Blue63 82 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 I have been following the SPL/SPFL saga and all its previous suggested forms for a number of months and one thing that fascinates me about the whole situation now that it has become the SPFL, is how Peter Lawwell as the Celtic Chief Executive is allowed anywhere near it, let alone become appointed to board of the Scottish FA.As someone who is paid directly by the football club of which he is the chairman , then there clearly is a conflict of interest situation. (A conflict of interest (COI) occurs when an individual or organisation is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in another).It would not be unreasonable to assume that Mr. Lawwell is paid handsome bonuses on how well his team performs in domestic and European competitions and as such being in a position to influence, manipulate or indeed eradicate any potential obstacles which may prevent said bonuses being achieved can definitely be identified as a COI.As a board member of the SFA and Celtic, he has a strict set of fiduciary controls that must be met and are indeed monitored, it is difficult, if not impossible to see how he can meet the following given his primary function he earns a salary for is as the Celtic Chief Executive.When a fiduciary duty is imposed, equity requires a different, arguably stricter, standard of behavior than the comparable tortious duty of care at common law. It is said the fiduciary has a duty not to be in a situation where personal interests and fiduciary duty conflict, a duty not to be in a situation where his fiduciary duty conflicts with another fiduciary duty, and a duty not to profit from his fiduciary position without knowledge and consent. A fiduciary ideally would not have a conflict of interest. It has been said that fiduciaries must conduct themselves "at a level higher than that trodden by the crowd and that the distinguishing or overriding duty of a fiduciary is the obligation of undivided loyalty."It would be interesting to see the payment history made to Mr. Lawwell of the last few seasons by the Celtic board in relation to bonus payments; maybe this enters into the realms of the Freedom of Information Act (FOI). In conclusion one thing is for sure he is certainly fulfilling his obligation of undivided loyalty and I don’t think it’s to the SPFL! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,815 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Nuremburg hugh says its all good. Have a word with yourself sir Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creampuff 22,628 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Yawn. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverBlue_Since91 2,895 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Just imagine if David Murray all those years ago got let on to the SFA board. There would be an outrage and every fucker and there dug would be screaming about corruption and conspiracys going on at the SFA and with Rangers,But Peter Lawwell the CEO of Celtic football is appointed without anyone raising an eye brow.And you get roasters like the above poster who don't give a fuck. And they wonder why Rangers are in a mess. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al 55 9,281 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 SPFL is made up of member clubs. I assume you mean the SFA Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Its as big a conflict of interest as you will ever see but sweep sweep the brooms are busy again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al.G.S.Gow 27 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Wonder what his input was when they wanted to nab the titles last year ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Wouldn't this conflict of interest only apply to things which directly affect Celtic? Will the representative of the nonprofessional game board also be a conflict of interest or do we not really care since its not Celtic/Lawwell? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
16BlueSherbert90 19,226 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 I probably shouldn't moan, but I don't wish to read Timmy Tales in Bears Den when it is not Rangers related.I am as disgusted by this appointment as probably the rest of us, but it doesn't belong here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Wouldn't this conflict of interest only apply to things which directly affect Celtic? Will the representative of the nonprofessional game board also be a conflict of interest or do we not really care since its not Celtic/Lawwell?And Rangers as we are the biggest club so therefore the biggest threat to them, whatever decisions are made involving us or the bheasts liewell should have no say but he will and he will continue to give the bheasts every advantage while hamstringing us at every chance and your nieve to think otherwise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 And Rangers as we are the biggest club so therefore the biggest threat to them, whatever decisions are made involving us or the bheasts liewell should have no say but he will and he will continue to give the bheasts every advantage while hamstringing us at every chance and your nieve to think otherwise.In that case we would need to bring in a wholly independent board with absolutely zero afilliation to any club in scottish football. Just to be on the safe side. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 In that case we would need to bring in a wholly independent board with absolutely zero afilliation to any club in scottish football. Just to be on the safe side.Absolutely fine with me Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mabawsa 888 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Calm the feck down. The guy's role is to be a low level paper gatherer and will not be having any influence at all. I had this clarified this morning on a call with Vince the Mince, Raygun and Harper McLeod. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Absolutely fine with meOnly problem is will be that the only people I can think of involved with scottishfootball in my lifetime that meet that criteria have been...Regan, & Doncaster.I mean we couldn't even have a fan of one club apointed for fear of some crank claiming its a conflict of interest Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al 55 9,281 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Issue isn't Liewell on the board, issue is why there is no Rangers equivalent. With the shit the game is in I think it makes sense for representatives of the 2 largest clubs to have a presence. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Only problem is will be that the only people I can think of involved with scottishfootball in my lifetime that meet that criteria have been...Regan, & Doncaster.I mean we couldn't even have a fan of one club apointed for fear of some crank claiming its a conflict of interestRegan and Doncaster are puppets of liewell and in one case former colleagues of his hardly suitable what we need are men of integrity (real integrity not the fake kind) who will make decisions for the good of everybody not just for one club, I don't want a Rangers biased sfa I want a fair and impartial one but there is no such thing in Scottish football. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StublueKPL 524 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 I probably shouldn't moan, but I don't wish to read Timmy Tales in Bears Den when it is not Rangers related.I am as disgusted by this appointment as probably the rest of us, but it doesn't belong here.sorry pal but I've got to disagree.This affects rangers as much as any club in Scotland so it is rangers related Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Regan and Doncaster are puppets of liewell and in one case former colleagues of his hardly suitable what we need are men of integrity (real integrity not the fake kind) who will make decisions for the good of everybody not just for one club, I don't want a Rangers biased sfa I want a fair and impartial one but there is no such thing in Scottish football.And how would these guys who have absolutely no history within Scottish football know what's best for the clubs? Lawwell is there as a rep of the professional game board. How do you represent those clubs with absolutely zero affiliation with any other? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cushynumber 25,178 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 if you have the Hugh Keevins take on it then Cellic fans can no longer moan about an agenda against their club, and we are not allowed to moan about the Liewell appointment because we dont have someone of sufficient gravitas to take up the position - which is as twisted a reasoning as I have ever heard. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
16BlueSherbert90 19,226 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 sorry pal but I've got to disagree.This affects rangers as much as any club in Scotland so it is rangers related Fair enough. I guess when you put it like that you are right. Moan withdrawn and apology submitted. lolI wonder when we get back up there if one of our guys will also be appointed to the SFA? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Fair enough. I guess when you put it like that you are right. Moan withdrawn and apology submitted. lolI wonder when we get back up there if one of our guys will also be appointed to the SFA?More importantly, I wonder if the same people will cry foul when that happens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 And how would these guys who have absolutely no history within Scottish football know what's best for the clubs? Lawwell is there as a rep of the professional game board. How do you represent those clubs with absolutely zero affiliation with any other?Liewell is a rep of celtic forget the official spiel that's what he'd doing and as the biggest club we have no representation either we should all have a equal voice or it should be completely independant but to have it so one sided only suits the green and grey agenda Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 More importantly, I wonder if the same people will cry foul when that happens.If we had representation and the scum didn't that would also be unfair, I wouldn't cry about it because I hate them but it would be unfair in exactly the same way as its unfair now Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Liewell is a rep of celtic forget the official spiel that's what he'd doing and as the biggest club we have no representation either we should all have a equal voice or it should be completely independant but to have it so one sided only suits the green and grey agendaDo you have any idea how many clubs would be represented if that was the case? There isn't just 42 clubs under the SFAs banner. So one sided? Hibs, Killie, Inverness, Stenhousemuir, Cove Rangers, Keith and Preston Athletic (i think) are all on the PGB. I've not heard anyone bleat about any of those clubs and a conflict of interest.The SFA board don't make day to day decisions on the running of Scottish football. Thats the PGB who do that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Do you have any idea how many clubs would be represented if that was the case? There isn't just 42 clubs under the SFAs banner. So one sided? Hibs, Killie, Inverness, Stenhousemuir, Cove Rangers, Keith and Preston Athletic (i think) are all on the PGB. I've not heard anyone bleat about any of those clubs and a conflict of interest.The SFA board don't make day to day decisions on the running of Scottish football. Thats the PGB who do that.You be happy liewells got his hands on the controls of all our future's if you want but I could never accept that ''man'' has anything but evil intent when it comes to my club Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.