Rangers boss Ally McCoist has insisted the club have no plans to offload any of their star players in the January transfer window, including key defender Lee Wallace.
The ongoing financial difficulties at Ibrox have been well documented over recent years and the club continue to struggle as a new company, losing £14.4 million during their first 13 months of trading.
Clearly the lack of top flight football and European action is playing a major part in Rangers' struggles and there has been talk in the transfer betting news of a few players leaving the Old Firm side next month.
After an impressive start to the season for both club and country, Scotland left-back Wallace appears to be at the top of the list of potential candidates to make a move away from Ibrox in January.
However McCoist has made it clear that he is under no pressure from the powers that be at the club to sell his prized assets.
The former Scotland striker told RangersTV:
"I've had discussions with board members and the chief executive and there has certainly been no indication at all that we have to sell. If that's the case, I'm sure I'll be informed of that but until that moment comes we obviously want to keep hold of our better and best players."
"You'd have to say Lee certainly comes into that category and in moving forward, which the club hopes to do, we'd be delighted to keep our better and best players."
Rangers look set to win the Scottish League One title at a canter, something the current Scottish football odds clearly suggest, but if they want to make their return to the top flight as quickly as possible, they can't rest on their laurels and keeping players like Wallace is clearly important to the ambitious McCoist.
Showing posts with label ally mccoist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ally mccoist. Show all posts
Friday, December 13, 2013
Friday, June 08, 2012
Scotland in 1996: Auld enemies, familiar feelings
Having become the first Scotland manager to take the country to the European championships in 1992 the nation eagerly awaited Andy Roxburgh’s encore.
Sadly his next trick was to bring to an end the proud World Cup qualification run.
He failed with a certain style. The campaign started with a 3-1 defeat away to Switzerland in a match that saw Richard Gough sent off for catching the ball after being deceived by its flight. It remains one of the more bizarre international red cards.
Worse was to follow on the road as Scotland were destroyed 5-0 by Portugal in a game that saw Ally McCoist break his leg and Gough call time on his international career after a fight with the manager.
Perfunctory wins over group minnows Estonia and Malta coupled with home draws with Switzerland, Portugal and group winners Italy took Scotland to 11 points but that was only enough for fourth place, four points behind the second placed Swiss.
The SFA's Jim Farry announced that he was standing behind Roxburgh but the manager himself decided he’d had enough of standing in front of Farry and Craig Brown took over as caretaker manager for the final two group games.
Scotland found themselves at a crossroads.
Qualifying for World Cups was what we did. It was all we did. If we didn't qualify we had nothing. And, as the rain fell that night in Portugal, it really did look like whatever we had was slipping away.
The SFA needed a charismatic, popular, inspirational manager to plot a new course.
Unable to find one they gave the job to Craig Brown permanently, the reasoning perhaps being that there was nothing so broke that Brown's reasonableness and experience at the side of Roxburgh wouldn't be able to fix it.
He knew exactly what he had to do. International tournament football was returning to England for the first time in 30 years in the summer of 1996. Brown had to make sure that Scotland didn't miss out this time.
Qualification for Euro 96 (the abbreviated title was officially used for the first time here, coined either by David Baddiel or someone who worked for Coca-Cola) saw 12 countries enter for the first time.
European cartographers were being kept busy and the reshaping of an old continent would have long term consequences for the national team.
For now, however, Brown got a group that although not without danger looked manageable, especially with the finals doubling in size from an elite eight teams to a more egalitarian 16.
Russia and Greece came from the top two pots of seeds with Finland, Faroe Islands and San Marino plucked from the three below Scotland in pot 3.
A 2-0 win in Finland gave Scotland the best possible start and, while a defeat in Greece wasn't ideal, two draws with Russia kept the pressure on.
When Greece came to Hampden in August 1995, Scotland needed a hero.
We found one in Ally McCoist. Coming on as substitute with less than 20 minutes to go McCoist scored with a header - his first touch in international football since breaking his leg in Portugal - to give Scotland a 1-0 win.
For me the night began with a Yorkshireman getting lost in Falkirk and ended with a friend falling out the back of a Transit van in the grounds of the private hospital at Murrayfield.
Somewhere along the way I’d been at Hampden as Scotland had seized the momentum. We closed out the group behind the Russians with an impressive enough points tally to qualify as one of the best runners up and, no doubt to Brown's great pleasure, the second best defensive record in the competition.
Football, we were told, was coming home. Craig Brown's Scotland were going to gatecrash.
The draw delivered a crackerjack. The Netherlands were perennial opponents, we'd had some recent history with Switzerland. And then there was England.
The first clash against the Auld Enemy for 16 years would be at Wembley in the finals of the European Championship.
Did we just accept that at the time? Or did we question if a corporate sponsor had been "heating" the balls before the draw was made?
Maybe in our excitement we didn't think about it or maybe we were less cynical in those days. Euro 96 was, after all, the first "modern" European Championship, marketed within an inch of its life and setting the template for all that's gone since.
Certainly we probably saw a group that was tough but not insurmountable and one that practically gave Scotland home advantage.
England and Switzerland got the group - and the tournament - underway with an uninspiring 1-1 draw at Wembley.
Two days later Scotland and the Netherlands matched them with an uninspiring goalless draw at Villa Park.
The proximity of the tournament, Scotland's involvement and the fawning of the English press has put a sheen on Euro 96 that has never been justified - too much of the football was as uninspiring as these two games.
Not that Scotland cared. They'd stifled the Dutch - at one stage with a blatant yet somehow unnoticed John Collins handball - and if they lacked creativity themselves they had at least weathered the storm and emerged with a point.
We've had worse starts to tournaments.
I was on some sort of course at Stirling University with school when we played the Dutch. I can't remember much about the course but I do remember we were not flavour of the month when it was discovered a group of us had decanted to the pub to cheer every last stubborn, resolute Scottish tackle. Late night choruses of Rod Stewart's Purple Heather kept us in the doghouse for the rest of the week.
So to the big one.
England v Scotland. Wembley. 15th June 1996.
On the morning of the game an IRA bomb exploded in Manchester city centre. 212 people were injured - there were no fatalities - and a shadow was cast over England’s summer of sport.
Aware as we all were of events in the north of England, the show went on. I seem to remember a spectacularly long build up to the 3pm kick off.
In Scotland we got to relive the Wembley win of 1967, the joy of Jim Baxter in his pomp. It's possible the English build up might even have mentioned 1966.
On a sunny day barbecues sizzled, beers were downed and nerves grew.
Those two unispiring draws were indicative. England huffed and puffed. Scotland matched each huff and each puff.
0-0 at half time. Still anyone's game.
Stuart Pearce was withdrawn at half time and England manager Terry Venables replaced him with Jamie Redknapp.
That improved England's shape after a first half that saw Gary McAllister, John Collins and Stuart McCall dominate the midfield. Less than ten minutes into the second half Scotland were a goal down.
Gary Neville crossed, Alan Shearer met the cross. 1-0. A typical Shearer goal.
But Scotland weren't done. David Seaman saved well from a Gordon Durie header and, when Durie was brought down, the goalkeeper found himself facing a Gary McAllister penalty.
Do you need reminded of the rest? The ball moved, McAllister kept going, Seaman saved, England broke, Gazza flicked, Hendry slipped, Gazza scored.
It went something like that. The penalty was too much for me so I took to the garden. The disturbing lack of cheers suggested McAllister had missed. When I got back inside Scotland were two down.
It had taken the power of Shearer and the genius of Gascoigne to break Scotland and raise England from their torpor.
From ringleader of England's drunken bums, Gazza was once more celebrated as England's clown prince. The tabloids even apologised to him.
Gary McAllister has said that the moments after that penalty was awarded forever damaged him in the eyes of the Tartan Army. I'm not sure that’s true - I'd blame Brown's selection policy a couple of years down the line for any abuse McAllister received - but it's a shame he feels like that.
The ball moving - Seaman also moved - was a freak occurrence in a moment of huge pressure. McAllister and Scotland got unlucky, England got lucky and Gazza had the brilliance to capitalise.
Such is football.
With England falling in love with Gazza all over again Scotland were sent homeward via Villa Park and a meeting with Switzerland that could yet see them into the next round.
Scotland had to win, hope England could beat the Dutch and try and ensure goal difference worked in our favour.
We came so very close.
With a goal chase on the cards Brown gave Ally McCoist a start and, with the midfield again running the show, the striker twice had chances to put Scotland ahead.
It took him 36 minutes to do just that with a fine effort from outside the box.
Scotland were on their way. And so too were England. As Venables' side found their rhythm they took an unlikely 4-0 goal lead over the Dutch.
Scotland toiled to add to their solitary goal but that didn't matter - a 1-0 win coupled with a 4-0 win for England would be enough to get Scotland through.
And then Patrick Kluivert came off the bench. And then he scored.
And that was that. The Dutch consolation goal 12 minutes from time was enough to tip the goal difference balance in their favour and Scotland were unable to find a response.
Agonisingly close margins.
Admittedly relying on England to cuff the Dutch was never the most secure of plans and Scotland, with everything on the line, should have been able to find another way past the Swiss.
But it was so, so close. A somewhat shamefaced Dutch side realised they'd done enough while being humiliated by England and Scotland were once again left to ponder what might have been.
A win, a draw, just the one goal scored.
It wasn't earth shattering form.
But it was so nearly enough...
As it was our experience of European Championship finals reads six games played with two wins, a draw and three losses. Four goals scored and five conceded with Scotland drawing a blank in four games.
Much like our World Cup record: when we got there we didn't really know how to stay there.
Manager: Craig Brown
Andy Goram, age 33, 35 caps (Rangers)
Jim Leighton, age 37, 74 caps (Hibs)
Nicky Walker, age 33, 2 caps (Partick Thistle)
Tom Boyd, age 30, 34 caps (Celtic)
Colin Calderwood, age 31, 10 caps (Tottenham Hotspur)
Colin Hendry, age 30, 17 caps (Blackburn Rovers)
Stewart McKimmie, age 33, 37 caps (Aberdeen)
Tosh McKinlay, age 31, 3 caps (Celtic)
Derek Whyte, age 27, 9 caps (Middlesbrough)
Craig Burley, age 24, 8 caps (Chelsea)
John Collins, age 28, 32 caps (Celtic)
Scot Gemmill, age 25, 6 caps (Nottingham Forest)
Eoin Jess, age 25, 11 caps (Coventry City)
Stuart McCall, age 31, 33 caps (Rangers)
Gary McAllister, age 31, 40 caps (Leeds United)
Billy McKinlay, age 27, 17 caps (Blackburn Rovers)
Scott Booth, age 24, 11 caps (Aberdeen)
Gordon Durie, age 30, 28 caps (Rangers)
Kevin Gallacher, age 29, 21 caps (Blackburn Rovers)
Ally McCoist, age 33, 51 caps (Rangers)
Darren Jackson, age 29, 12 caps (Hibs)
John Spencer, age 25, 8 caps (Chelsea)
Sadly his next trick was to bring to an end the proud World Cup qualification run.
Worse was to follow on the road as Scotland were destroyed 5-0 by Portugal in a game that saw Ally McCoist break his leg and Gough call time on his international career after a fight with the manager.
Perfunctory wins over group minnows Estonia and Malta coupled with home draws with Switzerland, Portugal and group winners Italy took Scotland to 11 points but that was only enough for fourth place, four points behind the second placed Swiss.
The SFA's Jim Farry announced that he was standing behind Roxburgh but the manager himself decided he’d had enough of standing in front of Farry and Craig Brown took over as caretaker manager for the final two group games.
Scotland found themselves at a crossroads.
Qualifying for World Cups was what we did. It was all we did. If we didn't qualify we had nothing. And, as the rain fell that night in Portugal, it really did look like whatever we had was slipping away.
The SFA needed a charismatic, popular, inspirational manager to plot a new course.
Unable to find one they gave the job to Craig Brown permanently, the reasoning perhaps being that there was nothing so broke that Brown's reasonableness and experience at the side of Roxburgh wouldn't be able to fix it.
He knew exactly what he had to do. International tournament football was returning to England for the first time in 30 years in the summer of 1996. Brown had to make sure that Scotland didn't miss out this time.
