On Grounds for Judicial Review

541
6418

While the proposed Judicial Review of the LNS decision is to be welcomed it is a position that is fraught with legal difficulties such as the capacity to raise the proceedings, potential time bars and all sorts of other arguments.

It would be complete folly to base an argument here solely upon a judicial review of LNS as that would only leave one string to the bow.

Further, take the stated opinion or Mr Rod McKenzie that LNS only dealt with the issue of Player Registrations within the SPL/SPFL — and nothing else.

Any analysis of what is meant by that statement (and others made by Neil Doncaster) leads to the conclusion that there are other matters to be considered which were outwith the tight and narrow remit handed to LNS by the SPFL.

For me, the clearest consideration is this.

1. Craig Whyte has already been personally convicted by the SFA for deliberately failing to pay taxes as and when they fall due under article 5.1 of the SFA rules.

2. No such charge has ever been levied against RFC — just against their CEO.

3. Not only did RFC fail to pay taxes as and when they became due under Whyte’s watch, they deliberately failed to pay taxes for a 13 year period under the stewardship of Sir David Murray. They did this by deliberately entering into two unlawful tax aggressive tax avoidance schemes which even their advisers warned them could only be undertaken at considerable risk to the club as the schemes were never guaranteed to be successful.

4. Those schemes were entered into so that the club could buy players they would otherwise not have afforded.

5. In furtherance of those schemes, RFC chose to deliberately withhold the full details of their contractual arrangements with both players and managers from both the SFA and the SPL when submitting their applications to play under licence and in terms of the rules of both organisations.

6. In each of the years concerned, RFC had to apply for both domestic and European Licences to play football, and it is the granting of these licences which allows any football club to play in structured competition organised under the auspices of, or with the approval of, the SFA or UEFA.

7. Each and every licence application as submitted to the SFA in the knowledge that key financial and contractual information had been excluded in furtherance of tax avoidance purposes, and tax, which has since been declared to be legitimately due and payable from 1999 onwards, was unpaid and remains unpaid.

8. The above processes and procedures are no different, and indeed are considerably worse, breaches of article 5.1 under which Whyte was personally convicted and fined.

9. Further, as part of the HMRC investigations into the use of unlawful tax schemes, RFC deliberately lied to HMRC, SFA and SPL about the existence of side letters and other contractual documentation. This is particularly so in relation to the annual application for a playing licence.

On 20th May 2011, HMRC, in relation to one of the tax schemes, wrote to RFC and accused the club of “deliberate and fraudulent” behaviour in relation to the continued submission of false PAYE and NIC returns over a period of years.

10. It, therefore, follows that each and every application for a football licence made by RFC to the SFA from 2000 onwards (at least) was based on falsified financial, contractual and tax information and was designed to mislead the SFA with a view to persuading them to grant a licence on misrepresented grounds.

11. Not only is the above a breach of article 5.1 of the SFA handbook, but any licence obtained by misrepresentation has not been validly obtained as it has been obtained by way of false representation and deception.

12. It is a pre-requisite of entry into any league competition that the participating club holds a valid licence to play football.

13. In the event that a club did not or should not have held/hold a valid licence to play, that same club is not free to enter structured competition or register players to participate in such competition. It also follows that any declaration of a result of 0-3 in relation to any particular game as a result of a rule breach (such as fielding an ineligible player) is of no consequence because the club concerned was not eligible to participate at all.

14. The Court of Arbitration for Sport has already been invited by UEFA to hold that any application for a licence or any other compliance submission, which is devoid of all necessary financial and contractual information should be treated as null and void and as never having been received.

15. The same Court has also held that any title, championship, award, record, reward or other benefit which has been gained as a result of an improper or prohibited process should not be allowed to stand, the records of the award etc should be expunged and the sporting records corrected accordingly.

None of the above is dependent on a successful review of LNS but goes hand in hand with that process.

In the forthcoming review of Scottish Football recently announced by the SPFL, in conjunction with the SFA, all of the above should be under consideration.

LNS, under review, may determine that the players were in fact not eligible, but much more fundamental is the fact that there are clear facts and circumstances which should mean that the club itself was never eligible in terms of established legal jurisprudence.

As had been pointed out by Rod McKenzie, none of this has been considered by the SPFL as all matters concerning a licence are solely under the jurisdiction of the SFA.

Thus far, the SFA have taken no action against RFC or any of its officials as a result of the clubs involvement in, and cover up of, the Big Tax Case or the Wee Tax Case – both of which will be the subject of the forthcoming review demanded by Celtic and others.

541 COMMENTS


  1. Despite the Scottish Court system being in the middle of its summer recess, I’ve still been keeping an eye on the court rolls for any cases of note, like a judicial review, although there is nothing on that as yet.

    There were a couple of unopposed petitions granted on Wednesday though.
    A392/16 Paul Clark v Chief Constable for Police Scotland &c Campbell Smith LLP
    A295/16 David Whitehouse v Liam Murphy &c Ledingham Chalmers LLP

    These are the D&P claims against Police Scotland re their evidence gathering practices.  Liam Murphy is a Procurator Fiscal for Specialist Casework, including claims against the police.

