WHENEVER anyone is accused of something they did not do, from the most heinous crime to some petty misunderstanding, it is advisable and also easy to stand up for yourself.
The burden of proof lies with the accuser and so if the accused is innocent then it’s simple enough to prove that.
But when a finger is pointed at a person and that individual remains schtum; let’s be honest, we all think there is smoke coming from a fire.
Which brings me to the Scottish Professional Football League chairman Murdoch MacLennan.
Read more: Steven Gerrard: Rangers strikeforce must show their quality or I will bolster the Ibrox attack
The 69-year-old Glaswegian is best known as a newspaper executive across several titles and for being regularly lampooned in the pages of Private Eye in which he has been accused of all sorts.
I won’t repeat them here because while I’m a fan and subscriber to the Eye, they don’t always get everything right and I’m skint so can’t afford Ian Hyslop’s overworked lawyer.
It was in Private Eye where MacLennan’s link with Dermot Desmond, Celtic’s biggest shareholder, was revealed (sic) and also his apparent hatred of Rangers with one story claiming that when he was at the Daily Record, he was well known on the editorial floor to be no fan of anyone at Ibrox.
Rangers demanded an investigation into this and wanted him removed from his role. Neither happened and it doesn’t really look like it will.
MacLennan is chairman of the Dublin-based Independent News and Media, a firm which lists Desmond and another Celtic shareholder, Denis O’Brien, as major shareholders. Rangers say there is a conflict of interest and they actually have a point.
Although from the outside looking in, it seems a pretty tenuous link. Do you honestly think the bold Dermot sent his man into Hampden in a Trojan horse to inflict more damage on his club’s rivals.
The theory is good fun if seriously flimsy.
The SPFL say they knew of MacLennan’s business relationship with the two Celtic man, which was hardly a secret and said this.
“To be definitive, a non-executive position on a plc does not constitute a business relationship between that individual and a minority shareholder in the company and therefore no investigation is warranted.”
Chances are Rangers won’t let this go. Many of their supporters will back them as it will be seen as having a go at the evil Scottish football bosses who tried to destroy their club.
While everyone else wonders if this is an attempt to divert attention away from the many troubles which can still be found down Edmonston Drive.
I know three people who worked under MacLennan and irregularly dealt with him. Two swear they can’t remember the man ever speaking about football, never mind that he supported a team in the city.
The other, a good friend, backs up Private Eye’s suggestion MacLennan had his sights set on a seat on the Celtic board, which doesn’t necessarily mean that as a boy he was a regular on the Bobby Murdoch Emerald supporters’ bus.
MacLennan has never given an interview since getting his job at Hampden. This is odd given his grandiose title, even if I have no idea what he actually does or whether he has any real power.
Should he dare hold a press conference, the first question would be: “Forgive my manners but what do you actually do?” Quickly followed up by: “So who much do you hate the Rangers?”
Read more: Steven Gerrard: Rangers strikeforce must show their quality or I will bolster the Ibrox attack
These are serious allegation even if you think it’s all a nonsense and, as stated above if, it is all wrong then then it would be easy enough for him to nip it in the bud.
Are the SPFL afraid a man of nearly 70, and one who has enjoyed great success in his life, can’t handle a couple of rather simple questions from someone like myself? He’s not going to get pranked by Sacha Baron Cohen.
The longer he says nothing then those who believe him to be a wrong ‘un will feel their fears have been confirmed, even if they are way off the mark.
Private Eye’s nickname for the chairman of our league is ‘Shifty.’ Murdoch MacLennan couldn’t sue them over that.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel