"Let the others come after us. We welcome the chase. It is healthy for us.
We will never hide from it. Never fear."
- William Struth

What's worse? A vote of no confidence or no vote at all?

Written by: We Must Be Bolder
Saturday, 4th February 2017

Next week the UK Parliament, note to SNP, that is the big house where serious matters are conducted, will hold a debate on a vote of no confidence in the Football Association (FA).


The issue here is the perception that the FA is incapable of reforming itself. It is felt that it is not representative of the wider population and that there are too many hangers on. It has been described as 'impossible for the organisation to reform itself'. 

Strong words. It seems that the FA is entrenched, myopic and lacking the self motivation to expand its demographic to reflect wider society.

We have the same problem in Scotland with the custodians of our game. The Scottish Football Association (SFA), lead by Stewart Regan which in turn, is ably aided and abetted by Neil Doncaster, have been pulling the strings for many a year now. In fact they have been in positions of high influence and power for quite a while and what have they actually brought to our game to progress it? Regan took over in July 2010 and Doncaster took over in 2009 when it was dressed up as the Scottish Premier League. 

Look at the SFA and SPFL as two functions within the same business for a moment. If a large corporation has split its assets as to gain the greatest return for its shareholders (supporters) and if after 6 and 7 years respectively those two business functions continued to perform poorly would those chief executives still be in their current roles? We know the answer. They would be voted out and replaced. 

They are supposed to be there for the best interest of the game for the wider population. I would like to see what evidence there is to back this up. Only a couple of weeks ago the former St Mirren chairman Stewart Gilmour not only suggested that Peter Lawwell has too much influence but that he actually runs the game.


I'd like to say well done to Stewart Gilmour for saying what many people suspected, however, until current board members of football clubs come forward with the same statement it will be dismissed as always with the word 'former'. I include the toothless board currently 'running' our great club also. Rangers should be doing so much more to hold Regan, Doncaster and indeed the wider SFA board including Lawwell to account. Put it this way, if Rangers stepped up and proved a highly critical but motivational member of Scottish football (as it should be) it would gain greater media coverage and it would start a long over due process of being regarded as the principle football club in Scotland, which it is. 

Next up regarding SFA ineptitude we have the shocking lack of comment relating to an interview with STV's Grant Russell with Andy Woodward the ex-footballer who has came out as a victim of sexual abuse within football clubs and has started a process that I hope sees justice for the victims. 


I think it's fair comment to state that this is now a matter under investigation and to prejudice the work that will be carried out would be counter productive, it could potentially be deemed illegal but when have the SFA been bothered about legal process and rules?

The SFA have done the absolute minimum in stating what will be done, by when and what advice and support they will offer. Indeed, what clarity and archive material will they hand over? We all know about the lack of investigation into the Torbett sexual abuse that was covered up by Celtic FC. Will this now be at the very first page on the dossier, I hope so.

On this very point Id like to highlight a growing issue being raised by other supporters that we should not be highlighting sexual abuse in football. Some say it reflects badly on us and it's petty, political point scoring. This is not about any of that, this about the lives of children. I would respond by saying if you do not want to get ultimate clarity and justice when children have been abused or that you'd rather forget a crime in the past and risk a child's well being in the future, then maybe you should examine your moral compass. Was it crass for people to comment on Saville and condemn the BBC? I think I have put that argument firmly to the sword and I'll say no more about it.

I slated the English FA previously over their handling of this. The lack of transparency from the SFA throughout this matter since it broke would lead you to think that behind the scenes the person running Scottish football, according to Stewart Gilmour, is directing the narrative. I hope I'm wrong. 

The Scottish Government need to scrutinise our national game with much more detail. It needs to be specific in its motives and objectives, not a mouth piece for every offended snowflake about the lyrics of a song. The Scottish Government are every bit as opaque as the SFA when it comes to discussing the thorny issues that surround the shadier side of our national game. The Scottish Government do not need to vote on the suitability of the SFA it is demonstrable by its failings that the institution and its board are not fit for purpose. The Scottish Government now needs to state clearly what it's going to do about the very real and insidious cover up of sexual abuse that took place in Scottish football starting with the chief protagonist, Celtic Football Club.

My point is, whether it is the private sector voting off incapable executives in a failing company or the Scottish Government taking a rare step and agreeing with the UK Parliament, the SFA and the puppet masters behind it must come under greater scrutiny and that gets my vote.


by Blue Ranger
by The Ref


Recent Articles:

This site prevails due to the
sterling efforts of volunteers for no
financial gain
. If you wish, you
can donate to VB running costs
by clicking the button below

From The Archive: