. Jobs for the bhoys and seats at the trough, typically filled with the swill of public money. Junkets for willing messengers and kick-backs to the club. Tracts of land for knock down prices – cleared of listed buildings free of charge. Independence for the worst of reasons and by the worst of actions, but no-one cares to mention it. The editors wont. The editors will play along. The free pass at Holyrood for the catholic church and the accompanying cold, merciless blind eye to the legion of child-abuse under in its name. And under celtics name. The concession to the reprehensibly divisive schooling model – Bigotry is learned at home? Possibly, but it’s reinforced through society and echos within its structures. And separation. And propaganda. Condoning and cavorting with members of the IRA. On one hand arguing those songs and that cause as political or freedom fighters, whilst at the same time dragging long-time benign religious marches into that bed and using it to shame them – make up your fucking minds. The worrying trends in Scotland’s policing and justice system; where keeping hold of evidence, length of sentence and even the appetite for justice appears linked to who you are and where you come from.

Added comment: this may come across as a rant and simply selecting what I want to see. Maybe it is. But where is the balance? Where are ones on the other side pushing their luck? Playing the system? I can’t think of many. And believe me, the way our press is, we would hear all about them.

Scotland can be a great place, but these things are far from it and I’d hate to see what kind of nation would be born and wrought from this furnace. Call it what it is – autonomous, hostile guerrilla warfare with no fixed morality and a multitude of masks. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter your excuses.

From the questionable allocating of funds from a massive international event to simply picking on Rangers players during the weekly BBC highlights programme, it’s a considerable spectrum. Maybe I am the lunatic fringe, maybe this is simply seeing things that aren’t there. Or maybe I happen to have a learned clarity of what I’m looking for and so can see it clearly when it occurs. Perhaps I would do the same and opposite should the opportunity arise. Perhaps not. Is that human nature and these opportunities happen to be placed there for the right people? And all the while all that the general public see is the closed curtain as the set behind is arranged for the next show.

Not much By Mouth…

If you’ve read Chasing the Scream by Johann Hari you’d have your eyes opened to some disturbing yet gnawingly obvious assertions. The author makes the case that much of drug related legislation and the drug war as we know it is based in social prejudice. The origins, the people, the politics and one hundred years of evidence doesn’t paint a pretty picture or loosen Hari’s assertions. The demographic of the prison populations and the colour or lack of wealth of those at the blunt end of the war tells its own story.

Yet amid all this there exists the most uneasy paradox, namely, many of those on the law enforcement side are genuinely there for the best intentions. They have an honest, pure investment and reason to enforce prohibition and work against drug use in society. And yet, they are the arbiters of a machine built to the racially prejudiced specifications of its architects.

And it must’ve been beyond the wildest dreams of those architects to have someone devoted and driven to implement something ultimately corrupt?

This is where my concern and confusion over Nil By Mouth (NBM) continues, of their purpose and actions. The origins and intent and soundbites are pure and decent enough. But that has to be followed through by probity and consistency. I expect unthinking loyalty or partiality from a rival fan but from a self-proclaimed bastion of good? Well, I demand more.

As a Rangers fan there’s been a recurring nuisance factor to NBM over the years. Bad press, and there’s been plenty, has often been accompanied and bolstered by NBMs sound-bites. Of course, I realise that this on its own means little, if there’s been reason to get involved and if the Rangers support has pushed decency then reminders or reprimands aren’t without foundation. In my experience, no Rangers fan has ever once asked for special treatment or claimed infallibility.

There comes a point when acknowledgement of the operating environment is required from NBM. If every time the phone rings and it’s a celtic-supporting hack wanting another run at Rangers, when we know there’s similar and worse elsewhere, then they have to recognise that the game is rigged. Call it out, if you will. If not, they then simply become part of a sectarian machine.

