Campbell Ogilve should step down as President of the SFA

[stewarty 1,876]

The ferocity with which the SFA President has been attacked by the online Celtic community may not come as a surprise. They do not like the thought of anyone carved in the Rangers tradition having any sort of responsibility within the game's governing body.

 

To see the likes of Channel 4's Alex Thomson take up the attack, egged on by cohorts of Hooped bloggers and Twitter Crusaders of Moral Exactitude, is also not a surprise - it was an obvious story from the off. In fact, it is more of a surprise that it took someone so obscure (in terms of reporting and commentating on Scottish football), to pick up the baton and run with the story.

 

One of the main principles of good governance is transparency. This means not only full disclosure of material facts, information and events, but also the appearance of transparency. The SFA can make all the statements they wish about Ogilve "distancing" himself from ongoing investigation - presumably they have set up Chinese walls between his office, Regan's and the SPL investigators - but the simple fact is that this will not wash. Not to the Crusaders of Moral Exactitude, not to a journalist such as C4's Alex Thomson, and not to this poster.

 

The SFA need to remove Ogilve from the equation altogether until all investigations into player registrations, dual contracts and EBT's are concluded. This may take weeks, months or years but unless it happens soon, the SFA will continue to be asked awkward questions which will be difficult to answer convincingly without being accused of protecting Ogilve or covering up evidence or links.

 

The accusations by Hugh Adam et al, may well turn out to be true or false; but until this is formally concluded, Ogilve's position is untenable.

 

Discuss...

[Bluedell 5,329]

Innocent until proven guilty.

 

I believe the investigations being carried into player registrations and dual contracts are being carried out by the SPL and not the SFA, so it's irrelevant.

 

Perhaps the kitman at Ibrox should also stand down as he also was not involved in player contracts at that time?

 

The fact that anyone is suggesting that someone should stand down to satisfy the hatred of a bunch of rabid bigots shows where we are as a country/

[stewarty 1,876]

Innocent until proven guilty.

 

I believe the investigations being carried into player registrations and dual contracts are being carried out by the SPL and not the SFA, so it's irrelevant.

 

Perhaps the kitman at Ibrox should also stand down as he also was not involved in player contracts at that time?

 

The fact that anyone is suggesting that someone should stand down to satisfy the hatred of a bunch of rabid bigots shows where we are as a country/

 

But the SFA are the appellate body should it arise. But whilst this has been the result of Celtic minded bloggers, it should not detract from the fact they have a point. Ogilve may well be innocent and I believe this will be proved, but until then his presence will cause problems over transparency. Though I would contend this isn't exactly the SFA's strong suit.

[craig 5,199]

If you create Chinese walls then that should be sufficient, regardless of the rabid hordes and their agenda.

 

Did Hugh Dallas deserve to go for what amounted to a joke ? Why did Regan not follow him for his "innocent joke" ? Ahhh, because Lawell was "onside".

 

If we (not just Rangers fans, but Scottish football fans as a whole outwith Celtic) continue to pander to these delusional, vindictive half-wits then we may as well turn off the lights.

 

Better yet, why not just rename Scottish football as Celtic's plaything, where Celtic must get what Celtic want or they will throw the toys out the pram.

 

All this pandering is bordering on insane.

 

Again, why should Ogilvie's position be untenable when a) he wasnt part of the decision-making on those contracts and b) they have created a Chinese wall to take him out of the process.

 

Dont be fooled by the perenially offended - this is NOTHING to do with Campbell Ogilvie and ALL to do with Rangers and their sordid agenda against us, from top to bottom as well (from Lawell to the hoodrats and beyond).

[BlueMazza 0]

He should absolutely stay where he is. Resigning/leaving will be seen as an admission of guilt and snatched up by the Rhabid lot.

[Bluedell 5,329]

But the SFA are the appellate body should it arise. But whilst this has been the result of Celtic minded bloggers, it should not detract from the fact they have a point.

 

They don't have a point.

 

You can't have someone stand down from their job just because there may be some conflict of interest in something that he he will have no impact or involvement in.

 

His presence is only causing problems to those who have an anti-Rangers agenda. We haven't been found guilty of anything and even if we are, there's no suggestion by anyone reasonable that Ogilvie had any involvement in it.

 

This implication that Ogilbvie has ever or will ever act in any way other than honourably is extremely insulting.

 

Sorry but I can't believe that we're even discussing it on here.

[stewarty 1,876]

I agree up to a point. But imagine you are an official of Company A. You leave Company A having served for a number of years a pursue other interests before joining the industry regulator as Chair. Shortly afterwards Company A is engulfed in a financial meltdown, a failed takeover and intense media scrutiny. As the meltdown unfolds, accusations of fraud and impropriety emerge. Given your status previoauly in Company A you are either implicated in the events or were ignorant of them. Until your role in said events is clarified, can you really continue as Chair of the regulatory body? I would suggest not.

[Bluedell 5,329]

All this pandering is bordering on insane.

 

I think that's worth repeating.

 

All this pandering is bordering on insane.

[Bluedell 5,329]

I agree up to a point. But imagine you are an official of Company A. You leave Company A having served for a number of years a pursue other interests before joining the industry regulator as Chair. Shortly afterwards Company A is engulfed in a financial meltdown, a failed takeover and intense media scrutiny. As the meltdown unfolds, accusations of fraud and impropriety emerge. Given your status previoauly in Company A you are either implicated in the events or were ignorant of them. Until your role in said events is clarified, can you really continue as Chair of the regulatory body? I would suggest not.

 

If the regulatory body is not involved in anything to do with any review then there should be no question of him standing down, particualrly as it's clear that he had nothing to do with the contracts.

 

Everyone knows what RCO's responsibilities were back then. There was never any question that he was involved in player contracts.

[stewarty 1,876]

They don't have a point.

 

You can't have someone stand down from their job just because there may be some conflict of interest in something that he he will have no impact or involvement in.

 

His presence is only causing problems to those who have an anti-Rangers agenda. We haven't been found guilty of anything and even if we are, there's no suggestion by anyone reasonable that Ogilvie had any involvement in it.

 

This implication that Ogilbvie has ever or will ever act in any way other than honourably is extremely insulting.

 

Sorry but I can't believe that we're even discussing it on here.

 

We as Rangers fans have called for transparency in other areas of the SFA, particularly in respect of their disciplinary process. This for me is no different. And it is a significant conflict of interest which will only be resolved upon the outcome of the FTT and the SPL enquiry. Until it is, questions will not go away. I say this not because I think him temporarily stepping down will be an admission of guilt, but because it is the best thing to do in the circumstances. The fact that he has not already done so, and the manner in which the SFA have handled this has only made it worse in my view.