The Campbell Ogilvie Conundrum

[Juancornetto 1]

President of the SFA since June 2011, Campbell Ogilvie’s role in the governing body’s scramble to retain control of Scottish Football has been at best ambiguous. He finds himself in the strange position of having been the beneficiary of an Employee Benefit Trust (to the tune of £95,000) whilst serving both as a Director of Rangers and Treasurer of the SFA. He is now the figurehead of one of the organisation which has been at the forefront of the EBT crusade.

 

This must cause Stewart Regan some real consternation, after all Ogilvie is technically his superior. Campbell Ogilvie could be the only obstacle that has prevented Regan unleashing the full scale assault on Rangers and our proud history that some expected. Does this explain why Regan has passed the baton (or should that be baseball bat?) to Neil Doncaster in an attempt to both appease those within Hampden’s corridors of power and ensure that Rangers face yet more punishment? Is it a co-incidence that Lord Nimmo Smith, who carried out the SFA’s bidding in imposing an unlawful transfer embargo, now fronts the SPL’s investigation into alleged “double contracts”?

 

Why two bodies supposedly independent of each other would choose to use the same QC could be little more than a co-incidence or it could simply be an attempt to shortcut the process given Lord Nimmo Smith’s familiarity with Rangers and its fiscal affairs. On balance of probability I’d suggest it’s the latter. Is this entirely fair? Does Lord Nimmo Smith’s previous encounter with Rangers (and the negative press caused by it) preclude him from casting a truly independent eye over proceedings? I’m sure you’ll agree it’s at least worthy of some thought.

 

To further illustrate Stewart Regan’s apparent change of attitude he spoke recently of a willingness to “move on” in a response to Charles Green’s recent comments. This in stark contrast to the previous tactic of immediately raising disciplinary proceedings, in an interview he said “I think for Scottish football it's important that we move on and try to restore focus on the football itself”. An admirable thing to say on the face of it however one wonders whether he now feels suitably comforted by the fact that the SPL and Lord Nimmo Smith are now the ones continuing the struggle.

 

Supposing the SPL’s panel do indeed find that Rangers use of EBT’s was contrary to league rules and sanctions are imposed…the furore and attention that would inevitably follow would be focused on the SPL and Neil Doncaster and well away from the SFA. Regan would have avoided confrontation with his President and in effect had his cake and eaten it too. Campbell Ogilvie recently gave his blessing to the re-structuring of Scottish Football, has he also given his blessing to a clumsy, smash and grab style, mugging of league titles Rangers won during his tenure?

Edited August 24, 2012 by Juancornetto

[amms 0]

Interesting, thanks. Ogilvie has come in for sustained criticism from the Celtic-minded over the last six months, I wonder if we'll ever discover what he's managed to do or say on our behalf. In some wars the heroes remain unknown for a long time after.

[GovanAllan 0]

The Celtic-minded have had him hamstrung before they unleashed all guns, he was incapable of doing anything if he wanted to keep his job.

 

On a side note he's one of the few men I would entrust with the future of the game, buts he got no chance of getting a crack at it because he's one of us and the bigots in the game won't let him.

Edited August 24, 2012 by GovanAllan

[Frankie 8,148]

Wasn't it Lord Carloway who presided over the transfer embargo decision?

[Bluedell 5,329]

Wasn't it Lord Carloway who presided over the transfer embargo decision?

 

It was Nimmo Smith that heard the appeal and allowed it to stand.

[stewarty 1,876]

I've said before, although not many agreed, that Ogilve should have stood down until the investigations into EBT's and dual contracts were completed. He is clearly conflicted and now faces a position where: if we are cleared, stitch up allegations will be made and he may well be forced out; or if we are found guilty, his position is untenable and will likely have to go anyway. Its just a matter of time, and it gives me no pleasure to say that because I agree with the sentiments others have posted above.

[amms 0]

Andy posted something yesterday which I meant to pick up on and forgot. He said no one from Rangers or Celtic should be allowed in administration roles (I'm paraphrasing). I disagree, we need to get to a point where people are judged on their actions not on their affiliations. As long as checks and balances are in place there is no reason why a Rangers or Celtic connected person can't run Scottish football if they are the best person to do it. Ogilvie has literally got a lifetime in football administration, few people in the world have more experience of it than him.

[GovanAllan 0]

Andy posted something yesterday which I meant to pick up on and forgot. He said no one from Rangers or Celtic should be allowed in administration roles (I'm paraphrasing). I disagree, we need to get to a point where people are judged on their actions not on their affiliations. As long as checks and balances are in place there is no reason why a Rangers or Celtic connected person can't run Scottish football if they are the best person to do it. Ogilvie has literally got a lifetime in football administration, few people in the world have more experience of it than him.

 

I read that as well I took it to mean no one who is already employed by a member club should be holding positions of power.

[amms 0]

I read that as well I took it to mean no one who is already employed by a member club should be holding positions of power.

 

He might well have meant that, I only mentioned his post because it sparked the thought. I expect Andy will be along soon to quite rightly kick my arse for misrepresenting him!