NBM took a back seat a few years ago. Presumably they knew their legitimacy was being tested in the football arena and they had become a political tool which was failing its mission statement. There is the uneasy truth that here we have an anti-sectarianism charity (Scotland’s leading charity for challenging sectarianism) that has lost the ear of half of the divide and doesn’t seem remotely perturbed by that. Indeed, there’s a strong case can be made that sectarian tension has increased in the West of Scotland under their watch. Think about that for a while.

Some context, following last weeks Old Firm game a guardian journo commented on how great it was not to have sectarian songs on show and that strict liability must be the way to go. That’s some claim. Plenty sectarian songs were on show, songs for the sectarian IRA and songs about Huns and Orange Bastards – perhaps he’s been conditioned to just accept the right type of sectarianism? UEFAs zero tolerance stance may be justified and inarguable but let’s at least concede that those running the anti-sectarian charge in Scotland have failed dismally for the years. Twenty years on and we currently have one side grudgingly editing its playlist under duress whilst the other ramps it up with impunity. Alongside this the undercurrent of emotions to injustice, mistrust and agendas rages with increasing energy. Only a fool would judge that a success.

My stance has always been that tensions can be tempered, fairly easily. You put all cards on the table, you leave agendas aside and then you address what’s unnecessarily offensive in a fair and balanced manner. You state what’s a problem, what needs fixed and what’s unhelpful to both football and society. From clubs, to governing bodies, to Holyrood, to the press (crucially the press as their the link between all parties and the public). So you agree on a road map then you follow it through in a firm but fair manner. The concessions forgone on any side are softened by visible and measurable concessions elsewhere. The hope is the situation is then defused to a state of adequate acceptability.

When conceding that both sides haven’t been treated fairly, that the loaded policies have failed, and many avenues haven’t yet been explored, then it’s saddening to see go all in NBM backing strict liability. This is something that Rangers fans view with scepticism, as we see it as another play to influence matters on the pitch from the outside. Our basis for this? The cast of characters calling for it. And the lack of effort and balance put into previous strategies.

One of NBMs historic sound-bites has been to address “baggage” – and this is something the West of Scotland has in spades. No argument there. My interpretation has always been that baggage can be identified and then sorted into helpful, benign and unhelpful. Over time society improves if the unhelpful baggage is dropped and the good stuff is embraced or at least recognised by all.

The following issue isn’t a Rangers issue per se. It isn’t something I personally have anything to do with, but the overlaps with the above are many, as are the characters who appear.

Firstly, when talking about the right to march then the Orange walks are something that can be debated. But if we’re going to attempt to categorise these marches as baggage, then it seems illogical to add more baggage to that mix. The rise of irish republican marches is just that. When that is then further laced with open support from proscribed terror groups then decisions have to be questioned. It appears that it’s not triumphalist or provocative marches that are the problem, only who does it.

Given the zero tolerance attitude on singing it is therefore surprising to see NBM backing these republican marches, through lack of condemnation for the original decision. It’s more baggage on the pile after all. Their tweet read “…those who wish to drag the rest of us into their more (mire) of bigotry and hatred” – now, any sane person would think this was directed at those wanting and allowing extremist republican marches through the streets of Glasgow in the first place.  But it doesn’t appear to be, or they would simply say so and condemn the GCC and the supporters of proscribed terror groups and sectarian murderers.

Further questions are raised at their backing of Humza Yousaf – who is as compromised and as unbelievable a politician as Scotland has ever produced. Let’s been honest, a child can see the play being made here. The worst and most unacceptable parts of irish republicanism are being used to change the landscape on walks. A strawman argument. Presumably a debate on the merit or not of Orange walks on their own isn’t possible or cannot give them what they want from it. And so these tactics are adopted, to the detriment of Glasgow and everyone in it. And NBM fall into step behind it. It’s saddening stuff.

Of course, there’s no loss of irony that a false balance had to be established to chip away at one side on this issue, when the same strategy was wilfully ignored on the sectarian singing issue. We have all witnessed the clamour to downgrade sectarian republic singing to political whilst lambasting other songs, now contrast to the attempt to classify religious walks (from the Orange order) on par with pro-terror group marches.  It’s astounding hypocrisy, simple as.

On the subject of baggage. I had noticed the following tweet from NBM. There is no accusation that every child that goes through any schooling system picks up its flaws and prejudices. But, it is a fact that Scotland’s schooling system is intrinsically sectarian – the clue is in sects being stakeholders. It may be a benign or liminal level of sectarian baggage, but it is just that. Of course, one could point to the very sectarian aspects of the churches veto on employees and the legally approved glass ceiling for those not of a chosen religion. A sectarian signing policy in black and white in 2019.

All of this suggests it will be very difficult to tackle a problem when it can’t even be conceded that a problem exists. It also makes it very difficult to explain the fluctuating tactics and stances, together with the company they keep, unless you factor in agenda.

 

 

Jumping off the merry-go-round.

There’s nothing new in this blog. Nothing that hasn’t been said one hundred times before. I started writing some thoughts down months ago because it would be relevant again soon enough. It appears to be relevant again.

There was an article on Sky News a while back where one point stuck with me. The article was based on a celtic player and made mention to something from a relatively long time ago, a time in the past. The mention was on both Rangers suggested signing inclinations and comment the Scottish society in general. I’m sure the inclusion of that item, on some level, was to tar one side whilst rallying the other. The omission of some considerable points of similar merit on the other side left the article incomplete, in my opinion anyway.

Intentionally or not, this all drags people into the vortex of old troubles and issues. A new generation picks up the old baggage, and then lashes out, acting out prejudices in the pursuit of settling old debts (real or imagined). The new generation on the other side, who has nothing to do with the original charge, then gets the brunt of any response. It drags them in and gives them something to react to. The cycle continues. This is the blessing and curse of the Old Firm rivalry, and wider Scottish football rivalries. The get-it-up-ye merry-go-round.

Of course, these aren’t single-issue rivalries. Everybody will have their own point of view and influences, be it singing, slanging, bias, soundbites, culture, religion, violence etc etc. Their own hobby horses and pet peeves and a compass of what is acceptable or offensive and what’s not. Points of view and incidents will be sought out to suit and reinforce agendas. This is then amplified with where a person or community is in their life at that moment.

This is the way of the world, everywhere, and it’s all fine and good fun if you keep some sort of grounding on things. It is too easy to get carried away and sometimes you need to step back, jump off the merry-go-round and ask, what am I doing? Or what the hell is actually going on here?

A bit of introspection first. It’s fair to say that singing targeted songs about others and calling them out as bastards isn’t the most politically savvy of tactics. If we were to analysis how we’ve been systematically levered from the mainstream to the outsider in our own backyard then this would be the recurring crow bar. Celtic have been able to use it to circle wagons and obviously drew strength from it, like we have from their songs and actions. The language is none-too-subtle, fenian is debatable on many counts of definition, merit and actual offensiveness, but fuck-the-pope and others much less so. The context to all of this was an escalating arms race of offensive singing between natural adversaries. The enemy, the Glasgow-based supporters branch of the irish republican army.

Remove that context. Stand the songs alone and it’s something less explicable, less justifiable. Worse than that, it’s something that can and has been weaponized and used to score points. The bigot message is peddled and driven home and the seed placed amongst other the supports of other clubs and the wider community, who as rivals (in many senses) gladly accepted the open goal. Pointing out the lack of comment on the other side achieves nothing. We do not control that narrative, they do. They do not care for balance. And thus coloured as toxic the Rangers carriage at the front of the Scottish football train had been decoupled from the rest – using our collective boldness and bluster against us.

Scottish football has a slightly different landscape from Europe and UEFA, for the moment at least. The status quo on certain songs is that we derive no net benefit from them. Football songs have their respective community and cultural value but only to the point where the negatives start to outweigh any positives. Indeed, with hindsight it is clear that for years these have been counter-productive and used against us.

A pro-Rangers songbook is the only safe way to go, to be honest it should probably always have been that way but we have allowed ourselves to become side-tracked and then ambushed.

The media have proven that they have no desire for balance or solutions. They’ll seldom admit to baggage or poor behaviour elsewhere, let alone bang on about it. They’ll barely mention far more serious crimes and crimes deserving proper draconian sanctions. No mistaking, the media and others are hell bent on whipping up chaos against Rangers. And this is what frustrates most, the knowledge of how to improve things and dampen tensions in the wider society exists but there’s no appetite or desire for that, despite proclamations. The medias stance is often intended to be a red rag, we need to recognise this and not fall for it.

Rangers have held many initiatives but UEFAs latest charge (at the bidding of the shockingly partial FARE) has come as a sharp reminder that nothing can be taken for granted – balance and measure do not always apply where certain organisations are concerned. Although we like to think of ourselves as a big fish we are insignificant and expendable in the eyes of UEFA.

In short, us the support need to sort this out, and quickly. As a club we are on to so many good things for the first time in a long time, and we need to ensure that this comes first and do whatever we must to back that cause, the one that truly matters and unifies us all.

Longer term, we should of course recognise our part in this, own any foolishness. We should learn from the numerous clear signals missed along the road to where we are now. We should also understand how agendas and various agents that have used too and take those lessons on board.

Troublesome tribalism: does it matter who asks the questions?

That’s the problem with the tribal nature of football at times, and of football and politics in Scotland – folk will act tribally. You’d be wrong to assume anything else. The loyalty to your own group, or identity, conditions you against impartiality; and more so when that impartiality damages your tribe.

tribalism

So where a situation arises that requires digging, leg-work, probity, disclosure, then only those proven to be wholly professional, non-conflicted or uninhibited would be trusted to deliver to a suitable standard.

Within that there’s another truism. A member of the opposite tribe will typically dig deeper, work harder and longer if it derives damages to an opposing tribe.

Case and point. Rangers tax case. The genesis of this appears to be a leak of certain private documents which then ended up in the hands of Celtic fans. A resolute process then set in motion. Evidence was harvested and then sculpted into a formidable weapon. Other structures were constructed around this and the rest is what it is. The cry to this day is that crimes were committed and justice had to be done.

A rather obvious fact of this entire process is that the key players were not Rangers fans, in fact it was predominately Celtic fans or had links back to Celtic. The press in particular had a large influence throughout the course of events.

All of which throws up another couple of permutations to consider. How would the whole saga have turned out had Rangers fans been in control of the information? How would the saga, coverage and outcomes have looked had Celtic used EBTs to the same extend?

As per the opening statement of this article both would presumably look a lot different. Rangers fans would downplay events or certainly not consider them worthy of the shit-show that subsequently ensued. The truth is we’d probably have sat on any leaked documents and the chain reaction would never have begun. The same applies to a switch in character positions. Celtic fans would not have gathered data against their club, would not have built a case and driven it through – especially if they’d suspected a possible endpoint to be liquidation and newco of the holding company and a demotion to the bottom division. This anticipated level of damage is an important factor, it’s easy to make concessions when there’s no consequences, not so much when your clubs future depends on it.

This anticipated level of damage is an important factor, it’s easy to make concessions when there’s no consequences, not so much when your clubs future depends on it.

Can we actually predict those outcomes with any confidence? Yes, we probably can. The press and BBC Scotland performance on topical football-based debates over the past decade support the theory. As an example, coverage on sectarian singing has been selective. Head-lines proclaimed, discussions arranged across the network and platforms. Celtic-friendly experts have been brought in and feel comfortable and emboldened enough to freely debate the issues, when they relate to Rangers that is. Yet when it occurs elsewhere, against their tribe, the debate is never held. Simple as that.

More importantly, it is relevant to the ongoing coverage (or cover-up) of the Celtic child abuse scandal. The coverage simply doesn’t add up. The story has not grown organically or remotely to scale of the severity. The clamour for results, to unearth information and facts and see it all through to the logical conclusion has been found wanting. If we consider that this is the self-same press that gorged themselves on the Rangers tax case, then it is not that much of a surprise. It can be explained by the same tribal behaviour.

This throws up questions on conflicts of interest. In short, any investigation or coverage cannot be expected to be completed satisfactorily if key personnel are conflicted, or tribally inclined to either suppress evidence or simply not dig for it in the first place.

There’s a point here – which can be extrapolated from the progress of the scandal so far – if the victims want to be unreservedly represented, if they want their story and situation to be investigated and reported, to its exhaustible limits, then that is unlikely if people with a conflict of interest are involved. It’s a tribal certainty in fact. Some detractors certainly appear more concerned with who is asking the question, than the question itself. Crimes have been committed and justice had to be done, remember. They are also over-looking why others aren’t asking the questions, when that too is pretty obvious.

People from the same tribe can absolutely fail such an investigation, knowingly fail, but the opposite isn’t true. A serious investigation cannot be investigated too much, cannot be over-worked, too many facts cannot be unearthed. It’s not point scoring to see serious crimes given an appropriate chance at justice. It is point-scoring to deny that justice for the sake of your tribal compass.

As a disclosure it may come as no shock that Celtic aren’t my tribe. I support the rival tribe of Rangers. I know some good folk who support Celtic and even enjoy supporting them. But I don’t like Celtic, the club. They exist, I’ll concede that much to them. The sanctimonious and quixotic mythologies they peddle are mawkish and tiresome. I find the unrepentant support of republican terror groups offensive and I’ve never seen what part or future it has in Scotland.

Like every man and his dog I’d heard rumours about Celtic for as long as I can remember. The trials in the 90s came and went. Rumours persisted. Social media opened up a world of discussion and information that was unavailable before. Facts came to light. Naturally these would lend themselves to theories and the jigsaw, of perception and probability, would start to take form. The attitude and behaviour of Celtic in response to the scandal did little to endear this onlooker. New facts, new theories. Same old response from Celtic. Then Rangers tax case blew up. The behaviour of the Celtic support was something else and often still is; especially knowing that their own club had this scandal skulking in the background. Then again maybe that’s a reason why they attacked Rangers with such desperate primal vigour?

So yes, hands up, I don’t like Celtic. I don’t want to see them get away with anything. I expect the full force of the law and of any governing bodies to be brought to them where-ever it is merited. Much like they did with Rangers tax issues.

I use several examples above to set out some points but let’s not pretend that these are in anyway equivalent. Under a socially conditioned level of loading the membrane containing tribal allegiances should burst. The laws of a footballing governing body are one thing. The laws of the land and the protection of children is another. In absolute terms one is many orders of magnitude bigger.

Could my conscience cope with knowing that the management of my football club had inserted a line in a remuneration contract of a player to enable it to pursue loophole-based tax efficiency schemes? Probably, yes.

You’re clearly not going to hold the guilty parties to account, so it should be no surprise that rival tribes will.

Would the same be true for the crimes committed, or acts carried out, under-the-guise-of and then in-the-name-of Celtic? I’d like to think not. That’s for the conscience of Celtics spinners and the Scottish press and politicians to ponder – those at Parkhead, Holyrood, Pacific Quay, the Daily Record, the Herald, the Scotsman, Channel 4 etcetera. Sports clubs and religious organisation most definitely should be included in any inquiry. You’re clearly not going to hold the guilty parties to account, so it should be no surprise that rival tribes will. Rangers, like all clubs, should be part of any inquiry. The inquiry must be thorough and must be ruthless and exhaustive. If Rangers and Rangers people have questions to answer, then so be it. That would be disappointing, probably heart-breaking to be honest, but ultimately necessary. Absolutely.