Qualification for Euro 96 (the abbreviated title was officially used for the first time here, coined either by David Baddiel or someone who worked for Coca-Cola) saw 12 countries enter for the first time.
European cartographers were being kept busy and the reshaping of an old continent would have long term consequences for the national team.
For now, however, Brown got a group that although not without danger looked manageable, especially with the finals doubling in size from an elite eight teams to a more egalitarian 16.
Russia and Greece came from the top two pots of seeds with Finland, Faroe Islands and San Marino plucked from the three below Scotland in pot 3.
A 2-0 win in Finland gave Scotland the best possible start and, while a defeat in Greece wasn't ideal, two draws with Russia kept the pressure on.
When Greece came to Hampden in August 1995, Scotland needed a hero.
We found one in Ally McCoist. Coming on as substitute with less than 20 minutes to go McCoist scored with a header - his first touch in international football since breaking his leg in Portugal - to give Scotland a 1-0 win.
For me the night began with a Yorkshireman getting lost in Falkirk and ended with a friend falling out the back of a Transit van in the grounds of the private hospital at Murrayfield.
Somewhere along the way I’d been at Hampden as Scotland had seized the momentum. We closed out the group behind the Russians with an impressive enough points tally to qualify as one of the best runners up and, no doubt to Brown's great pleasure, the second best defensive record in the competition.
Football, we were told, was coming home. Craig Brown's Scotland were going to gatecrash.
The draw delivered a crackerjack. The Netherlands were perennial opponents, we'd had some recent history with Switzerland. And then there was England.
The first clash against the Auld Enemy for 16 years would be at Wembley in the finals of the European Championship.
Did we just accept that at the time? Or did we question if a corporate sponsor had been "heating" the balls before the draw was made?
Maybe in our excitement we didn't think about it or maybe we were less cynical in those days. Euro 96 was, after all, the first "modern" European Championship, marketed within an inch of its life and setting the template for all that's gone since.
Certainly we probably saw a group that was tough but not insurmountable and one that practically gave Scotland home advantage.
England and Switzerland got the group - and the tournament - underway with an uninspiring 1-1 draw at Wembley.
Two days later Scotland and the Netherlands matched them with an uninspiring goalless draw at Villa Park.
The proximity of the tournament, Scotland's involvement and the fawning of the English press has put a sheen on Euro 96 that has never been justified - too much of the football was as uninspiring as these two games.
Not that Scotland cared. They'd stifled the Dutch - at one stage with a blatant yet somehow unnoticed John Collins handball - and if they lacked creativity themselves they had at least weathered the storm and emerged with a point.
We've had worse starts to tournaments.
I was on some sort of course at Stirling University with school when we played the Dutch. I can't remember much about the course but I do remember we were not flavour of the month when it was discovered a group of us had decanted to the pub to cheer every last stubborn, resolute Scottish tackle. Late night choruses of Rod Stewart's Purple Heather kept us in the doghouse for the rest of the week.
So to the big one.
England v Scotland. Wembley. 15th June 1996.
On the morning of the game an IRA bomb exploded in Manchester city centre. 212 people were injured - there were no fatalities - and a shadow was cast over England’s summer of sport.
Aware as we all were of events in the north of England, the show went on. I seem to remember a spectacularly long build up to the 3pm kick off.
In Scotland we got to relive the Wembley win of 1967, the joy of Jim Baxter in his pomp. It's possible the English build up might even have mentioned 1966.
On a sunny day barbecues sizzled, beers were downed and nerves grew.
Those two unispiring draws were indicative. England huffed and puffed. Scotland matched each huff and each puff.
0-0 at half time. Still anyone's game.
Stuart Pearce was withdrawn at half time and England manager Terry Venables replaced him with Jamie Redknapp.
That improved England's shape after a first half that saw Gary McAllister, John Collins and Stuart McCall dominate the midfield. Less than ten minutes into the second half Scotland were a goal down.
Gary Neville crossed, Alan Shearer met the cross. 1-0. A typical Shearer goal.
But Scotland weren't done. David Seaman saved well from a Gordon Durie header and, when Durie was brought down, the goalkeeper found himself facing a Gary McAllister penalty.
Do you need reminded of the rest? The ball moved, McAllister kept going, Seaman saved, England broke, Gazza flicked, Hendry slipped, Gazza scored.
It went something like that. The penalty was too much for me so I took to the garden. The disturbing lack of cheers suggested McAllister had missed. When I got back inside Scotland were two down.
It had taken the power of Shearer and the genius of Gascoigne to break Scotland and raise England from their torpor.
From ringleader of England's drunken bums, Gazza was once more celebrated as England's clown prince. The tabloids even apologised to him.
Gary McAllister has said that the moments after that penalty was awarded forever damaged him in the eyes of the Tartan Army. I'm not sure that’s true - I'd blame Brown's selection policy a couple of years down the line for any abuse McAllister received - but it's a shame he feels like that.
The ball moving - Seaman also moved - was a freak occurrence in a moment of huge pressure. McAllister and Scotland got unlucky, England got lucky and Gazza had the brilliance to capitalise.
Such is football.
With England falling in love with Gazza all over again Scotland were sent homeward via Villa Park and a meeting with Switzerland that could yet see them into the next round.
Scotland had to win, hope England could beat the Dutch and try and ensure goal difference worked in our favour.
We came so very close.
With a goal chase on the cards Brown gave Ally McCoist a start and, with the midfield again running the show, the striker twice had chances to put Scotland ahead.
It took him 36 minutes to do just that with a fine effort from outside the box.
Scotland were on their way. And so too were England. As Venables' side found their rhythm they took an unlikely 4-0 goal lead over the Dutch.
Scotland toiled to add to their solitary goal but that didn't matter - a 1-0 win coupled with a 4-0 win for England would be enough to get Scotland through.
And then Patrick Kluivert came off the bench. And then he scored.
And that was that. The Dutch consolation goal 12 minutes from time was enough to tip the goal difference balance in their favour and Scotland were unable to find a response.
Agonisingly close margins.
Admittedly relying on England to cuff the Dutch was never the most secure of plans and Scotland, with everything on the line, should have been able to find another way past the Swiss.
But it was so, so close. A somewhat shamefaced Dutch side realised they'd done enough while being humiliated by England and Scotland were once again left to ponder what might have been.
A win, a draw, just the one goal scored.
It wasn't earth shattering form.
But it was so nearly enough...
As it was our experience of European Championship finals reads six games played with two wins, a draw and three losses. Four goals scored and five conceded with Scotland drawing a blank in four games.
Much like our World Cup record: when we got there we didn't really know how to stay there.
Scotland's Euro 96 squad
Manager: Craig Brown
Andy Goram, age 33, 35 caps (Rangers)
Jim Leighton, age 37, 74 caps (Hibs)
Nicky Walker, age 33, 2 caps (Partick Thistle)
Tom Boyd, age 30, 34 caps (Celtic)
Colin Calderwood, age 31, 10 caps (Tottenham Hotspur)
Colin Hendry, age 30, 17 caps (Blackburn Rovers)
Stewart McKimmie, age 33, 37 caps (Aberdeen)
Tosh McKinlay, age 31, 3 caps (Celtic)
Derek Whyte, age 27, 9 caps (Middlesbrough)
Craig Burley, age 24, 8 caps (Chelsea)
John Collins, age 28, 32 caps (Celtic)
Scot Gemmill, age 25, 6 caps (Nottingham Forest)
Eoin Jess, age 25, 11 caps (Coventry City)
Stuart McCall, age 31, 33 caps (Rangers)
Gary McAllister, age 31, 40 caps (Leeds United)
Billy McKinlay, age 27, 17 caps (Blackburn Rovers)
Scott Booth, age 24, 11 caps (Aberdeen)
Gordon Durie, age 30, 28 caps (Rangers)
Kevin Gallacher, age 29, 21 caps (Blackburn Rovers)
Ally McCoist, age 33, 51 caps (Rangers)
Darren Jackson, age 29, 12 caps (Hibs)
John Spencer, age 25, 8 caps (Chelsea)
- Average was just under 30, although only Collins, Booth and Gallacher were under 30 in the starting XI v Netherland, Collins and Spencer v England and Collins and Burley v Switzerland
- Scotland's warm up fixtures included a 2-1 defeat to the USA. We might take that now.
- Ally McCoist's goal against Switzerland was his first in eight appearances in the finals of a major tournament (1990 World Cup, 1992 European Championship, 1996 European Championship)
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Rangers: Enemies at the gate
Ally McCoist is annoyed.
Mark Hateley is annoyed.
The Rangers supporters are so annoyed that they've reached a hysteric stage of fandemonium.
Yes, there's been a lot of rage flying around Scottish football this week. Most of it emanating from an enfeebled Ibrox.
An SFA Judicial Panel, basing their decisions on the evidence provided by an independent inquiry, went after Rangers in a big way.
Some of the financial punishments dished out were the maximum allowed in the SFA's own guidance.
The additional punishment of a 12 month transfer embargo stopped short of the maximum sanction - expelling the club from the SFA - but it remained surprisingly punitive.
The sanctions were aimed at both Craig Whyte - banned for life from any involvement in Scottish football - and Rangers, the club he has helped on the road to ruin.
One of the things that so annoyed McCoist was that Rangers were punished alongside Whyte.
In these things the club and the owner - and Whyte is still, to the best of anyone's knowledge, Rangers' biggest shareholder and the man with the keys to both Ibrox and Murray Park - are indistinguishable.
That's a hardship for the club but a reality. It's how these things work.
McCoist is naive and disingenuous to believe otherwise. Apart from anything else Rangers enjoyed an artificial advantage because the club - even if this was at the sole direction of Whyte - were able to sign, retain, pay and play players by completely bumping the tax man.
Not only should the club be punished for that but a transfer embargo actually seems a reasonable enough fit for the crime in question.
You can be sure that if - or when - UEFA come sniffing around this particular mess they won’t make the distinction between fly-by-Whyte and Rangers and they’d not look kindly on the SFA's panel making the distinction.
McCoist, Hateley and many fans have also argued with a certain vehemence that the Judicial Panel issued the punishments with a complete disregard for the future wellbeing of Rangers or the Scottish game.
Which is exactly as it should be.
The remit of this investigation into the gross mismanagement of a football club could not and should not have been:
"Go easy lads, Rangers are in a bit of a fix."
Doesn't work like that.
I can accept that these SFA sanctions don't help Rangers and that it would be easier if both the SFA and the SPL were able to deliver verdicts and punishments simultaneously, rather than this gradual drip-drip of bad news, of Rangers driven to financial insanity by a Chinese water torture of fines and sanctions.
But such is the football environment that Rangers helped create. And, on these particular charges, it wasn't for the panel to make life easier for Rangers or for potential new owners like Bill Miller or Paul Murray's Blue Knights.
The SFA, and any disciplinary procedures it has, should serve the game, not serve Ally McCoist, Rangers' administrators or the Rangers Supporters Trust.
But, say some, whither the SFA when Craig Whyte took the reigns?
An absurd revisionist history is growing up that suggests the SFA could and should have stopped Whyte from taking over.
It's true that the SFA's fit and proper procedures are shambolic, setting an honesty threshold that would shame a bad online dating site.
But the SFA can't stop someone buying shares. Whyte - encouraged by the warm backing of Rangers supporters - wanted to buy the club, Sir David Murray and Lloyds TSB were absolutely desperate to get a financial Titanic off their hands.
Even if they'd raised objections the SFA would have been powerless to stop Whyte paying his pound and installing someone like Gary Withey as chairman and perhaps someone from Duff & Phelps as company secretary.
And, you know, if they'd done that at the time I'm fairly certain that a number of Rangers fans would have lost their heads over unfair interference in the commercial interests of their club.
So Ally McCoist is wrong. And those who have backed his stance are wrong.
The Judicial Panel acted within their remit and handed out a punishment that was certainly remarkably stringent but quite within their power.
As is correct Rangers, who were represented at the hearing, will have a right to appeal.
That is how the SFA's disciplinary procedures work. It was the system voted on unanimously by all clubs - including Rangers - just last summer. A new process that, at the time, appeared to create an unusual but welcome unity and cohesion in the Scottish game.
