The Clumpany experienced a genuine ‘WTF?!’ moment a short while ago when reading this mercifully short piece in the Daily Record:
It discusses the rumours which circulated today about Sevco still owing Greenock Morton their share of the proceeds of their recent Scottish Cup tie.
At just after 5pm today, Morton confirmed that they had received the money. Although – as a sharp-beaked goose pointed out – they didn’t specify when.
Make of that what you will.
However, it was the Record’s subsequent piece about the blog which had first alleged non-payment of the money which struck me as the most bizarre thing about this episode. [Yes this is a blog about a newspaper writing about another blog. The Universe may collapse before you finish reading it!].
Here is the piece in full:
What an accusation!
And what ‘front’!
I must admit that my first thoughts upon reading the article were “Craig Whyte: Billionaire”, “All eleven players attacked or spat on”, and “Red Bull Leipzig’s £6m interest in Barrie McKay”.
I also briefly wondered whether I was actually reading a particularly pithy/pishy Sevco ‘club’ statement.
But I wasn’t.
So I simply marvelled at a mainstream Scottish sports news publication – which has brought us some truly wonderful Ibrox moonbeams over the years – wagging a condescending finger at its readers and telling them that someone else is “best ignored”!
Are they playing for laughs?! Because they didn’t exactly ignore the blog in question themselves, did they?!
The article sounded like someone’s snooty mother handing out a lecture to an errant son. Whatever next?
“Please don’t play on that ghastly Twitter, darling. You know how it upsets me with its talk of the Offshore Game report”?
Or perhaps, “I’m not having that Facebook in THIS house. You don’t know what it might have on it. Someone might mention EBTs, side letters and Lord Nimmo-Smith. Dear me, I feel quite faint just thinking about it. Why don’t you watch a nice DVD about Rangers winning nine-in-a-row instead?”?
I also wondered to which measure or arbiter of ‘discreditedness’ the Record was referring in the piece. If there is some sort of Ombudsman for it, I think I might like to make a few red top referrals…