    I would expect that hearings in front of a judge will follow in these two cases later in the Autumn, but I can’t see any great revelations coming from them. The D&P pair were successful in a similar claim against the City of London Police last year and were awarded £500k in damages.

    View Comment

  2. There was some earlier discussion on Ewan  Murray’s article in the Guardian but there’s another article by Barney Ronay regarding an Inquiry initiated by Lewisham Council into the Compulsory Purchase Order placed on land, including Millwall FC’s Den, which may be of interest. The inquiry was called after a series of questions emerged over the process and due diligence behind the council’s plans to compulsorily purchase the land in Bermondsey and sell it on to an offshore‑registered developer.
    The full article can be found here:https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/aug/17/millwall-inquiry-battle-den-lewisham-council

    This extract may resonate:

    The inquiry is expected to reveal its findings in a report before the end of the year. Witnesses are currently giving evidence.
    At the end of which it is worth pointing out that the inquiry itself is a puzzling affair. Lord Dyson may be a hugely respected, impartial and dizzyingly able former master of the rolls. It is important to point out that this is not a public inquiry with judicial force.
    This is in reality a report commissioned and paid for by the council’s executive, and operating within a strictly defined framework. It is a private inquiry.
    The Dyson inquiry has no power to demand or seize documents. It cannot peer behind the veil of offshore secrecy. It will never tell us, for example, who really owns Renewal, or who Renewal’s ultimate beneficiaries are. All of the evidence involved will be heard privately and kept from the public gaze.

    View Comment

  3. I remember reading a while back about the disparity in income for SPFL clubs.  One partial solution put forward was gate sharing.  It was pointed out however, when talking about a 50/50 split that the overheads involved in running the larger stadia in Scotland is hugely more expensive than the smaller to medium sized grounds.  Even apart from the infrastructure, can you imagine the costs involved in Policing, stewarding, emergency services for a crowd of 50K+ or 5K?

    With regards to away fans’ clubs keeping their own ticket money, be careful what you wish for.  Not a few clubs visit Celtic Park with a very small away support.  On the other hand Celtic’s away support, by comparison, is consistently massive.

    TV revenue/ viewing figures, sponsorship deals, it all comes down to the same thing. Numbers.

    There is no easy answer here in Scotland.  2 Very large clubs, 3 or 4 fairly large, the rest small.  It’s always going to be an uneven split.

    I don’t expect any sympathy for this but it should be remembered Celtic is a selling club.  We buy cheap and sell dear.  I wish I had a penny for every transfer rumour I have read about, with clubs from Europe and especially England wanting to take away my favourite players. It’s not easy at the top either!

    View Comment

  4. HOMUNCULUSAUGUST 18, 2017 at 13:02  Solidarity payments to clubs not qualified for UEFA club competition……
    …..Maybe this is income which could be distributed a bit better, it would be a massive boost for lower division clubs, they are in the same league as teams in the top division. 

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Couldn’t agree more.
    Just think how much good the money could and would do at a community level.

    View Comment

  5. I suppose the Hibs match provided a good opportunity to deflect attention down Ibrox way.

    Haven’t heard much about King, the ‘Cold Shoulder’, lack of cash etc.

    Something must be going on?

    And another poor home result tomorrow won’t please the bears – and especially after seeing CFC virtually secure another CL cash windfall.

    When will they be outside Ibrox with torches and pitchforks, demanding King to throw in his ‘promised’ GBP 50M / 30M / 20M ?  [Can’t remember the final, quoted, boll*x number.]

    That Champions League result wasn’t just bad for Scottish football…it was ‘simply the worst’ for TRFC!  15

    View Comment

  6. John ClarkAugust 18, 2017 at 00:54Well, that’s an idea, indeed, to try to put pressure on UEFA  to get in on the act and head off the involvement of the actual civil courts of the nation by getting the SFA/SPFL arraigned before the ‘court of arbitration for sport.’
    https://twitter.com/laurasportslaw/status/898525039708041218
    Maybe you do not need clubs to get it there, sometimes a simple letter from someone who is good at writing facts and can show evidence is all thats needed.

    View Comment

  7. I imagine the Court of Session have a wide range of powers with regards Mr King. Bearing in mind they are only being asked to enforce a lawful instruction as far as I am aware.

    He was told to make the 20p offer and appealed it.

    He lost the appeal and now has to make the offer.

    He didn’t.

    There is no further appeal as far as I’m aware, it’s just a matter of making him do it. Could they for example ban him as a director in the UK. That would make hi position at the holding company a bit awkward. 

    View Comment

  8. STEVIEBCAUGUST 18, 2017 at 16:40
    he final, quoted, boll*x number.]
    —————
    One day i’m going to use that line. with your permission of course19

    View Comment

  9. It’s a quiet night tonight, as I wait for a Skype from Oz.(It’s running a bit late, which might mean an early morning Skype for us, at Oz dinner time!).

    But I have had some fun reading, or re-reading, the findings of the Takeover Panel’s Hearing Commmittee, which King appealed against( and lost his appeal)

    Some of you might not have read the full report of the original hearing. If you haven’t, it’s at this link

    http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/publication/view/20174-rangers-international-football-club-plc

    It’s quite a long read,but it puts me in mind of a South Africa judge’s observation about blig and sasheselm rail, or some such.
    19

    View Comment

  10. Johnjames talking this morning about the sensational Retail deal struck by Dave king back in June.  So I decided to have a look for myself, what the latest stock situation is.  I entered the online Megastore.
    First of, there is still no 2017-2018 strips of any description.  One would have thought that Puma & SD would have pulled out all the stops to get strips on the shelves for what will probably be their final season to make some money.  Even if it was a limited edition of say 30k units, all parties could have cashed in.