And it was a system that had the anonymity of panel members at its heart. A mechanism required, we must concede, because of the schism in Glasgow football. An assurance that the game remained governable.
If I'm allowed to jump on the bandwagon of rage, what's left me seething is the way that McCoist, egged on by cheerleaders in the press, has decided that it's a process that's not fit for purpose if it delivers a verdict that Rangers don't agree with.
I'll accept that it was nothing but anger that led McCoist to call for the anonymity of the three panel members to be lifted.
Anger at the predicament his club finds itself in, frustrated rage at the dying of the Ibrox light, at the realisation that this is a club which, even if they had the money, simply cannot buy a break at the moment.
An anger that led him to a moment of gross irresponsibility, an unreasonable demand supported by a sneering and misguided dig at the independence of the panel.
It didn't take too long for his words to have an impact.
The names were posted across the internet, the police raised concerns about the safety of the three men, the SFA issued the following statement:
Mark even names the three members of the panel. Proving that where Twitter leads the Record’s nutters will follow.
The Telegraph pitched in with an odd Roddy Forsyth article that not only named the men but apparently felt the need to offer up some sort of half hearted attack on their suitability for the job.
I would agree that there should have been more transparency. The reasons for the decision should have been delivered at the same time as the judgements.
But there was no need to name names. No need to essentially destroy a new disciplinary system before it had been properly evaluated.
No need to make it even more difficult for the game to attract knowledge and expertise from across society - the sort of people we need to clear up myriad messes caused by the "football men" that Hateley seems to think should be left in glorious isolation to ruin the game as they see fit.
No need to take Scottish football another step on this destructive path, this hysterical belief that if you don't agree with something you're perfectly within your rights to leave the game all but ungovernable.
All of which could have been avoided if McCoist had slowed down, taken a breath and, if he didn't already know, asked a colleague who was on the panel.
He chose not to, jumping instead on his soapbox for a bit of rabble rousing.
Maybe he thought the fans needed a rallying cry, maybe he thought there was danger of administration fatigue setting in and an injection of passion was required.
Maybe, and this is the worst possible scenario, he thought that such callous treatment of the original panel would ensure that an appeals panel would be fearful enough to treat Rangers leniently.
Maybe he wasn't thinking at all.
Whatever the reason, his misjudgement was huge.
What now?
Rangers will appeal.
I don't think the SFA should agree to hold that appeal before they've properly investigated any disciplinary issues that need to be addressed following McCoist's comments.
I don’t think they should agree to an appeal until after they have properly investigated who leaked the names of the original panel.
Those issues need to be resolved because there are those - inside Ibrox, in the press and in the Rangers support - who have gone out of their way to ensure that an appeal cannot be held without “fear or favour.”
If these things are not addressed then each individual on the SFA’s list of potential panellist must surely consider disengaging from the organisation and refusing to sit in judgement of an appeal hearing.
If that prolongs Rangers' agony then so be it. The SFA need to show a commitment to their own procedures and their own panels before they commit to the future of one club. And Rangers won’t need to look far to apportion blame for any delay in the process.
Would the end of Rangers also kill Scottish football? Possibly. But almost certainly not.
Still Rangers people - supporters and those within the club - seem to think they qualify for special treatment, that they are above normal standards because they “are” Rangers, that they can bully and threaten now because if Scottish football doesn’t do what Rangers want then Rangers will make Scottish football pay at some unspecified date when the club is not a financial basket case.
"The whole world's agin us, but we will rise and smite our enemies."
It’s a position that relies on the brassiest of brass necks and a tenuous grasp of just how deep in the mire Rangers find themselves.
I’ve said before that a little humility would go a long way. This week it was sadly lacking as McCoist flew off the handle, as Hateley launched his rant or as Sandy Jardine promised "sanctions" against those teams who don't respect Rangers the way they should.
They are doing their club no favours.
Faced with this kind of backlash it’s hard not think that the other clubs should just take the risk and give them no special treatment at all.
Maybe, as the Gurkha motto has it, it's better to die than to be a coward.
The sad thing about this week, and the long-term damage it might still do to the governance of the Scottish game, is that it's all something of a storm in a teacup.
Maybe a welcome one for Duff & Phelps, those beleaguered administrators at Ibrox, a deflection from their own travails.
Four days on from the deadline they set we still wait patiently for the announcement of a preferred bidder.
And wait and wait and wait.
Where do we stand?
Who knows? The longer it drags on the more convinced I am that Bill Miller's interest will fizzle out and that Paul Murray's Blue Knights can't gather the cash they need to satisfy the requirements of the administrators.
A sorry mess and one that must now mean liquidation is the by some distance the most likely outcome.
The Judicial Panel's appeal hasn't changed that one way or another. I doubt it will even speed up or slow down a process that is now surely geared to simply getting Rangers to the end of the SPL season.
Given the way a number of people have behaved this week it's likely that any sympathy for that predicament has sharply receded.
Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.
Mark Hateley is annoyed.
The Rangers supporters are so annoyed that they've reached a hysteric stage of fandemonium.
Yes, there's been a lot of rage flying around Scottish football this week. Most of it emanating from an enfeebled Ibrox.
An SFA Judicial Panel, basing their decisions on the evidence provided by an independent inquiry, went after Rangers in a big way.
Some of the financial punishments dished out were the maximum allowed in the SFA's own guidance.
The additional punishment of a 12 month transfer embargo stopped short of the maximum sanction - expelling the club from the SFA - but it remained surprisingly punitive.
The sanctions were aimed at both Craig Whyte - banned for life from any involvement in Scottish football - and Rangers, the club he has helped on the road to ruin.
One of the things that so annoyed McCoist was that Rangers were punished alongside Whyte.
In these things the club and the owner - and Whyte is still, to the best of anyone's knowledge, Rangers' biggest shareholder and the man with the keys to both Ibrox and Murray Park - are indistinguishable.
That's a hardship for the club but a reality. It's how these things work.
McCoist is naive and disingenuous to believe otherwise. Apart from anything else Rangers enjoyed an artificial advantage because the club - even if this was at the sole direction of Whyte - were able to sign, retain, pay and play players by completely bumping the tax man.
Not only should the club be punished for that but a transfer embargo actually seems a reasonable enough fit for the crime in question.
You can be sure that if - or when - UEFA come sniffing around this particular mess they won’t make the distinction between fly-by-Whyte and Rangers and they’d not look kindly on the SFA's panel making the distinction.
McCoist, Hateley and many fans have also argued with a certain vehemence that the Judicial Panel issued the punishments with a complete disregard for the future wellbeing of Rangers or the Scottish game.
Which is exactly as it should be.
The remit of this investigation into the gross mismanagement of a football club could not and should not have been:
"Go easy lads, Rangers are in a bit of a fix."
Doesn't work like that.
I can accept that these SFA sanctions don't help Rangers and that it would be easier if both the SFA and the SPL were able to deliver verdicts and punishments simultaneously, rather than this gradual drip-drip of bad news, of Rangers driven to financial insanity by a Chinese water torture of fines and sanctions.
But such is the football environment that Rangers helped create. And, on these particular charges, it wasn't for the panel to make life easier for Rangers or for potential new owners like Bill Miller or Paul Murray's Blue Knights.
The SFA, and any disciplinary procedures it has, should serve the game, not serve Ally McCoist, Rangers' administrators or the Rangers Supporters Trust.
But, say some, whither the SFA when Craig Whyte took the reigns?
An absurd revisionist history is growing up that suggests the SFA could and should have stopped Whyte from taking over.
It's true that the SFA's fit and proper procedures are shambolic, setting an honesty threshold that would shame a bad online dating site.
But the SFA can't stop someone buying shares. Whyte - encouraged by the warm backing of Rangers supporters - wanted to buy the club, Sir David Murray and Lloyds TSB were absolutely desperate to get a financial Titanic off their hands.
Even if they'd raised objections the SFA would have been powerless to stop Whyte paying his pound and installing someone like Gary Withey as chairman and perhaps someone from Duff & Phelps as company secretary.
And, you know, if they'd done that at the time I'm fairly certain that a number of Rangers fans would have lost their heads over unfair interference in the commercial interests of their club.
So Ally McCoist is wrong. And those who have backed his stance are wrong.
The Judicial Panel acted within their remit and handed out a punishment that was certainly remarkably stringent but quite within their power.
As is correct Rangers, who were represented at the hearing, will have a right to appeal.
That is how the SFA's disciplinary procedures work. It was the system voted on unanimously by all clubs - including Rangers - just last summer. A new process that, at the time, appeared to create an unusual but welcome unity and cohesion in the Scottish game.
And it was a system that had the anonymity of panel members at its heart. A mechanism required, we must concede, because of the schism in Glasgow football. An assurance that the game remained governable.
If I'm allowed to jump on the bandwagon of rage, what's left me seething is the way that McCoist, egged on by cheerleaders in the press, has decided that it's a process that's not fit for purpose if it delivers a verdict that Rangers don't agree with.
I'll accept that it was nothing but anger that led McCoist to call for the anonymity of the three panel members to be lifted.
Anger at the predicament his club finds itself in, frustrated rage at the dying of the Ibrox light, at the realisation that this is a club which, even if they had the money, simply cannot buy a break at the moment.
An anger that led him to a moment of gross irresponsibility, an unreasonable demand supported by a sneering and misguided dig at the independence of the panel.
It didn't take too long for his words to have an impact.
The names were posted across the internet, the police raised concerns about the safety of the three men, the SFA issued the following statement:
"The Judicial Panel consists of volunteers from across the spectrum of sport and business in Scotland. They are appointed on the basis of anonymity yet all three panel members have reported intrusion into their personal and work lives, including abusive and threatening communication.A couple of weeks ago the Daily Record’s Jim Traynor was ruminating on the awfulness of Twitter:
"This has been extended to directors of the Scottish FA, whose private details have been published on internet sites and who have, themselves, been victims of abusive communication.
"This culminated tonight in a visit by Strathclyde Police, who are taking seriously the threats made towards the individuals involved. We are thankful for their advice and support in these matters."
“Too many halfwits with twisted agendas are attracted to these sites but if these very platforms allow people to let off steam and expound their half-baked theories they probably are of some use to the rest of society. They probably cut down on the number of nutters roaming the streets muttering to themselves.”That was very good of Jim. Because it offers a wonderfully lucid description of the “half baked” rant that passes for Mark Hateley’s column in today’s Record.
Mark even names the three members of the panel. Proving that where Twitter leads the Record’s nutters will follow.
The Telegraph pitched in with an odd Roddy Forsyth article that not only named the men but apparently felt the need to offer up some sort of half hearted attack on their suitability for the job.
I would agree that there should have been more transparency. The reasons for the decision should have been delivered at the same time as the judgements.
But there was no need to name names. No need to essentially destroy a new disciplinary system before it had been properly evaluated.
No need to make it even more difficult for the game to attract knowledge and expertise from across society - the sort of people we need to clear up myriad messes caused by the "football men" that Hateley seems to think should be left in glorious isolation to ruin the game as they see fit.
No need to take Scottish football another step on this destructive path, this hysterical belief that if you don't agree with something you're perfectly within your rights to leave the game all but ungovernable.
All of which could have been avoided if McCoist had slowed down, taken a breath and, if he didn't already know, asked a colleague who was on the panel.
He chose not to, jumping instead on his soapbox for a bit of rabble rousing.
Maybe he thought the fans needed a rallying cry, maybe he thought there was danger of administration fatigue setting in and an injection of passion was required.
Maybe, and this is the worst possible scenario, he thought that such callous treatment of the original panel would ensure that an appeals panel would be fearful enough to treat Rangers leniently.
Maybe he wasn't thinking at all.
Whatever the reason, his misjudgement was huge.
What now?
Rangers will appeal.
I don't think the SFA should agree to hold that appeal before they've properly investigated any disciplinary issues that need to be addressed following McCoist's comments.
I don’t think they should agree to an appeal until after they have properly investigated who leaked the names of the original panel.
Those issues need to be resolved because there are those - inside Ibrox, in the press and in the Rangers support - who have gone out of their way to ensure that an appeal cannot be held without “fear or favour.”
If these things are not addressed then each individual on the SFA’s list of potential panellist must surely consider disengaging from the organisation and refusing to sit in judgement of an appeal hearing.
If that prolongs Rangers' agony then so be it. The SFA need to show a commitment to their own procedures and their own panels before they commit to the future of one club. And Rangers won’t need to look far to apportion blame for any delay in the process.
Would the end of Rangers also kill Scottish football? Possibly. But almost certainly not.
Still Rangers people - supporters and those within the club - seem to think they qualify for special treatment, that they are above normal standards because they “are” Rangers, that they can bully and threaten now because if Scottish football doesn’t do what Rangers want then Rangers will make Scottish football pay at some unspecified date when the club is not a financial basket case.
"The whole world's agin us, but we will rise and smite our enemies."
It’s a position that relies on the brassiest of brass necks and a tenuous grasp of just how deep in the mire Rangers find themselves.
I’ve said before that a little humility would go a long way. This week it was sadly lacking as McCoist flew off the handle, as Hateley launched his rant or as Sandy Jardine promised "sanctions" against those teams who don't respect Rangers the way they should.
They are doing their club no favours.
Faced with this kind of backlash it’s hard not think that the other clubs should just take the risk and give them no special treatment at all.
Maybe, as the Gurkha motto has it, it's better to die than to be a coward.
The sad thing about this week, and the long-term damage it might still do to the governance of the Scottish game, is that it's all something of a storm in a teacup.
Maybe a welcome one for Duff & Phelps, those beleaguered administrators at Ibrox, a deflection from their own travails.
Four days on from the deadline they set we still wait patiently for the announcement of a preferred bidder.
And wait and wait and wait.
Where do we stand?
Who knows? The longer it drags on the more convinced I am that Bill Miller's interest will fizzle out and that Paul Murray's Blue Knights can't gather the cash they need to satisfy the requirements of the administrators.
A sorry mess and one that must now mean liquidation is the by some distance the most likely outcome.
The Judicial Panel's appeal hasn't changed that one way or another. I doubt it will even speed up or slow down a process that is now surely geared to simply getting Rangers to the end of the SPL season.
Given the way a number of people have behaved this week it's likely that any sympathy for that predicament has sharply receded.
Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Justice takes a break
So Lee McCulloch is free to play for Rangers tonight.
How can that be? Wasn't he red carded against St Mirren on Saturday?
That he was. For flinging an elbow. I've seen more heinous crimes on a football pitch. But I'd also say that the red card was justified.
Opinions, of course, are like certain anatomical features. We all have them.
Ally McCoist has his: McCulloch should not have been sent off so Rangers have appealed the decision.
That's fair enough.
Complications arise though.
It's Christmas. So the SFA's much heralded fast tracked disciplinary procedure has developed a breakdown. The main players are on holiday.
McCoist is adamant that he's not playing the system, he's simply standing by his man, seeking justice for the wronged party.
Who's to doubt to his sincerity?
But it's a handy loophole and one that a touch of foresight should have closed in advance.
This isn't really about McCoist or McCulloch.
It's about the SFA realising that their processes must be active as long as games are being played. Otherwise, in an Old Firm week, they're opening themselves up to a whole lot of nonsense.
Justice, and Stewart Regan's SFA revolution, is weakened if it needs a Christmas holiday.
The Scottish Football Blog blogathon took place in November in aid of Alzheimer Scotland and the Homeless World Cup. You can still donate to help two great causes.
How can that be? Wasn't he red carded against St Mirren on Saturday?
That he was. For flinging an elbow. I've seen more heinous crimes on a football pitch. But I'd also say that the red card was justified.
Opinions, of course, are like certain anatomical features. We all have them.
Ally McCoist has his: McCulloch should not have been sent off so Rangers have appealed the decision.
That's fair enough.
Complications arise though.
It's Christmas. So the SFA's much heralded fast tracked disciplinary procedure has developed a breakdown. The main players are on holiday.
McCoist is adamant that he's not playing the system, he's simply standing by his man, seeking justice for the wronged party.
Who's to doubt to his sincerity?
But it's a handy loophole and one that a touch of foresight should have closed in advance.
This isn't really about McCoist or McCulloch.
It's about the SFA realising that their processes must be active as long as games are being played. Otherwise, in an Old Firm week, they're opening themselves up to a whole lot of nonsense.
Justice, and Stewart Regan's SFA revolution, is weakened if it needs a Christmas holiday.
The Scottish Football Blog blogathon took place in November in aid of Alzheimer Scotland and the Homeless World Cup. You can still donate to help two great causes.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
SPL Advent: Rangers
Day ten of the SPL Advent. Rangers. Dreaming of a Whyte Christmas.
Rangers offer another chance for one of these half season reviews to become more a work of financial reporting. I'll try to resist.
We know the taxman cometh, we know Craig Whyte himself rarely seems short of a battle to fight and we know that other companies and individuals have raised concerns over Rangers' financial position.
We still don't know where this particular footballing fable about the perils of avarice will end.
Partly that's because the ins-and-outs of the previous board's relationship with the taxman will not be fully aired until January.
It's also because of Mr Whyte's apparent - to this outsider at least - refusal to properly communicate.
He seems quicker to engage lawyers than engage with fans. There's been the odd platudinous interview. But - again as a detached observer - the lack of an AGM for shareholders and the apparent brittleness of his relationship with the media really only serve to shroud a complex business situation in more mystery.
Is that me being guilty of wandering off the football pitch and into the boardroom and the tax office?
Yes and no.
I'd say that Craig Whyte and his new team have presided over a succession of PR blunders that have undermined them even as they've raised the business as usual signs.
That, of course, is entirely up to him. He obviously has a disdain for the media and doesn't consider himself, his business interests or his strategy for Rangers as public property.
But it's created a vacuum that's been filled by constant speculation, supposition, rumour and the odd fact. And Rangers have often looked paralysed in the face of it.
It has helped create a constant "club in crisis" narrative. And that's unfortunate because it's a narrative that hasn't been borne out on the pitch.
There were doubts about Ally McCoist's ability and suitability. There was a strong body of opinion that this was not a season where Rangers could afford to have a novice - all be it a fairly long in the tooth novice - at the tiller.
Two European exits before the summer was frozen from memory, an early league cup defeat to Falkirk. Even the opening draw at home to Hearts.
It all added grist to the mill. McCoist the entertainer was going to turn into McCoist the managerial clown.
Right now it seems like a thousand questions about the future remain unanswered. And it's far too early to make any predictions about McCoist's likely longevity or overall success as a manager.
Yet Rangers have a four point cushion at the top of the league.
They've lost only once, conceded only nine goals, won 15 games and have the league's best goal difference.
Those statistics don't suggest a club suffering a crisis on the pitch. There have been some tight wins, some iffy performances.
Yet they remain four points clear.
That gap has narrowed. At one stage it was a twelve point cushion. But Celtic had a game in hand and were always as likely to go on a run of victories as Rangers were to drop a few points.
I have to admit that I thought Rangers were hopeless - but not lucky - in beating Hibs a couple of weeks ago. I've not seen the game but I've heard tell of a couple of big strokes of fortune helping them past Inverness at the weekend.
Performances like that contribute to the idea of a side struggling to hold itself together as their main rival become ever more buoyant. It's a funny kind of perfection we demand in an imperfect game if 19 points from the last 24 is a sign of impending doom.
Crucially, of course, in the championship waltz played out in Glasgow, Rangers have - right now - the upper hand in the head to heads.
How McCoist must have enjoyed that 4-2 win at Ibrox in September. How he'd like to repeat it next week away to a Celtic side that look more inspired than they did a couple of months ago.
So McCoist is where he is. Top of the league, a four point gap and his team still monotously winning games, even those games they don't look like winning.
Which, as far as the league is concerned, is pretty much exactly what is expected of a Rangers manager.
And yet unease seems to remain. Will players - most crucially top scorer Nikica Jelavić - be sold to help balance the books?
What will happen with the tax case? And how serious will the consequences of that case be?
Amid all this games still need to be played. Three matches between Christmas Eve and the New Year holiday. Including that trip across Glasgow.
Big questions, big stakes, big games.
All McCoist and his players can do is keep winning.
Keeping hold of their best players. A resolution to the tax case that is not punitive enough to demand further penury - or worse.
Rangers might be asking for some quite big gifts this year.
More important gifts than football?
Perhaps. But a win at Celtic Park, putting a halt to the momentum Celtic seems to have been building and extending Rangers' lead at the top of the SPL.
Well, that might just feel priceless.
The Scottish Football Blog blogathon took place in November in aid of Alzheimer Scotland and the Homeless World Cup. You can still donate to help two great causes.
Rangers offer another chance for one of these half season reviews to become more a work of financial reporting. I'll try to resist.
We know the taxman cometh, we know Craig Whyte himself rarely seems short of a battle to fight and we know that other companies and individuals have raised concerns over Rangers' financial position.
We still don't know where this particular footballing fable about the perils of avarice will end.
Partly that's because the ins-and-outs of the previous board's relationship with the taxman will not be fully aired until January.
It's also because of Mr Whyte's apparent - to this outsider at least - refusal to properly communicate.
He seems quicker to engage lawyers than engage with fans. There's been the odd platudinous interview. But - again as a detached observer - the lack of an AGM for shareholders and the apparent brittleness of his relationship with the media really only serve to shroud a complex business situation in more mystery.
Is that me being guilty of wandering off the football pitch and into the boardroom and the tax office?
Yes and no.
I'd say that Craig Whyte and his new team have presided over a succession of PR blunders that have undermined them even as they've raised the business as usual signs.
That, of course, is entirely up to him. He obviously has a disdain for the media and doesn't consider himself, his business interests or his strategy for Rangers as public property.
But it's created a vacuum that's been filled by constant speculation, supposition, rumour and the odd fact. And Rangers have often looked paralysed in the face of it.
It has helped create a constant "club in crisis" narrative. And that's unfortunate because it's a narrative that hasn't been borne out on the pitch.
There were doubts about Ally McCoist's ability and suitability. There was a strong body of opinion that this was not a season where Rangers could afford to have a novice - all be it a fairly long in the tooth novice - at the tiller.
Two European exits before the summer was frozen from memory, an early league cup defeat to Falkirk. Even the opening draw at home to Hearts.
It all added grist to the mill. McCoist the entertainer was going to turn into McCoist the managerial clown.
Right now it seems like a thousand questions about the future remain unanswered. And it's far too early to make any predictions about McCoist's likely longevity or overall success as a manager.
Yet Rangers have a four point cushion at the top of the league.
They've lost only once, conceded only nine goals, won 15 games and have the league's best goal difference.
Those statistics don't suggest a club suffering a crisis on the pitch. There have been some tight wins, some iffy performances.
Yet they remain four points clear.
That gap has narrowed. At one stage it was a twelve point cushion. But Celtic had a game in hand and were always as likely to go on a run of victories as Rangers were to drop a few points.
I have to admit that I thought Rangers were hopeless - but not lucky - in beating Hibs a couple of weeks ago. I've not seen the game but I've heard tell of a couple of big strokes of fortune helping them past Inverness at the weekend.
Performances like that contribute to the idea of a side struggling to hold itself together as their main rival become ever more buoyant. It's a funny kind of perfection we demand in an imperfect game if 19 points from the last 24 is a sign of impending doom.
Crucially, of course, in the championship waltz played out in Glasgow, Rangers have - right now - the upper hand in the head to heads.
How McCoist must have enjoyed that 4-2 win at Ibrox in September. How he'd like to repeat it next week away to a Celtic side that look more inspired than they did a couple of months ago.
So McCoist is where he is. Top of the league, a four point gap and his team still monotously winning games, even those games they don't look like winning.
Which, as far as the league is concerned, is pretty much exactly what is expected of a Rangers manager.
And yet unease seems to remain. Will players - most crucially top scorer Nikica Jelavić - be sold to help balance the books?
What will happen with the tax case? And how serious will the consequences of that case be?
Amid all this games still need to be played. Three matches between Christmas Eve and the New Year holiday. Including that trip across Glasgow.
Big questions, big stakes, big games.
All McCoist and his players can do is keep winning.
Don't look back or turn away, life can be your's if you'll only stay
Keeping hold of their best players. A resolution to the tax case that is not punitive enough to demand further penury - or worse.
Rangers might be asking for some quite big gifts this year.
More important gifts than football?
Perhaps. But a win at Celtic Park, putting a halt to the momentum Celtic seems to have been building and extending Rangers' lead at the top of the SPL.
Well, that might just feel priceless.
The Scottish Football Blog blogathon took place in November in aid of Alzheimer Scotland and the Homeless World Cup. You can still donate to help two great causes.
Thursday, August 04, 2011
Rangers: McCoist Still Deserves His Shot At Glory
Rangers crash out of the Champion's League and the chants of "Super Ally" begin to stick in the throats of the faithful.
Ridiculous in the extreme that a new manager should be judged on the basis of four games of competitive football - only one of which ended in defeat.
But life in the Old Firm is a life full of extremes and a life that's often ridiculous. Thus it seems that to question Ally McCoist's suitability as Rangers boss is fair enough and to answer that question with "he's no up to it" is perfectly acceptable.
It's a harsh verdict. But dropped points at home and a Champions League exit so early in the season are cause for concern at Ibrox.
McCoist finds himself under pressure. It's not how he would have imagined it working out, this shot at his dream job after a very modern footballing career trajectory.
The storied playing days, the television stardom and the tabloid tittle tattle. And the apprenticeship served with Walter Smith. All leading, perhaps not always obviously, to the Ibrox hot seat. A first managerial appointment at the age of 48.
Following Smith, emerging from Wattie's shadow, was never going to be easy especially when the wily old fox signed off with what seemed at times an improbable title triumph.
It's been made harder by the financial uncertainty at Ibrox and the enigmatic presence of the new owner, Craig Whyte.
A succession of apparently failed transfer bids increases the sense of uneasiness. The public pursuit of players seems to confirm McCoist's unhappiness with his squad, the failure to capture as many targets as he would have liked leads to the idea that he's struggling with what he's got.
Gordon Smith's director of football role should act as a buffer between McCoist and these transfer dramas. So far that's not happening. I seem to remember someone calling Smith two faced when he was with the SFA. It seems the masks he's chosen for his role at Rangers are anonymity and ineffectualness.
As the pressure builds it's McCoist who becomes the lightning rod for the "we're doomed" brigade among the support and the media.
Time, as we're always told, is the one thing Old Firm managers do not have.
But, along with an injection of new players, it's what McCoist and Rangers need.
My own view would be that he's - quite rightly - safe for now.
He's still searching for his managerial mojo. But Gordon Smith still appears to be searching for a definition of his new role. And Craig Whyte still seems to be searching for a strategy that will guide his stewardship of the club.
McCoist's Rangers have dropped two points in the SPL and narrowly - only narrowly despite the numerical disparity caused by Steven Whittaker's stupidity - gone out of the Champions League.
They've not "lost" the league and the Europa League remains in place as a European safety net.
It's not world beating. But nor should it be seen as a manifesto for continued failure in the role.
He might also be entitled to expect more support from within the club. The saga that was the failed attempt to sign David Goodwillie stank of incompetence. Seven failed bids and then a cackhanded attempt to brief against the Dundee United board didn't cover Rangers in glory or inspire confidence.
Blackburn signed Goodwillie and Rangers were left with only a very public distraction in the build up to the Malmo game, a squad no stronger than when they started and questions continuing to swirl about their commitment to pulling off big transfers.
It's difficult to pin too much of the blame on McCoist for any of that. He could consider it the mother of injustices if the club were to panic over his position when others in crucial roles are also experiencing issues in adjusting to their new surroundings.
For Craig Whyte a sudden managerial vacancy would also present a further dilemma, a further need to prove his recruitment credentials. Why would he relish that at this stage of his ownership?
A pressured existence, impatient demands from all sides and unforgiving judges desperate for their chance to don the black cap and deliver their appocalyptic sentences. That's McCoist's life now and he'll accept that.
But he at least deserves more time to prove he can handle them.
Ridiculous in the extreme that a new manager should be judged on the basis of four games of competitive football - only one of which ended in defeat.
But life in the Old Firm is a life full of extremes and a life that's often ridiculous. Thus it seems that to question Ally McCoist's suitability as Rangers boss is fair enough and to answer that question with "he's no up to it" is perfectly acceptable.
It's a harsh verdict. But dropped points at home and a Champions League exit so early in the season are cause for concern at Ibrox.
McCoist finds himself under pressure. It's not how he would have imagined it working out, this shot at his dream job after a very modern footballing career trajectory.
The storied playing days, the television stardom and the tabloid tittle tattle. And the apprenticeship served with Walter Smith. All leading, perhaps not always obviously, to the Ibrox hot seat. A first managerial appointment at the age of 48.
Following Smith, emerging from Wattie's shadow, was never going to be easy especially when the wily old fox signed off with what seemed at times an improbable title triumph.
It's been made harder by the financial uncertainty at Ibrox and the enigmatic presence of the new owner, Craig Whyte.
A succession of apparently failed transfer bids increases the sense of uneasiness. The public pursuit of players seems to confirm McCoist's unhappiness with his squad, the failure to capture as many targets as he would have liked leads to the idea that he's struggling with what he's got.
Gordon Smith's director of football role should act as a buffer between McCoist and these transfer dramas. So far that's not happening. I seem to remember someone calling Smith two faced when he was with the SFA. It seems the masks he's chosen for his role at Rangers are anonymity and ineffectualness.
As the pressure builds it's McCoist who becomes the lightning rod for the "we're doomed" brigade among the support and the media.
Time, as we're always told, is the one thing Old Firm managers do not have.
But, along with an injection of new players, it's what McCoist and Rangers need.
My own view would be that he's - quite rightly - safe for now.
He's still searching for his managerial mojo. But Gordon Smith still appears to be searching for a definition of his new role. And Craig Whyte still seems to be searching for a strategy that will guide his stewardship of the club.
McCoist's Rangers have dropped two points in the SPL and narrowly - only narrowly despite the numerical disparity caused by Steven Whittaker's stupidity - gone out of the Champions League.
They've not "lost" the league and the Europa League remains in place as a European safety net.
It's not world beating. But nor should it be seen as a manifesto for continued failure in the role.
He might also be entitled to expect more support from within the club. The saga that was the failed attempt to sign David Goodwillie stank of incompetence. Seven failed bids and then a cackhanded attempt to brief against the Dundee United board didn't cover Rangers in glory or inspire confidence.
Blackburn signed Goodwillie and Rangers were left with only a very public distraction in the build up to the Malmo game, a squad no stronger than when they started and questions continuing to swirl about their commitment to pulling off big transfers.
It's difficult to pin too much of the blame on McCoist for any of that. He could consider it the mother of injustices if the club were to panic over his position when others in crucial roles are also experiencing issues in adjusting to their new surroundings.
For Craig Whyte a sudden managerial vacancy would also present a further dilemma, a further need to prove his recruitment credentials. Why would he relish that at this stage of his ownership?
A pressured existence, impatient demands from all sides and unforgiving judges desperate for their chance to don the black cap and deliver their appocalyptic sentences. That's McCoist's life now and he'll accept that.
But he at least deserves more time to prove he can handle them.
Friday, July 22, 2011
SPL: Rangers v Hearts
The first of this weekend's six preview posts, starting with the first game - Rangers v Hearts. Quite a match to kick things off.
Championship flag a-flappin' in the Govan breeze Rangers have the perfect chance to dismiss as exaggerations any rumours of their footballing demise. Quite a test though against a Hearts side who will be out to show that we'd be foolish to write off their intention of taking the challenge to the Old Firm this season.
Which might lead me to predict a draw if I didn't think that habit and a sense of occassion will propel Rangers to a win.
Having waited a long time to become his own man "young" Ally McCoist must be feeling some frustration at the moment. Daddy's left him the keys to the house but not the credit card to buy any furniture.
Target upon target seems to have slipped away from McCoist, his football director Gordon Smith and new owner Craig Whyte.
At the time of writing only Juan Manuel Ortiz, Lee Wallace and (just about confirmed) Alejandro Bedoya have arrived.
They could be whoppingly magnficent signings - Scotland fans will hope so in the case of Wallace at least - but they don't at first glance appear to provide the solutions to the questions that hung over the squad even in their moment of triumph last season.
Certainly they don't seem to offer the statement of intent that other rumoured targets who have, reportedly, fallen by the wayside might have done.
On the other hand a number of key players have signed long term deals to provide McCoist with a sense of stability.
But right now Rangers put me in mind of that well known raconteur and good time guy Donald Rumsfeld. Everywhere you look there an known unknowns and unknown unknowns.
We think we know McCoist but we've no idea how he will react to the top job, to the removal of Walter Smith's wise, protective embrace.
And how will the players, so many of whom worked under Smith and know McCoist as assistant and coach, react to him? What will they feel if they disagree ever so slightly with his way of doing things and then find results going a bit awry? We don't know.
More signings, ambitous signings, money to burn? We don't know.
But there is one massively important "known known." We've written Rangers off before, written them off when they've had much the same group of players and much the same coaching staff.
They have a habit of ignoring our predictions and just winning the sodding league anyway.
Declare this a powder puff title challenge before a ball is even kicked at your peril.
Still I can't help but feel that this season might be a struggle, a campaign too far.
Twitter tips: Nikica Jelavic, Steven Davis
I'm delighted to welcome back Craig Cairns, blogger extraordinaire at Three at the Back, to furnish us with this preview of the season ahead for Hearts. You can also follow Craig on Twitter.
In terms of new recruits, Jim Jefferies was the fastest out of the blocks in the SPL, quickly securing the services of Danny Grainger, John Sutton and Jamie Hamill on free transfers before the month of May was out. Zander Diamond was pursued around the same time but negotiations broke down during the former-Aberdeen defender’s medical.
The attempt to sign Diamond, and subsequent trial of Kari Arnason, suggests that Jefferies is still in the market for a central defender to cover for club-captain Marius Zaliukas, who no stranger to a suspension, and the injury-prone Andy Webster. It was mentioned during the unveiling of Grainger that if required he is an able deputy at centre-back but with Lee Wallace leaving for Ibrox, he now finds himself as the first-choice left-back.
It remains to be seen but I expect Jefferies to add to the centre of his defence, and possibly bring in more cover at full-back, before the transfer window ends.
The general feeling going into the new season is that Hearts have strengthened their squad without significantly strengthening their starting eleven. Two full-backs, a winger-cum-second striker and a striker have all been added, bulking the numbers in these positions.
Assuming a central defender is also added then the only area of the pitch that seems to have been neglected in terms of strengthening is the centre of midfield. More specifically, the defensive-midfield band of the 4-2-3-1 Jefferies seemed to favour last season. These positions were mostly filled Ian Black and Adrian Mrowiec during the 2010/11 campaign and it seems that these two will form the centre-midfield pairing when the season kicks off at Ibrox on Saturday.
On their day both are excellent SPL players. During his loan from Kaunas, Mrowiec struggled to perform and it was surprising when Jefferies offered him a permanent deal. The Pole doesn’t offer much attacking impetus but for a sizable amount of last season he offered terrific protection to the Hearts defence and was one of the reasons the side picked up seven clean sheets over a nine match period.
Black, on the other hand, is positioned slightly ahead of Mrowiec and is expected to get on the ball and create while still being expected to close down the opposition and break up attacks, even if he is over-exuberant at times in his execution (although it must be said that he himself is often subjected to reckless challenges from his opponents).
Despite their qualities both struggled towards the end of last season. It should be noted however that the team as a whole slumped and in the end hobbled over the third-place finish line, a target that at one point seemed like a stroll. There is no questioning Black’s passion and commitment, the big problem for Black is his consistency. Some of his performances at the turn of the year were man-of-the-match material; however, he has failed to hit any sort of consistency in his performance.
The lack of cover for these positions is worrying. Rudi Skacel, Scott Robinson and Mehdi Taouil, another player who arrived on a free transfer during the summer, can all play in the centre of midfield but tend to occupy the attacking central-midfield role just off the striker. Skacel is the only one of the three that seems to posses the attributes to move back a position but his future at the club remains uncertain.
Ryan Stevenson is another who can sit alongside either Black or Mrowiec but I think even he would admit that no one really knows his best position. Initially Stevenson struggled with the pace of the SPL and only made the odd appearance. During the second half of last season he was used in a number of positions and I think it is fair to say he lacked consistency in any of them. His best spell came as an auxiliary striker in the absence of Kevin Kyle once he was allowed to settle into the role. All things considered it would appear that he is more suited to a more attacking role.
This leaves Eggert Jonsson and Ryan McGowan as possible competition. Jonsson was converted to full-back under Csaba Laszlo and has since played almost every position for Hearts. The few occasions where he has been returned to his supposed natural position he has struggled. Even so, he will be required at right-back for the first two matches of the season due to Hamill’s suspension and will then be required to deputise for either of the first-choice full-backs should they find themselves out of the side for whatever reason.
McGowan’s few chances in the first team have yielded mixed reports. He first broke into the side towards the end of the disastrous 2006/07, impressed and has since undergone loan spells with Ayr United and Partick Thistle, earning favourable reports. His performances towards the end of last season left much to be desired but at 21-years-old this may be the season where he establishes himself as a first team regular.
With Skacel’s future uncertain and the likes of Stevenson and Taouil likely to be used in more advanced positions, along with the Jonsson being required at full-back and the lack of new recruits in this area of the side, this may be the time for the young Australian to make his mark at Tynecastle.
Unless Black and Mrowiec improve on their form from the tail end of last season or else McGowan reaches something near his full potential then I feel that this will be a potential weak-spot for the Hearts side in the all-too-important midfield battles they will inevitably face.
Twitter tips: Andy Webster, John Sutton, Mehdi Taouil, Rudi Skacel
The game
Championship flag a-flappin' in the Govan breeze Rangers have the perfect chance to dismiss as exaggerations any rumours of their footballing demise. Quite a test though against a Hearts side who will be out to show that we'd be foolish to write off their intention of taking the challenge to the Old Firm this season.
Which might lead me to predict a draw if I didn't think that habit and a sense of occassion will propel Rangers to a win.
Rangers
Having waited a long time to become his own man "young" Ally McCoist must be feeling some frustration at the moment. Daddy's left him the keys to the house but not the credit card to buy any furniture.
Target upon target seems to have slipped away from McCoist, his football director Gordon Smith and new owner Craig Whyte.
At the time of writing only Juan Manuel Ortiz, Lee Wallace and (just about confirmed) Alejandro Bedoya have arrived.
They could be whoppingly magnficent signings - Scotland fans will hope so in the case of Wallace at least - but they don't at first glance appear to provide the solutions to the questions that hung over the squad even in their moment of triumph last season.
Certainly they don't seem to offer the statement of intent that other rumoured targets who have, reportedly, fallen by the wayside might have done.
On the other hand a number of key players have signed long term deals to provide McCoist with a sense of stability.
But right now Rangers put me in mind of that well known raconteur and good time guy Donald Rumsfeld. Everywhere you look there an known unknowns and unknown unknowns.
We think we know McCoist but we've no idea how he will react to the top job, to the removal of Walter Smith's wise, protective embrace.
And how will the players, so many of whom worked under Smith and know McCoist as assistant and coach, react to him? What will they feel if they disagree ever so slightly with his way of doing things and then find results going a bit awry? We don't know.
More signings, ambitous signings, money to burn? We don't know.
But there is one massively important "known known." We've written Rangers off before, written them off when they've had much the same group of players and much the same coaching staff.
They have a habit of ignoring our predictions and just winning the sodding league anyway.
Declare this a powder puff title challenge before a ball is even kicked at your peril.
Still I can't help but feel that this season might be a struggle, a campaign too far.
Twitter tips: Nikica Jelavic, Steven Davis
Hearts
I'm delighted to welcome back Craig Cairns, blogger extraordinaire at Three at the Back, to furnish us with this preview of the season ahead for Hearts. You can also follow Craig on Twitter.
In terms of new recruits, Jim Jefferies was the fastest out of the blocks in the SPL, quickly securing the services of Danny Grainger, John Sutton and Jamie Hamill on free transfers before the month of May was out. Zander Diamond was pursued around the same time but negotiations broke down during the former-Aberdeen defender’s medical.
The attempt to sign Diamond, and subsequent trial of Kari Arnason, suggests that Jefferies is still in the market for a central defender to cover for club-captain Marius Zaliukas, who no stranger to a suspension, and the injury-prone Andy Webster. It was mentioned during the unveiling of Grainger that if required he is an able deputy at centre-back but with Lee Wallace leaving for Ibrox, he now finds himself as the first-choice left-back.
It remains to be seen but I expect Jefferies to add to the centre of his defence, and possibly bring in more cover at full-back, before the transfer window ends.
The general feeling going into the new season is that Hearts have strengthened their squad without significantly strengthening their starting eleven. Two full-backs, a winger-cum-second striker and a striker have all been added, bulking the numbers in these positions.
Assuming a central defender is also added then the only area of the pitch that seems to have been neglected in terms of strengthening is the centre of midfield. More specifically, the defensive-midfield band of the 4-2-3-1 Jefferies seemed to favour last season. These positions were mostly filled Ian Black and Adrian Mrowiec during the 2010/11 campaign and it seems that these two will form the centre-midfield pairing when the season kicks off at Ibrox on Saturday.
On their day both are excellent SPL players. During his loan from Kaunas, Mrowiec struggled to perform and it was surprising when Jefferies offered him a permanent deal. The Pole doesn’t offer much attacking impetus but for a sizable amount of last season he offered terrific protection to the Hearts defence and was one of the reasons the side picked up seven clean sheets over a nine match period.
Black, on the other hand, is positioned slightly ahead of Mrowiec and is expected to get on the ball and create while still being expected to close down the opposition and break up attacks, even if he is over-exuberant at times in his execution (although it must be said that he himself is often subjected to reckless challenges from his opponents).
Despite their qualities both struggled towards the end of last season. It should be noted however that the team as a whole slumped and in the end hobbled over the third-place finish line, a target that at one point seemed like a stroll. There is no questioning Black’s passion and commitment, the big problem for Black is his consistency. Some of his performances at the turn of the year were man-of-the-match material; however, he has failed to hit any sort of consistency in his performance.
The lack of cover for these positions is worrying. Rudi Skacel, Scott Robinson and Mehdi Taouil, another player who arrived on a free transfer during the summer, can all play in the centre of midfield but tend to occupy the attacking central-midfield role just off the striker. Skacel is the only one of the three that seems to posses the attributes to move back a position but his future at the club remains uncertain.
Ryan Stevenson is another who can sit alongside either Black or Mrowiec but I think even he would admit that no one really knows his best position. Initially Stevenson struggled with the pace of the SPL and only made the odd appearance. During the second half of last season he was used in a number of positions and I think it is fair to say he lacked consistency in any of them. His best spell came as an auxiliary striker in the absence of Kevin Kyle once he was allowed to settle into the role. All things considered it would appear that he is more suited to a more attacking role.
This leaves Eggert Jonsson and Ryan McGowan as possible competition. Jonsson was converted to full-back under Csaba Laszlo and has since played almost every position for Hearts. The few occasions where he has been returned to his supposed natural position he has struggled. Even so, he will be required at right-back for the first two matches of the season due to Hamill’s suspension and will then be required to deputise for either of the first-choice full-backs should they find themselves out of the side for whatever reason.
McGowan’s few chances in the first team have yielded mixed reports. He first broke into the side towards the end of the disastrous 2006/07, impressed and has since undergone loan spells with Ayr United and Partick Thistle, earning favourable reports. His performances towards the end of last season left much to be desired but at 21-years-old this may be the season where he establishes himself as a first team regular.
With Skacel’s future uncertain and the likes of Stevenson and Taouil likely to be used in more advanced positions, along with the Jonsson being required at full-back and the lack of new recruits in this area of the side, this may be the time for the young Australian to make his mark at Tynecastle.
Unless Black and Mrowiec improve on their form from the tail end of last season or else McGowan reaches something near his full potential then I feel that this will be a potential weak-spot for the Hearts side in the all-too-important midfield battles they will inevitably face.
Twitter tips: Andy Webster, John Sutton, Mehdi Taouil, Rudi Skacel
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
SFA: Another Day of Scottish Football Gloom
Howls of anguish yesterday as Scotland witnessed an outrageous miscarriage of justice.
Of course we didn't.
Rather we saw three men who should have known better treated leniently by the Scottish Football Association.
Rangers players El-Hadji Diouf and Madjid Bougherra were given fines following their red cards in the Scottish Cup replay at Celtic Park. Both players were warned over their future conduct and, in the unlikely event that they are in Scotland next season, will serve their automatic Scottish Cup suspensions.
Ally McCoist, involved in a spat with Neil Lennon, had his automatic two game suspension wiped out.
Bring on the outrage.
Paul McBride QC, who has represented Neil Lennon this season, led the assault on the SFA:
"The SFA are tonight officially the laughing stock of world football and they have been shown to be not merely dysfunctional and not merely dishonest but biased."
Damning stuff. He's wrong about us being the laughing stock of world football. World football doesn't care. That's a problem. But not one that need detain us here.
The three decisions handed down today involved no bending of SFA rules. The disciplinary committee acted within their rights, within the scope of the SFA's needlessly woolly rules.
Nor did the decisions leave Neil Lennon as the fall guy in the whole affair. Faced with the same charge as McCoist, Lennon chose not to appeal. Instead, and here they probably did the Scottish game a favour, McBride and Lennon made the decision to accept the ban and point out a flaw in the SFA's own rules about the serving of suspensions.
But in doing so they accepted a blame that McCoist chose to fight. Had they done the same they might have been in the position of proving by direct comparison that there are different rules for different clubs. They chose not to.
In light of the fall out from that game, in a season where we've had the remarkable experience of our referees refusing to officiate at games, we might have expected the SFA to exercise a firmer hand on the Rangers trio.
That didn't happen.
Why?
McBride, and he's not alone among Celtic supporters or supporters of clubs throughout the land, suggests dishonesty and bias.
There have been incidents of dishonesty this season, that much is undeniable.
Bias - widespread, institutional bias - is more difficult to measure. It is, I suspect, an easier claim to make on the BBC than it is to prove in a court of law.
The problem the SFA have is their own incompetence.
When an organisation is so shambolic, so riddled with errors and misjudgements, so arrogant in their silent refusal to explain decisions, it doesn't take an eminent lawyer to point to inconsistencies and it doesn't take a particularly conspiratorial mind to join the dots and cry "bias."
And the problem with "dysfunctional" amateurs is that the more you point out that they are "dysfunctional" amateurs the more likely they are to make dysfunctionally amateur decisions just to spite you.
Which in turn makes it easier to accuse them of bias.
And thus does the self perpetuating stench of Scottish football engulf us all, the game slowly suffocating in a smog of mismanagement, accusations and bloody mindedness.
I suspect we saw all of that yesterday. The most depressing thing is that none of this is anything new.
What I don't see, what we need to see, is a way to move the game forward.
I don't see it in the smiling arrogance of Diouf and Bougherra as they left Hampden.
I don't see it from Paul McBride as he launches another broadside.
I don't see it from Celtic as they circle the wagons.
I don't see it from the SFA as they batten down the hatches.
I don't see it from fans of either side of the Old Firm as they launch once more into their tiresome cyberwars.
I don't see it from other clubs as they struggle with their own finances and see a civil war developing that they don't want to be involved with.
Not all the answers are simple. But some are.
Standard punishments available to the disciplinary committee. Simple.
A more transparent committee system within the SFA. Simple.
A disciplinary committee that is partly drawn from but entirely independent of the SFA, SPL or SFL. Simple.
The SFA transformed from an arrogantly silent private members club to a professional organisation that serves the game not its blazered apparatchiks. Simple.
Is all this too much to ask for?
It better not be. Because, on and off the pitch, this season has been dire, too often riven with a destructive vitriol that is defeating the cause of constructive change.
And that can't go on.
Or pretty soon we'll find ourselves longing for the day when world football chose to ignore us rather than laugh at us.
At least we have something to ignore at the moment.
Too many more seasons like this, too many more days like yesterday, and we might find that we have nothing left to fight over.