    As for the home strips 2016-2017 I’m afraid there is only a limited range on juniors and ladies.

    If you really want an adult male top you will have to settle for a 2015 away top provided you are L or XL.

    So in a sense the one years contract agreed in June has been a success, they have cleared out the unsold stock by and large.

    But in the end the idea that getting the retail deal sorted out would lessen the need for soft loans seems to have petered out.  Yet only back in June things seemed much more optimistic:
    “You had a structural deficit within the ongoing operations. So, one of the priorities for us over the last couple of years – the biggest priority if you are ignoring the football side of getting back to the Premiership and into Europe – was the resolution of the retail deal.”
    (Dave King quoted in the Telegraph 21 June 2017)

    View Comment

  11. Apologies for the grammatical and punctuation errors above.  I usually take the time to edit my posts for the obvious mistakes, but on this occasion the wee room called urgently!  2212

    View Comment

  12. After the controversial stuff from the Green Brigade recently, it was great to see them back to their best today.  A banner, ‘ A club open to all’ in support of Pride Glasgow was on display.  Good to see football beginning to move into the 21st Century on this issue.  The last hurdle of homophobic attitudes in society beginning to crumble.

    ps, It has nothing to do with the Bromance between KT & PR. 041219 

    Good to see a Scottish club’s support taking the lead.  It’s one thing for club PR people coming out and saying the right thing but another thing entirely when it comes from the fans.
    Well done.

    View Comment

  13. As a wee aside from the serious stuff I found this interlude amusing.I remarked to my good lady that Pedro’s coat must be on a shoogly peg after today’s result and she said he can always go back to being a fisherman. I had no idea what she was talking about but she told me to look up Pedro the Fisherman and here is the link. What I found particularly ironic and amusing, as I’m sure will the Celtic readers, that it is from the film The Lisbon Story.

    Hopefully one of these will work.

    View Comment

  14. woodsteinAugust 19, 2017 at 16:16
    ‘..Slippery slope.
    __________________
    Aye, it’s a worry!
    Daily Record circulation 143,635    , down 13.78% Sunday Post circulation 135,181   ,down 10.24%
    Sunday Mail  circulation 152,892     down 14.39%
    Seriously ( and we do have to be serious about ‘journalism’) I think that we all know that when we have a go at the SMSM/Radio Scotland as being mere propagandists for and supporters of untruth we ( or at least, I) are referring principally ( but not exclusively) to the sports journalists and their editors who partook of the22  ,and failed to investigate and question all and anything that was being said by, successively, SDM, CW, CG, D&P , The SPL, the SFL, the SFA, in the matter of the cheating by SDM and the subsequent farcical  and deceitful nonsense that TRFC Ltd  is entitled to be regarded as the same club as another club that is in Liquidation, and for whose sake,it is alleged, the Football Authorities  threw Integrity out of the window by lying to UEFA, and by withholding relevant evidence from the LNS Commission.
    The concepts of a free Press , and freedom of the Press have been of critical importance to the development of such democracy as we have.
    I do not particularly want our newspapers to go bust and die the death of Liquidation.
    Ach, what am I worrying about? If SDM’s/CW’s RFC didnae die, how could a newspaper?19

    View Comment

  15. How bloody annoying! I went to edit my last post(!) with about one minute twenty seconds to go, but was denied the facility! ‘ you are not authorised to edit’ was the message! Something wrong with Word Press there? I just wanted to space the paragraphs!

    View Comment

  16. bluAugust 18, 2017 at 11:47 
    I agree part that Celtic can’t be faulted for driving forward. They were happy though to ally with Rangers on the voting structure of the SPL, which effectively provided the two with a veto  on change. Why the others didn’t kick the door in when Rangers went bust is beyond me.
    —————————————————————————————————————–

    Hi Blu

    Interesting point – some thoughts… 🙂

    Whether we like it or not, I think we have to accept that our football clubs are run as businesses – there may be exceptions.

    In the case of a PLC like Celtic, there is an obligation to shareholders to operate the business in such a way as to maximise benefit. This is largely achieved by being as successful as you can manage to be on the playing field and by operating astutely in the market and in dealings with the governance of the game.

    This is essentially true for all of our clubs.

    The voting structure of the SPL undoubtedly gave the so-called Old Firm a veto on change. Presumably they felt that this protected them from issues like gate sharing and probably gave them an advantage in othe areas too.

    As a business, and operating with a fairly narrow view of what is good for that business, this seems to me to be a situation that is comfortably within the ambit of doing what is best for your business – why would they not do it? (There ARE reasons not to, but this comes later).

    The question that this raises in my mind is this: How the hell were they able to get the SPL rules set up with this veto in the first place???

    You say the others should have kicked the door in when Rangers went bust. Fair point. However, why did the other clubs agree to the SPL ‘Old Firm’ veto in the first place??

    Celtic get one vote. Rangers get one vote. There were at least 8 other teams in the SPL at any given time. When the SPL was set up – how did the Old Firm force the issue? What was their leverage?

    I struggle with this.

    Did they threaten to leave Scottish Football and go south? Sure we saw all the headlines in the press. Did we once see any indication that the English FA was remotely interested in them coming south or that the English clubs would wear it? Nope.

    This is one of the emptiest threats ever.

    So what else was there? How were votes for the SPL veto managed?

    Well it sounds to me like most of the senior clubs in Scotland had a common problem.

    The problem was they were in debt to the same bank. And that bank was bailing out Rangers to the tune of tens of millions. Moreover, it sounds a lot like it was being run by a guy, Masterton, who was quite willing to put the squeeze on other clubs if it was in the interest of his beloved Rangers.

    I fear this was the real Blue Pound for a long time.

    If it was not Masterton (not sure of the exact timing) then it could easily have been predecessors. This is what the Establishment club means.

    This stuff is important for how we go forward in the future. We MUST NOT accept a future that is organised to serve the ‘Old Firm’ and relegates everyone else to diddy status.

    I say this as a Celtic fan. And I would urge my own board to see the bigger picture where a truly competitive Scottish league would generate much more domestic TV income and support better performances in Europe. We should be promoting the level playing field at all times and being sufficiently confident in our ability to perform at the highest levels.

    I want Celtic to be more than a PLC, but I have to accept that this is the true nature of boardroom discussions. However, they have to realise that their paying customers are intrinsic to financial success and that ultimately they need a competititve product on the field, domestic and European, for long term survival.

    The other clubs have to get over what ever affliction caused them to kowtow to the ‘Old Firm’ and, possibly collectively, push for the level playing field too.

    Diddies no more. (In a Proclaimers stylee)

    View Comment

  17. ZilchAugust 20, 2017 at 10:37

    All those greetin’ faces over Celtic’s financial dominance, particularly amongst the so called sports journalists, would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic. Celtic are, perhaps, a little (very) fortunate that this level of superiority has come at a time when so much money is there to be made from CL participation, but that’s not their fault. It may eventually ruin Scottish football, but, again, that’s not their fault, and if truth be told, it’s only the Rangers, of old, supporters who are losing out on league winning glory, for it’s a long time since any other club’s supporters had genuine belief that it might happen for them.

    The problem now, of course, is the prospect of repeated ‘trebles’, which will only be avoided by the unpredictability of cup competition, where one mistake, or dodgy honest mistake, can see even the best of clubs defeated. That is why the one-off style of cup competition is so important to our game.

    But what to do to change that dominance, without expecting Celtic to fall on it’s collective sword?

    Well there is very little that Scottish football can do to level the financial disparity, gate-sharing won’t do it, and is intrinsically unfair, while creating a more level distribution of football income and prize-money won’t come close to closing the gap, even if they went so far as to apportion it inversely, with the top club getting less than, say, sixth place does. There just isn’t the money within the Scottish game to ‘even out’ Celtic’s dominance (even if there was a fair and equitable way to do it).

    No, the problem, and answer, lies with UEFA.

    Until, and unless, they acknowledge that the CL income is generated by the whole game, and not the individual clubs (despite what the (world) media would want us to believe), and distribute that income to all their member FAs, to be distributed fairly within their leagues, then the gap will continue to grow between the top elite clubs, and all the rest, in every single country. The gap between top and bottom in England is only minimised by the ludicrous amount that over-hyped league gets from TV rights, with the only other country where the ‘gap’ isn’t growing being Germany, where the problem was addressed before it got to the level it is everywhere else.

    In the meantime it is perfectly proper for Celtic to pocket whatever money they can get, and to spend it wisely in a way that makes them ever stronger. No one, other than UEFA, can stop them, and the less worthy ‘elite’, from moving away from the rest of us.

    View Comment

  18. Two excellent posts which give much food for thought.

    As mentioned above it is not within Celtic’s gift to be altruistic, the board have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the shareholders.

    When Fergus McCann proposed a share issue and a listing on the Stock Market some supporters were against this move, preferring the club to remain a private company with meaningful fan representation.  However given the history of the club under the control of a few families there was no large appetite for this.  The discipline required under the watchful eye of The City seemed more reassuring.  Besides Fergus’ aim to have a large fan ownership of shares could give the fans a voice.  Of course after the initial share offering came another two, I think, which diluted fan input to very little.  Hence the uphill road the Res.12 folk have had.  It’s remarkable how far they have taken this so far.

    I totally agree with Zilch’s sentiment:  “However, they have to realise that their paying customers are intrinsic to financial success and that ultimately they need a competititve product on the field, domestic and European, for long term survival”
    But the answer to that is not within Scotland so much, as AJ says, it has to be taken by EUFA.  They need to redistribute the huge money swirling around to the benefit of all, maybe not entirely evenly but certainly not mainly for the benefit of about 4 countries.  It is no wonder people talk about a breakaway European body made out for the benefit of the rest of Europe ( I would exclude Asian teams, the travel is ridiculous and stretches the meaning of Europe to a strange degree).  If the top 4 countries are all important then let them get on with it alone.  Their ‘big cup’ would be devalued.

    Even then, I still think there will be bigger clubs and smaller clubs.  But if it means that smaller clubs stop having to exist hand to mouth, can develop players, improve infrastructure, improve fan experience, move forward without fear of a chap on the door then that itself would be something worthwhile.

    View Comment

  19. John Clark
    August 19, 2017 at 23:16
     
     
    “The concepts of a free Press , and freedom of the Press have been of critical importance to the development of such democracy as we have.”
     
    Exactly.
     
    But
     
    “Where once journalists were active gatherers of news, now they have generally become mere passive processors of unchecked, second-hand material, much of it contrived by PR to serve some political or commercial interest. Not journalists, but churnalists. An industry whose primary task is to filter out falsehood has become so vulnerable to manipulation that it is now involved in the mass production of falsehood, distortion and propaganda.”
     
    Full article here.
     
    http://www.nickdavies.net/2008/02/05/introducing-flat-earth-news/
     
    PS.  JC you have unread mail

    View Comment

  20. ZilchAugust 20, 2017 at 10:37
    AllyjamboAugust 20, 2017 at 13:07
     jimboAugust 20, 2017 at 14:27
    ____________
    Three immensely valuable posts, gentlemen.

    The matters you mention point up the failure  of an ‘industry’ to understand and get to grips with two realities-  the mutual interdependence of football clubs and the dependence (ultimately) on each club having a ‘consumer base’ large enough to keep it functioning reasonably competitively.

    Things were in a bad way before the SDM cheating scandal, when we assumed that our administrators were simply unimaginative, inflexible, complacent and  incompetent ,rather than desperate to the point of abandoning the very concept of Sporting Integrity.

    Now that we know that our very Governance was and continues to be heedless of moral and sporting principle, things are in a very, very, very bad way.

    There can be no hope of any real change until we get to the (many?) truths concerning how and why we have arrived at this situation.

    And we’re not going to get that under the present dispensation.

    View Comment

  21. woodsteinAugust 20, 2017 at 14:35
    I agree with the sentiment of your post, but I think it’s a bit optimistic to suggest that there has been a sea-change in journalism in, relatively, recent years, from honest reporting of facts to what we see now. Wasn’t it Mark Twain, a man not born yesterday, who said (something like), ‘the man who doesn’t read newspapers is uninformed, while the man who does, is misinformed!’ 

    View Comment

  22. AJ, Jimbo and JC

    Dead right.

    In football terms we are currently a diddy nation acting like we are content to be a diddy nation.

    We need the SFA to be actively lobbying and planning for a viable European context for us to compete in fairly.

    What have we got? An SFA that is doing contortions to maintain a corrupt domestic scene, basically lying and defrauding all of us.

    We could be so much better than this.

    The answer does involve UEFA. This is an association of members, of which we are one through the SFA.

    We need our clubs to act to fix the SFA, and the SFA to act to fix UEFA.

    In each case it is a matter of building a groundswell amongst the smallest to come together and act in untiy to counteract the playground bullies.

    We all learned about this stuff when we were kids. It really is this simple and fundamental.

    The first step is to get our clubs to find some spine and act to clear out the corruption at the SFA / SPFL.

    View Comment

  23. Shit !! just spent about half an hour replying to Allyjambos great post at 13.07 and I dont know what the hell I done but as I was about to send it I somehow managed to delete it AAAAAARRRGHH …..11

    View Comment

  24. Allyjambo
    August 20, 2017 at 15:21
     
    Wasn’t it Mark Twain, a man not born yesterday, who said
    ‘the man who doesn’t read newspapers is uninformed, while the man who does, is misinformed!’
     
    Not only, but also
    “A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”
     
    “sea-change in journalism”
     
    Would agree, but with the growth of PR in the last 20 years or so, I would say

    “The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.”

    Thomas Jefferson  2222

    View Comment

  25. I see BBC Sportsound today continued its celebration of Rangers EBT years with a fawning interview with Ronald de Boer, and Alex Mcleish as a studio guest. That is the same Mcleish who admitted in a BBC documentary Rangers HAD to use EBT’s otherwise they couldn’t match the wages Celtic could afford to play. That did not stop Chick Young nauseatingly recalling the final day in 2003 when an EBT funded Rangers won the league by a single goal.  Chick’s hearty laughter as he recalled signalling the Celtic score to ‘big Eck’ during the game left the listener in no doubt as to what his leanings were that day. 

    I wonder how much Sportsound would fawn over Rangers if BBC were NOT banned from Ibrox!

    View Comment

  26. Jumbo 14.27
    “Hence the uphill road the Res.12 folk have had.  It’s remarkable how far they have taken this so far.”
    The above provides an opportunity to remind folks of two underlying aims of Res12 initially  hoped for as a  result of an investigation  by UEFA, but as long as an investigation is  honestly done, by anyone seeking the truth and through it restoration of trust.
    Aim1.Accountability.  
    An aim of Res12 is to send a message to the SFA that they can no longer make decisions in secrecy without being called to account for them. A Judicial Review is one means for calling SPFL and SFA to account for the failings of LNS to address dishonesty since 1999 to 5th July 2017  and the harm a commercial 5 Way deal has done to our game.
    However Res12 is still alive and kicking and making football accountable precisely because as matters stand, and as glacial the state of progress has been, it makes the SFA accountable to shareholders in Celtic because of Celtic’s accountability to their shareholders.

    Getting answers will be a sign to the SFA (and clubs and their supporters) that the days of making decisions that exclude all stakeholders, of which shareholders in clubs are but one party, have gone. 

    It should not be forgotten that Res12 was never about a small group of bampots,  led by an even smaller group of eejits, pursuing  a hopeless cause, doomed to die, but is a cause that lives on precisely because what it stands for is what the vast majority of football supporters crave, which is restoration of trust that our game is not governed sole  by commercial considerations and that integrity is paramount.
    So point one is that in getting answers, whatever they might be, Res12 will have achieved one aim.
    Aim 2. SFA reform.
    In many ways this depends on the answers obtained by Res12, but if they demonstrate flaws in the rules/regulations and the processes that police them, then reform is not just desirable, it is essential and those opposing or defending or participating in a flawed system must make way for those for whom integrity is paramount and once in place will amend and police the rules/regulations accordingly.
    The above is something that crosses the club  support divide and makes Res12 much much wider than a single club issue.
    Although it is Celtic shareholder driven, if its aims are achieved, every club will benefit from the accountability and reformation that results.
    We might even realise we are all in it together and instead of dying from the scraps falling from the UEFA table, can come up with a process where leagues across Europe argue with UEFA for a greater percentage of prize money going to leagues instead of clubs as solidarity payments.

    View Comment

  27. HomunculusAugust 20, 2017 at 19:27
    ‘….Maybe the BBC don’t know they are employing tax cheats.’
    __________
    But they sure as hell knew that one of their employees  ( recently retired but still getting regular gigs paid for by our money ) did his best to deny that Dave King was convicted of scores of offences of fraud, by asserting hotly and frequently that King had ‘settled’ matters with the South Africa Revenue Service. 
    The same employee made light of the £95K  EBT slipped to CO as being just about the price of ‘a good night out’, trying to minimise the potential significance of the connection between RFC and its former employee who had become President of the SFA .
    And he had a good wee laugh with McLeish and the others when he described how (not knowing the telegraphic language for ‘missed penalty’) he signalled the miss by raising his arm in the air!
    For as long as guys like him are ’employed’  by the BBC …

    View Comment

  28. AuldheidAugust 20, 2017 at 20:24
    ‘….Res12 much much wider than a single club issue.Although it is Celtic shareholder driven, if its aims are achieved, every club will benefit from the accountability and reformation that results.’
    ____________
    Those are key points, that cannot be too strongly stated: there is no legal way that a plc board can ignore a shareholders’ resolution: no matter how long it may be postponed, it must sooner or later be debated at an AGM ( unless, of course, it is ‘withdrawn’ by the requisitioners).

    When it is debated, sooner or later, it won’t be an in-house  ‘football’ debate, but a debate about whether the Board failed in its fiduciary duty to use every means at its disposal to protect and advance the shareholders’ business and financial stake in the plc.That’s serious business for any Board which might have preferred to accept being cheated out of millions rather than tackle the alleged cheating head-on.

    Likewise, a Judicial Review of whether an  organisation’s  internal ‘disciplinary’ procedures were or were not subverted in such way as to lead to an unjust and ill-founded determination will result in a conclusion which can be accepted as being fully independent .And whatever the ‘verdict’, would signal a way forward.

    Then, and only then, can we get on with trying to revivify the whole of Scottish Football as a fair and  justly administered competitive sport, in which the rewards of the ‘successful’ take into account the mutual interdependence of the competitors, without whom there could be no football matches to be televised, or sponsored, or marketed.

    View Comment

  29. Some great posts tonight! Thank you all for your insights. 
    Slightly off track but loosely connected with a few earlier posters …
    The bbc reports:”BBCScottish Premiership ins and outs – Summer 2017
    Rangers, after a disappointing third-place finish last season, have been the biggest spenders as they try to narrow the gap between themselves and champions Celtic.”
    This is simply not true? What motive does the BBC have for printing this stuff? Surely they must see that they are complicit in the lies that continue to get tens of thousands of TRFC supporters to part with their cash.
    The dichotomy is that in trying to appease Rangers/Sevco/TRFC (delete as appropriate), they are helping to continuing to help pull the wool over the eyes of the supporters (the vast majority of whom are just like any other set of supporters). The absolute scandal is that, once again, they won’t see the crash coming, when it inevitably does.
    Looking at the BBC Scotland football page, it is more and more like all the stories come directly from level 5 or at least from level 5 via the daily record. Almost every link the other night was to the DR.

    i also agree with upthehoops and others about the almost incessant re-living the ‘glory days’ at Inrox. It seems that no Show can pass without mention of Rangers treble winning team but definitely without mention of their EBTs and the complicity surrounding those.

    View Comment

  30. Why should the public pay the BBC a licence fee when it is a known fact some of their commentators and production staff invite and willingly interview tax cheats and pay them to come on. If licence money goes to pay these people, both the interviewer and the interviewee, then surely this is stealing from the public purse to aid and abet tax cheats and is encouraging dishonesty and is breaching the morale and ethical codes. I do not listen to the bbc now that they have set an agenda of dishonesty and lying.

    View Comment

  31. armchairsupporterAugust 20, 2017 at 22:19
    ‘Some great posts tonight! Thank you all for your insights. ‘
    ____________________
    So I ty to find the BBC thingy, and am hit by the news that Jerry Lewis has died!
    Bang goes another of my boyhood movie delights! Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis!
    But to your post:the transfer window doesn’t shut till 31st August.
    You see the stupid deviousness of whatever prat of a ‘journalist’ (and his/her editor) in reporting, not an actual untruth( if up till now  TRFC Ltd have in fact spent more than any other club) but reporting a fact with the intention to mislead the gullible. 
    Anything can happen in the next 11 days, in the transfer market.
    It’s astonishing to reflect how the BBC ‘during the war’ (as Del boy’s uncle Albert was wont to say) the BBC strove to  tell the truth as far as possible without providing aid and comfort to the aitch you en esses.
    Today, as in 2012,and before,there seems to be a BBC ‘TRFC Ltd fan club’ blind to truth, and propagandising for all it is worth, desperately trying to normalise the abnormal.
    Quite extraordinary.
    And not to be put down to thicko, pretendy’journalists’. 
    No, at the higher levels of BBC governance.
    Now, there’s a word!
    Governance. Where have I heard that before? And in what context?19
    The baleful shade of Peter Thomson has managed, perhaps, to cross the Styx, oops, sorry, the Clyde, to haunt the sports desks in Pacific Quay.

    View Comment

  32. And, before I go to bed, can I just say that ‘the Hamilton goal’ was indeed as sweet a goal as ever was worked.

    It is the beautiful game.

    If only we could believe that our Football governance people could understand that beauty is truth, and truth beauty.

    Some poet guy said that long ago- and my old man used to quote it before ever I had read the poem.

    Mind you, my old man was a Motherwell-born-non-multimillionaire, so what could he have known? 

    View Comment

  33. Artificial pitches – here’s a project for the suits at Hampden.

    There was a lot of talk yesterday on another site and on BBC Sportscene about the pitch at Rugby Park.  No one has a good thing to say about that pitch in particular but artificial pitches in general.
    From what I gather on a BBC article (2016) there are 12 artificial pitches in Scotland out of 42 clubs.  2 In the top league, Hamilton & Kilmarnock.

    700 Players in Scotland were surveyed and 73% prefer to play in a deteriorating grass pitch than a plastic one.  Main reasons were cited as the possibility of injuries.  Joints, knee, ankle, hip, slide tackle burns.

    Even Lee McCulloch doesn’t like to play on them, longer recovery time in the days after (a common comment)
    Ball control issues.  Funnily  enough a lot of people quote the new wonderful turf at Murrayfield, forgetting that game is played with the players carrying the ball!

    Apparently the latest hybrid pitches are a step up I heard mention of Celtic looking into this and I’m certain Hearts are going with this.

    Summer football could be the answer.

    As always it all comes down to costs.  Which kind of brings us back to what we were discussing yesterday.. I mentioned that smaller clubs who benefitted from a larger share of the European pot of gold could invest in infrastructure.  Another suggestion I read was the SPFL could employ a couple of top grade groundsmen to go around clubs and advise on problems, share best practice etc.

    Who knows what the answers are (not me) but it would be a good project for people with vision at Hampden.  Folk who excel at solving problems!

    (I’ll get my coat!)

    View Comment

  34. Scotland squad,  v Lithuania & Malta
    Goalkeepers
    Jordan Archer (Millwall)Craig Gordon (Celtic)Allan McGregor (Hull City)
    Defenders
    Ikechi Anya (Derby CountyChristophe Berra (Heart of Midlothian)Grant Hanley (Newcastle United)Russell Martin (Norwich City)Charlie Mulgrew (Blackburn Rovers)Andrew Robertson (Liverpool)Kieran Tierney (Celtic)Steven Whittaker (Hibernian)
    Midfielders
    Stuart Armstrong (Celtic)Barry Bannan (Sheffield Wednesday)Scott Brown (Celtic)Tom Cairney (Fulham)Darren Fletcher (Stoke City)Ryan Fraser (Bournemouth)James Forrest (Celtic)James McArthur (Crystal Palace)John McGinn (Hibernian)Matt Phillips (West Bromwich Albion)Matt Ritchie (Newcastle United)Robert Snodgrass (West Ham United)
    Forwards
    Steven Fletcher (Sheffield Wednesday)Leigh Griffiths (Celtic)Chris Martin (Derby County)Steven Naismith (Norwich City)

    That’s 18 players plying their trade in England against 9 in Scotland including 6 who play for Celtic.  That makes me sad.  I don’t follow English football but are all these guys any better than Scottish based equivalents?  Are there only 3 players outwith Celtic in Scottish Football fit to play for us?  I find that hard to believe. 

    I’ve read stories in the past of WGS choosing English based players who are not getting game time at their clubs over Scottish based players who are playing week in week out.

    View Comment

  35. I got that team list from the SFA website.  I then read the Daily Record report on it and they said there were 26 players in the squad!  They omitted Ikechi Anya (Derby C.)

    What a dilemma! who do you believe The Daily Record or the SFA?  I’ll wait until the Beano covers it.

    View Comment

  36. UPTHEHOOPS
    AUGUST 21, 2017 at 07:14 
    Latest from Rangers Tax Case blogger
    https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/2017/08/21/a-history-of-unusual-payments-at-ibrox/
    ===============================

    Interesting.

    And you would think that Andrew Dickson – current Finance & Admin Director for TRFC – who was at Ibrox during the EBT years, would be able to clarify ?

    However, RFC [IL] is virtually dead, so let’s move on ?

    But Dickson was recently appointed to an SFA Committee and to the SPFL Board.
    Indirectly one could infer from the RTC update that Dickson’s integrity is questionable – and he may in fact be ‘unfit & improper’ to be involved in the administration of Scottish football.

    Wild guess.
    The SMSM will look the other way.
    The Hampden blazers might retreat to the bunker, and hope this story goes away.

    The Scottish football fans will raise their eyebrows yet again – and the credibility of the SFA & SPFL will slide to even lower depths.

    View Comment

  37. JIMBOAUGUST 21, 2017 at 13:17
    Are there only 3 players outwith Celtic in Scottish Football fit to play for us?  I find that hard to believe. 
    ———————What no players from trfc. There will be a boycott of something coming in a statement

    View Comment

  38. Albion Rovers made a simple mistake last week and listed Liam McGuigan as a sub v Spartans in the cup.
    He was ineligible and there is no argument, it was an error by the Coatbridge side.

    They will be shown no mercy by Mr Doncaster.
    There will be no replay and Spartans will play Linfield at Ainslie Park in a couple of weeks.

    Fair enough all fair minded people will say that is the rule and rules are rules.

    Unless of course there is industrial scale historical shenanigans by one of the two clubs Mr Doncaster needed and still needs to “sell” Scottish Football to his comprehensive list of Gambling Sponsors.

    One rule for the wee guys and a different and altogether more pragmatic approach when required. 

    View Comment

  39. Some consternation has been expressed on here and on other platforms of BBC Scotlands indulgence towards old Rangers players who were EBT beneficiaries. I would rather take the view that such interviews are self defeating and really serve to underline the poverty of the current incarnation. Own goal or a cunning plan. You decide.

    View Comment

  40. EX LUDOAUGUST 21, 2017 at 17:41
    BBC Scotlands indulgence towards old Rangers players who were EBT beneficiaries. I would rather take the view that such interviews are self defeating and really serve to underline the poverty of the current incarnation. Own goal or a cunning plan. You decide.
    ——————–
    Or a slap in the face for every paying customer over the EBT years

    View Comment

  41. Ex LudoAugust 21, 2017 at 17:41   
    Some consternation has been expressed on here and on other platforms of BBC Scotlands indulgence towards old Rangers players who were EBT beneficiaries. I would rather take the view that such interviews are self defeating and really serve to underline the poverty of the current incarnation. Own goal or a cunning plan. You decide.
    __________________________

    Undoubtedly an own goal, and a none too cunning plan to boot!

    The plan is almost certainly to create an antidote to Celtic’s success, but it only highlights the paucity of talent at Ibrox now, for, if they want to make TRFC relevant now, they should really be showcasing the current crop of foreign players, of whom very little is known – and they must surely have an interesting story or two to tell…surely 14

    Of course, it might just turn out to be the case that the BBC are running a series of interviews of past stars from all of our clubs…but don’t get too excited waiting to find out which of our own individual clubs’ favourites will be showcased!

    View Comment

  42. JOHN CLARKAUGUST 20, 2017 at 23:42
    “Trying to normalise the abnormal.”
    Absolutely right but what is the long game? If they really cared about TRFC, surely they would be calling out the current regime on a few things and shining the spotlight to avoid a repeat of the collapse.
    I suppose, as you say, normalising the abnormal means that it’s quite normal to go from one financial disaster to another but still be welcomed with open arms as the same team.
    And to be given every advantage and a helping hand along the way.
    Imagine if Aberdeen or Hearts or Hibs or (insert your own team here) were given the same advantages or even the same constant stream of free, good publicity.

    View Comment

  43. ALLYJAMBOAUGUST 21, 2017 at 18:29
    ======================

    In my view the BBC, or at least some people at BBC in a position to influence matters, are seeking to undermine the case for title stripping or even a note added to historical records.  This is much in common with the rest of the media. 

    View Comment

  44. Where is the moral code in parts of Scotland?  As far as I’m aware there was no criminality involved in receiving an EBT, but the Supreme Court decision was, or should have been, explosive for everyone concerned.
      The BBC seem to be infatuated in having them (EBT recipients) on air at every given opportunity.  I would have expected as a norm. for weeks later, that the first question asked of them would have been ‘Well Graham, what have you to say about this?  Tell me about your involvement’.

    As far as the EBT recipients involved in the media itself, why didn’t editors & producers say ‘Right Charlie, I want you to do a piece on EBTs and your take on it, just to clear the air’

    It’s as if it didn’t happen but more importantly, it was nothing worth talking about.

    As for the likes of Campbell Ogilvie and Andrew Dickson et.al. why are they not treated as persona non grata?  Not yet exposed, officially, for any wrong doing but would any self respecting business or governing body want anything to do with them, even if it only for the corporate smell?
    Morality? Integrity?

    View Comment

Comments are closed.