> Standard punishments? Easier for some offences than for others. But it should be simple for offences like raising your arms towards the referee. An automatic ban for any physical contact with an official while debating a decision would persuade players to stop. Given the way the word "manhandle" was stressed yesterday you might think that Bougherra had come over all nightclub bouncer and marched the referee in a headlock to the Celtic Park exit. He didn't. Rather he was the yappity ned in the nightclub remonstrating with the barman over his lack of ID. Nonetheless a no questions asked automatic three game ban would probably have stopped him doing it.
> Spare a thought for Stewart Regan. The SFA's chief executive sees the need for change but is powerless to enact it. When George Peat goes this summer Regan has to begin to assert his authority. Here's hoping.
> As sure as night follows day, there was going to be a refereeing controversy in Celtic's win at St Johnstone last night. And what a corker it was. Iain Brines might have a perfectly valid reason for ignoring Michael Dubery's handball. I'm buggered if I know what that reason might be. It's the sort of howler that goes beyond bias or simple incompetence and has to be classified under moment of madness.
Of course we didn't.
Rather we saw three men who should have known better treated leniently by the Scottish Football Association.
Rangers players El-Hadji Diouf and Madjid Bougherra were given fines following their red cards in the Scottish Cup replay at Celtic Park. Both players were warned over their future conduct and, in the unlikely event that they are in Scotland next season, will serve their automatic Scottish Cup suspensions.
Ally McCoist, involved in a spat with Neil Lennon, had his automatic two game suspension wiped out.
Bring on the outrage.
Paul McBride QC, who has represented Neil Lennon this season, led the assault on the SFA:
"The SFA are tonight officially the laughing stock of world football and they have been shown to be not merely dysfunctional and not merely dishonest but biased."
Damning stuff. He's wrong about us being the laughing stock of world football. World football doesn't care. That's a problem. But not one that need detain us here.
The three decisions handed down today involved no bending of SFA rules. The disciplinary committee acted within their rights, within the scope of the SFA's needlessly woolly rules.
Nor did the decisions leave Neil Lennon as the fall guy in the whole affair. Faced with the same charge as McCoist, Lennon chose not to appeal. Instead, and here they probably did the Scottish game a favour, McBride and Lennon made the decision to accept the ban and point out a flaw in the SFA's own rules about the serving of suspensions.
But in doing so they accepted a blame that McCoist chose to fight. Had they done the same they might have been in the position of proving by direct comparison that there are different rules for different clubs. They chose not to.
In light of the fall out from that game, in a season where we've had the remarkable experience of our referees refusing to officiate at games, we might have expected the SFA to exercise a firmer hand on the Rangers trio.
That didn't happen.
Why?
McBride, and he's not alone among Celtic supporters or supporters of clubs throughout the land, suggests dishonesty and bias.
There have been incidents of dishonesty this season, that much is undeniable.
Bias - widespread, institutional bias - is more difficult to measure. It is, I suspect, an easier claim to make on the BBC than it is to prove in a court of law.
The problem the SFA have is their own incompetence.
When an organisation is so shambolic, so riddled with errors and misjudgements, so arrogant in their silent refusal to explain decisions, it doesn't take an eminent lawyer to point to inconsistencies and it doesn't take a particularly conspiratorial mind to join the dots and cry "bias."
And the problem with "dysfunctional" amateurs is that the more you point out that they are "dysfunctional" amateurs the more likely they are to make dysfunctionally amateur decisions just to spite you.
Which in turn makes it easier to accuse them of bias.
And thus does the self perpetuating stench of Scottish football engulf us all, the game slowly suffocating in a smog of mismanagement, accusations and bloody mindedness.
I suspect we saw all of that yesterday. The most depressing thing is that none of this is anything new.
What I don't see, what we need to see, is a way to move the game forward.
I don't see it in the smiling arrogance of Diouf and Bougherra as they left Hampden.
I don't see it from Paul McBride as he launches another broadside.
I don't see it from Celtic as they circle the wagons.
I don't see it from the SFA as they batten down the hatches.
I don't see it from fans of either side of the Old Firm as they launch once more into their tiresome cyberwars.
I don't see it from other clubs as they struggle with their own finances and see a civil war developing that they don't want to be involved with.
Not all the answers are simple. But some are.
Standard punishments available to the disciplinary committee. Simple.
A more transparent committee system within the SFA. Simple.
A disciplinary committee that is partly drawn from but entirely independent of the SFA, SPL or SFL. Simple.
The SFA transformed from an arrogantly silent private members club to a professional organisation that serves the game not its blazered apparatchiks. Simple.
Is all this too much to ask for?
It better not be. Because, on and off the pitch, this season has been dire, too often riven with a destructive vitriol that is defeating the cause of constructive change.
And that can't go on.
Or pretty soon we'll find ourselves longing for the day when world football chose to ignore us rather than laugh at us.
At least we have something to ignore at the moment.
Too many more seasons like this, too many more days like yesterday, and we might find that we have nothing left to fight over.
> Standard punishments? Easier for some offences than for others. But it should be simple for offences like raising your arms towards the referee. An automatic ban for any physical contact with an official while debating a decision would persuade players to stop. Given the way the word "manhandle" was stressed yesterday you might think that Bougherra had come over all nightclub bouncer and marched the referee in a headlock to the Celtic Park exit. He didn't. Rather he was the yappity ned in the nightclub remonstrating with the barman over his lack of ID. Nonetheless a no questions asked automatic three game ban would probably have stopped him doing it.
> Spare a thought for Stewart Regan. The SFA's chief executive sees the need for change but is powerless to enact it. When George Peat goes this summer Regan has to begin to assert his authority. Here's hoping.
> As sure as night follows day, there was going to be a refereeing controversy in Celtic's win at St Johnstone last night. And what a corker it was. Iain Brines might have a perfectly valid reason for ignoring Michael Dubery's handball. I'm buggered if I know what that reason might be. It's the sort of howler that goes beyond bias or simple incompetence and has to be classified under moment of madness.
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
Celtic v Rangers: Drama, But Little Football
Over 90 minutes of football at Celtic Park last night the home side deservedly won a poor Old Firm game.
They dominated possession, scored the only goal and were comfortable enough to restrict Rangers to just one attempt on target.
It was not by any measure a quality game. In fact it was a dire game.
But Celtic continue their treble hunt and have now lost only one of this season's five Old Firm games.
Rangers improved on their last showing at Celtic but were still horribly short of ideas and inspiration.
On other days our story might end right there. The game decided by Mark Wilson's goal with little in the way of incident.
But tonight we saw a bad football game stuck in the middle of a crazy Glasgow night.
Rangers' ten yellow cards produced three red cards. Steven Whittaker might consider himself unfortunate for his first booking but once that card had been meted out he should have the sense not to make a challenge as rash as the one that led to his second yellow.
Madjid Bougherra might well be annoyed by his second yellow card but his first appeared to come after a snidey, sneaky scrape of his studs down Gary Hooper's achilles so his complaints could well bring little sympathy.
At least they were both booked while taking a full part in the game. El Hadji Diouf was an isolated, peripheral figure all night. Except when he was getting involved with Neil Lennon in the first half for his first booking and continuing to show dissent after the final whistle for his second.
Even then the bold Diouf wasn't finished, stripping off his shirt and vest to throw into the Rangers crowd. Why any of them would want souvenirs of his less than heroic performance remains a mystery.
Certainly it's a snarling, ineffectual kind of heroism that does little for me.
Ally McCoist and Lennon, the men who will lead these teams into next season, had a bust up as they shook hands.
Celtic coach Alan Thompson suggested that McCoist said something that caused Lennon to react. If that is the case they should both know better but Lennon in particular should be able to take the slings and arrows of football without it engendering a violent reaction. There is no room for that in the job he is in.
Like Diouf, Lennon should by now have had enough bad experiences to know not to react.
These seemed to me to be the major talking points, fans of both teams and fans of neither will no doubt have picked out their own villains and flashpoints.
Sadly tonight's game followed on from Les Gray, chairman of the Scottish Police Federation, having this to say:
As he acknowledges, Mr Gray knows there will be no end to this fixture. He was simply illustrating a point.
And tonight's game will have done nothing to allay his fears.
You and I can watch a game of football without going mental afterwards. But we all know there are people who can't.
What should have been 90 minutes of football has this evening fuelled the arguments of those who feel that this is a clash that encourages the very worst in Scottish society.
That, in the coming days, is a question that both clubs and the SFA will be expected to address. For Rangers, already cash strapped, the likelihood of a fine for their ten yellow cards is unlikely to be welcomed.
So what? Who cares? This sometimes happens in football, it's an emotional game, get over it.
To an extent that is true. But these are our two biggest clubs. Their dominance brings privileges and also the burdens of scrutiny and responsibility.
Certain actors in tonight's drama should reflect in the morning that under that scrutiny their behaviour was irresponsible.
For a while at least that will mean the clubs are attacked from outside and find themselves under pressure from both the media and the authorities. Nobody in Scottish football needs that.
Old Firm games will always carry baggage. An intense local rivalry need not be a bad thing. But at times tonight it threatened to descend into mayhem. The main protagonists need to be able to rise above that or pleas for calm to their wider communities will inevitably fall on ever deafer ears.
As a neutral, as a football fan, tonight was a let down.
I even found myself feeling some sympathy for Neil Doncaster. As he tries to sell Scottish football these games are his crown jewels.
Jim White's smug laughter as he reported the half time controversies said everything about why, already saturated with football good, bad and indifferent, Sky want these games.
Their interest is the wider spectacle, the freakshow that sits alongside the game, the blessed moments of controversy they can drool over.
Because they know, we all know, that there are people who tune into Old Firm games to see the very behaviour they were treated to tonight.
But these are modern football clubs who should be aiming for something different, something better.
They failed tonight. Rangers were the more guilty but Celtic were not without blame. The way Rangers set up demands discipline. The best of Celtic demands tempo that constant distractions disrupt. At the most basic tactical level the idiocy that surrounded the game denied both teams of their best.
And, as compelling as all this drama might be, it's not about football and it's not good for Scotland.
They dominated possession, scored the only goal and were comfortable enough to restrict Rangers to just one attempt on target.
It was not by any measure a quality game. In fact it was a dire game.
But Celtic continue their treble hunt and have now lost only one of this season's five Old Firm games.
Rangers improved on their last showing at Celtic but were still horribly short of ideas and inspiration.
On other days our story might end right there. The game decided by Mark Wilson's goal with little in the way of incident.
But tonight we saw a bad football game stuck in the middle of a crazy Glasgow night.
Rangers' ten yellow cards produced three red cards. Steven Whittaker might consider himself unfortunate for his first booking but once that card had been meted out he should have the sense not to make a challenge as rash as the one that led to his second yellow.
Madjid Bougherra might well be annoyed by his second yellow card but his first appeared to come after a snidey, sneaky scrape of his studs down Gary Hooper's achilles so his complaints could well bring little sympathy.
At least they were both booked while taking a full part in the game. El Hadji Diouf was an isolated, peripheral figure all night. Except when he was getting involved with Neil Lennon in the first half for his first booking and continuing to show dissent after the final whistle for his second.
Even then the bold Diouf wasn't finished, stripping off his shirt and vest to throw into the Rangers crowd. Why any of them would want souvenirs of his less than heroic performance remains a mystery.
Certainly it's a snarling, ineffectual kind of heroism that does little for me.
Ally McCoist and Lennon, the men who will lead these teams into next season, had a bust up as they shook hands.
Celtic coach Alan Thompson suggested that McCoist said something that caused Lennon to react. If that is the case they should both know better but Lennon in particular should be able to take the slings and arrows of football without it engendering a violent reaction. There is no room for that in the job he is in.
Like Diouf, Lennon should by now have had enough bad experiences to know not to react.
These seemed to me to be the major talking points, fans of both teams and fans of neither will no doubt have picked out their own villains and flashpoints.
Sadly tonight's game followed on from Les Gray, chairman of the Scottish Police Federation, having this to say:
“How do you prevent this violence after the Old Firm? The only effective way to prevent it is to ban matches. They are just not worth the murder and mayhem that accompanies them. Every time we think we’ve got to grips with this issue, it just flares up again – as it did on Sunday.
“If the players are on the park squaring up to each other and being aggressive, I cringe. I know this violence will be replicated later on Scotland’s streets, but then it will be done with bottles and knives. Realistically it will probably never happen but something has got to give.” (Herald)
As he acknowledges, Mr Gray knows there will be no end to this fixture. He was simply illustrating a point.
And tonight's game will have done nothing to allay his fears.
You and I can watch a game of football without going mental afterwards. But we all know there are people who can't.
What should have been 90 minutes of football has this evening fuelled the arguments of those who feel that this is a clash that encourages the very worst in Scottish society.
That, in the coming days, is a question that both clubs and the SFA will be expected to address. For Rangers, already cash strapped, the likelihood of a fine for their ten yellow cards is unlikely to be welcomed.
So what? Who cares? This sometimes happens in football, it's an emotional game, get over it.
To an extent that is true. But these are our two biggest clubs. Their dominance brings privileges and also the burdens of scrutiny and responsibility.
Certain actors in tonight's drama should reflect in the morning that under that scrutiny their behaviour was irresponsible.
For a while at least that will mean the clubs are attacked from outside and find themselves under pressure from both the media and the authorities. Nobody in Scottish football needs that.
Old Firm games will always carry baggage. An intense local rivalry need not be a bad thing. But at times tonight it threatened to descend into mayhem. The main protagonists need to be able to rise above that or pleas for calm to their wider communities will inevitably fall on ever deafer ears.
As a neutral, as a football fan, tonight was a let down.
I even found myself feeling some sympathy for Neil Doncaster. As he tries to sell Scottish football these games are his crown jewels.
Jim White's smug laughter as he reported the half time controversies said everything about why, already saturated with football good, bad and indifferent, Sky want these games.
Their interest is the wider spectacle, the freakshow that sits alongside the game, the blessed moments of controversy they can drool over.
Because they know, we all know, that there are people who tune into Old Firm games to see the very behaviour they were treated to tonight.
But these are modern football clubs who should be aiming for something different, something better.
They failed tonight. Rangers were the more guilty but Celtic were not without blame. The way Rangers set up demands discipline. The best of Celtic demands tempo that constant distractions disrupt. At the most basic tactical level the idiocy that surrounded the game denied both teams of their best.
And, as compelling as all this drama might be, it's not about football and it's not good for Scotland.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Rangers: McCoist The Manager
We suspected, surmised, accepted. But now we've had the official unveiling.
Ally McCoist will lead Rangers into the 2011/12 SPL season.
Probably. Unless someone comes along to buy the club and decides that this is no time for a novice.
"No time for a novice." A line from an ultimately futile political speech.
Yesterday's announcement, the cynic in me screams, owed a lot to politics. This was an essay in deflection.
The good news story to deflect from a club in financial dire straits, a team on the back foot and a incumbent who has, once again, mistimed his departure.
It's a hell of a job for McCoist. This, clearly, was the role he wanted from the moment his career went from ex-player and pundit to ex-player and coach.
One can only imagine what Bill Struth would have made of an ex-chat show host becoming Rangers manager. If Struth could have comprehended what a chat show was.
But Ally's Rangers credentials are good. A novice, but his is a time served apprenticeship at the feet of Walter Smith, a man who can tell a story or three about managing Rangers.
If he dreamt - as surely he must have - about managing his club, McCoist could surely never have imagined that it would be in such straitened times.
The premature confirmation suggests that a takeover is no closer. It might still happen but existing debt and that tax question remain, making the odds on a benevolent knight arriving ever longer.
The team needs an overhaul, key players from Smith's second era are already gone or look to be heading for the exit door. Age has caught up with David Weir, financial necessity will probably spell the end for Madjid Bougherra and others.
Becoming Rangers manager at any time is a massive challenge. In the present circumstances it seems McCoist is about to tackle the north face of the Govan Eiger.
A glance across the city shows another novice transformed from playing hero to manager. Neil Lennon had even less experience than McCoist when he got the Celtic job.
But Lennon has benefited from an extremely effective scouting system and a board that has a firm direction in mind.
Rangers seem to have neither. Many people might have claims on the club, all might have the best interests of it functioning as a going concern at heart.
But vested interests and differing opinions lead to a boardroom tension - if not an internecine war - that robs Rangers of momentum off the pitch.
Even more crucially it seems that McCoist will not enjoy Lennon's number one luxury of weakened Old Firm opposition, a dose of good fortune that has given the Celtic manager time to find his feet.
There will be some in the Rangers support who welcome the appointment, there will be others who bemoan McCoist's coronation.
He is the most available, most economical choice. That's how Rangers have to operate at the moment.
It's impossible to tell how good or bad he will be.
But when Smith takes his leave in May McCoist will have a fairly lengthy to-do-list.
He needs to rebuild his side, he needs to do that on a budget. He needs to try and ensure that the rebuilding process is quick enough to allow him to keep pace with a Celtic side who might - just might - be heading into the new season with the confidence of a newly won treble behind them.
And all that has to be done while coping with the distraction of a club in a state of confusion off the park - a malaise that the courts and HMRC might make even worse.
It's quite a task. Achieve it all and never will the 'Super Ally' tag have been so deserved.
Achieve just some of it and the myriad powers that be at Rangers might still think they've found the right man.
It could be that Rangers are preparing - silently, without fanfare - for a period where trophies are less important than re-establishing financial safety.
If so, then a hungry new manager - we can hardly call McCoist young - with a passion for the club might be exactly the man they are looking for.
The Scottish Football Blog News Feed
Friday, July 09, 2010
Football On Film
Escape To Victory is often held up as the nadir of football films but it's really not. Apart from anything else the coming together of Bobby Moore, Michael Caine, Pele, Sylvester Stallone and director John Huston gives it value as a footballing and cinematic curiosity of some worth.
In many ways Escape To Victory has to be considered a classic of the genre. That alone is a measure of how the cinema has failed the world's favourite sport.
Maybe football is just too dramatic in its own right. Perhaps films are just unable to add any more depth to a game that already demands our emotional involvement.
And, as Barney Ronay argues in The Guardian, football is so aware of its role as a television spectacular that the world's greatest team is now subconsciously cinematic in its approach to the game.
That might explain why feature length documentaries fare better than fiction on the big screen. Last year The Mirror picked the top five football films and found space for three documentaries in the list.
So am I missing something? Or is football really without a classic feature film?
Tell me your favourites and your least favourite of all time.
The worst ever in my opinion stars Pele and is called Hotshot. IMDB's synopsis is brief:
The story of an American soccer player trying to make it big who turns to Pele, the greatest soccer player of all time, for guidance.
I went through a period of insisting that we hired this from the video shop. Even then I realised how bad it was but repeated watching was yet another way to torture my long suffering older brother. A pursuit I'm still enjoying today.
I think you would have needed to watch Hotshot on video. I have serious doubts that it was ever given a cinematic release.
> A Shot At Glory incidentally is a must see for any Scottish football fan of a certain vintage. You will never again see a film that stars John Martin, Hugh Dallas, Eddie May and many, many more Scottish football stalwarts. And Ally McCoist is just about lucky enough to pull off his central role.
> Spoiler Alert. I've got to say that, even though I sincerely hope you never watch Hotshot. Here's the emotional final scenes. Has football ever looked better on film. Aye. Probably.
Monday, July 07, 2008
The Miller's Tale: Same Old, Same Old
"But in my opinion he's the best all-round Scottish striker at the moment. Boydie (Kris Boyd] has his goals, Faddy (James McFadden] has great talent and a wee spark, but pound for pound you'd have Kenny starting in your team before anyone."
Ally McCoist on Kenny Miller. Not, perhaps, what the Rangers fans want to hear. The Rangers supporters were so against this signing that they stopped their Scottish Cup celebrations to protest about it.
Partly it's his recent history with Celtic. But partly it is his poor goalscoring record. Not many players have played for Celtic and Rangers. Miller has failed at them both. He is not the player you sign if you want to turn your back on a reputation for dourness. Neither is Kyle Lafferty (10 goals in 83 league games) although he does have potential. And Andreas Velicka will have a lot to prove.
McCoist says Rangers have to emulate Ajax and PSV Eindhoven. I'm not sure the Dutch ideal of total football is strikers who don't score.
Time will tell. But Walter Smith and McCoist looked on last year as a success. Expect more of the same from Rangers this season.
Ally McCoist on Kenny Miller. Not, perhaps, what the Rangers fans want to hear. The Rangers supporters were so against this signing that they stopped their Scottish Cup celebrations to protest about it.
Partly it's his recent history with Celtic. But partly it is his poor goalscoring record. Not many players have played for Celtic and Rangers. Miller has failed at them both. He is not the player you sign if you want to turn your back on a reputation for dourness. Neither is Kyle Lafferty (10 goals in 83 league games) although he does have potential. And Andreas Velicka will have a lot to prove.
McCoist says Rangers have to emulate Ajax and PSV Eindhoven. I'm not sure the Dutch ideal of total football is strikers who don't score.
Time will tell. But Walter Smith and McCoist looked on last year as a success. Expect more of the same from Rangers this season.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Enough is Enough
I blame Princess Diana. We have become a nation that mawkishly salivates at the prospect of public grieving.
That Tommy Burns was a great guy I have no doubt. That we need to view his funeral through the full glare of the media is more troublesome.
Maybe it's what he would have wanted. Maybe it's what the family wanted. Or maybe not.
But this outpouring of grief that we see every time a public figure dies is beginning to devalue the very notion of heroes or legends. Every funeral is bigger, more moving and more important than the last.
I was half expecting Sir Elton John to appear singing a reworked version of Saturday Night's Alright for Fighting in tribute to Tommy's crucial role in the peacekeeping process that followed the Battle of the Boyne.
Tonight of course all bets will be off. See how long lasting this orgasm of mourning is. Listen to the Celtic fans celebrate the life of a very Catholic man who saw friendship as the path to defeating bigotry. Then listen to the vitriol pouring from the stands celebrating a conflict that took place on another island, an island that is moving on.
Listen to the Rangers fans saying how decent Walter and Ally are. How they were proud of their management team at the funeral, how Tommy was a decent guy who loved his country. Then listen to the vitriol from their stands as they celebrate being up to their knees in fenian blood. In Tommy's blood.
Read the Daily Record preach the mantra of peace in our time. Read them dedicating this peace to one man as they genuflect at the altar of St Tommy. Then read them defending, even applauding, the Rangers fans who rampaged in Manchester. Read about the carnival atmosphere but don't ask them to mention that the carnival raved to the tunes of Billy Boys and terrorists.
And then ask yourself, as we fall over ourselves to honour Tommy Burns, how hollow these tributes are. And ask if this decent guy deserves the insult of a mock national grief that is instantly forgotten when a football match kicks off.
That Tommy Burns was a great guy I have no doubt. That we need to view his funeral through the full glare of the media is more troublesome.
Maybe it's what he would have wanted. Maybe it's what the family wanted. Or maybe not.
But this outpouring of grief that we see every time a public figure dies is beginning to devalue the very notion of heroes or legends. Every funeral is bigger, more moving and more important than the last.
I was half expecting Sir Elton John to appear singing a reworked version of Saturday Night's Alright for Fighting in tribute to Tommy's crucial role in the peacekeeping process that followed the Battle of the Boyne.
Tonight of course all bets will be off. See how long lasting this orgasm of mourning is. Listen to the Celtic fans celebrate the life of a very Catholic man who saw friendship as the path to defeating bigotry. Then listen to the vitriol pouring from the stands celebrating a conflict that took place on another island, an island that is moving on.
Listen to the Rangers fans saying how decent Walter and Ally are. How they were proud of their management team at the funeral, how Tommy was a decent guy who loved his country. Then listen to the vitriol from their stands as they celebrate being up to their knees in fenian blood. In Tommy's blood.
Read the Daily Record preach the mantra of peace in our time. Read them dedicating this peace to one man as they genuflect at the altar of St Tommy. Then read them defending, even applauding, the Rangers fans who rampaged in Manchester. Read about the carnival atmosphere but don't ask them to mention that the carnival raved to the tunes of Billy Boys and terrorists.
And then ask yourself, as we fall over ourselves to honour Tommy Burns, how hollow these tributes are. And ask if this decent guy deserves the insult of a mock national grief that is instantly forgotten when a football match kicks off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)