Stevie G – The Real Deal?

1082
165202

Steven Gerrard’s slip in 2014 against Chelsea cost Liverpool the league and extinguished Brendan Rodger’s chances of having his name written in Liverpool folklore. Now Steven Gerrard stands in his way of becoming a Celtic legend, by stopping the Ulsterman from claiming an eighth successive title for the Hoops.

But how realistic is that? Can this Anfield great transform the beleaguered ‘Gers into title contenders? Or like his pursuit for a Premier League title, will it ultimately end in failure? Here we take a look at Gerrard’s chances of breaking Celtic’s dominance next season.

Is he tactically astute?

During Sven Goran-Erikkson’s reign as England manager, he was blessed with midfield greats such as Frank Lampard, Paul Scholes, David Beckham and Steven Gerrard. Lampard consistently netted 20+ goals a season for Chelsea and Gerrard seemingly won games on his own for Liverpool.

Yet the two couldn’t play together, and one of the reasons for that was Gerrard’s tactical ineptitude. Whilst Lampard had shown himself adept at following a tactical plan under Mourinho, Gerrard only flourished when partnered with Xabi Alonso – a canny operator with a sharp footballing brain.

All too often Gerrard would abandon his responsibilities and scupper England’s attacks with predictable ‘Hollywood’ passes. If his disregard of tactics from his playing career is anything to go by, then his time at Ibrox will be short-lived.

Signings

Much has been made of the expected wave of Liverpool loanee’s at Ibrox, but so far the new manager has opted to find most of his talent from elsewhere. Scott Arfield, Allan McGregor, Connor Goldson and Ovi Ejaria have all joined the ‘Gers.

Jon Flanagan is the only incoming player with links to Gerrard’s former club, and whilst signings from Brighton, Sunderland and Burnley might not be inspiring, they seem more astute than bringing in second-rate Liverpool rejects. The signing have ensured that Rangers are now 12/1 for the title, second favourites to Celtic.

The transfer market is a crowded place at the moment and Rangers, like Celtic, simply do not have the allure or the money of most Championship clubs never mind Premier League outfits. If Rangers are to be successful they need to maximise the transfer market as Celtic did when David Moss was the head of recruitment.

Moss was the man responsible for bringing players such as Victor Wanyama, Virgil Van Dijk and Moussa Dembele to Parkhead, with the Hoops making substantial profits on most of their player purchases.

Gerrard needs to bring the right scouting team into Ibrox in the hope of emulating Celtic’s transfer success. If he doesn’t, then he won’t stand a chance of challenging Brendan Rodgers as Rangers’ current squad isn’t up to much.

The odds

As much as analysis of Gerrard’s history and style is helpful, it doesn’t give any clear indicators. With the notable exception of Leicester City, the bookies have always tended to get things right in football.

Manchester City and Celtic were the bookies favourites for their domestic leagues last season and Real Madrid were the favourites for the Champions League.

1082 COMMENTS

1 2 3 16
 

  1. Auldheid 15th October 2018 at 16:04

    '…. Res 12 has been mentioned every year from the top table at the AGM since 2014.'

    ______________________________

    Yes, Auldheid.

    Let's hope this year is action time.

    If there are bad guys who need to be charged with a crime, let's have it done sooner or later, in fairness to them: it can't be fun for anyone who , however innocent he believes himself to be, or however 'protected' he thinks he may be, suspects that his conduct in office might just lead  to a visit from the Plod. 

    If Celtic plc won't take action, I think that the Res 12 people ( or those who are shareholders)  as a group might themselves refer the alleged crime to the PF. with the facts on which the allegation is based, and ask for an investigation to be carried out.

    View Comment

  2. We all want transparency. Wouldn't it be great if LG felt supported enough (by SMSM for example) to be transparent? Picture this….  LG "So the Scotland manager knew I was the best striker available. After all, he didn't even pick Naisy – who I think is a great player, by the way – in his original squad. He then chose me to play in the first game, showing he thought I was the best available. That Belgium defence was really good as they've shown in the past and we struggled to create much against them. I was a bit disappointed to be left out for the Albania game as I felt I did as well as I could against one of the best teams in the world. Naisy did well getting the two goals against Albania, but I feel that I would have scored as well if I'd played against them instead of Belgium. What disappointed me most, though, was when the manager decided on the basis of those two games that Naisy was a better choice than I was, which I think shows that he doesn't know anything about the game. 4 days before, he thought I was better than Naisy, then after comparing my performance against one of the best teams in the world with Naisy's against a poor Albania side, he announces to the world that Naisy is a better striker than me and will start the next game. I was restrained when I said it was a kick in the teeth! What I really menat is that McLeish must be as thick as f**k if he can't see how your opponent might impact how well you play. No wonder I can't be *rsed turning up for the next games under him."

    Well, it could go that way……

    View Comment

  3. Auldheid 15th October 2018 at 00:46
    34 2 Rate This

    There is a podcast up on E Tims at

    http://etims.net/?p=13509 

    that discusses where matters stand on the JPDT investigation into the granting and retention of the UEFA licence to Rangers in 2011.
    ……………………………..
    A good listen and i hope that some who could not get their head around some of the things to do with Res 12 find it a bit clearer. 5 years ago many would not have understood what was happening, but now 5 years down the line many more fans are beginning to understand and are looking for answers.
    Keep up the great work.

    View Comment

  4. Allyjambo 

    15th October 2018 at 10:36  

    =====================================

    Thanks, that makes sense. So long as the prospective purchaser was aware of the potential debt it would be fair. They could choose to go ahead with the deal or not.

    It kind of raises questions re Green though. Was he really willing to fund a CVA with a potential £90m debt outstanding at the time. Would the administrator demand evidence that he could fund that debt as part of is role is not just to get a CVA but to also make sure it is a viable business going forward.

    Maybe even that was smoke and mirrors from Green and he always expected / knew the CVA would get rejected anyone but had to appear to try to save the club, not just buy the assets. 

     

    View Comment

  5. nawlite 15th October 2018 at 18:56 

    No wonder I can't be *rsed turning up for the next games under him.

    "Well, it could go that way……

    An alternative point of view might be that most Scottish blokes like me who've played and supported our national game for many decades would have given their spleen to have the honour of representing their country just once in a lifetime, regardless of any apparent lack of ability or table rankings.

    Based purely on talent and goalscoring ability, Leigh Griffiths would normally be an automatic starter in my team selection, given the paucity of talent otherwise available at this juncture, but throwing the toys out of the pram for perceived injustices automatically relegates him to my 'B Team' (as in, “Bu*gered if I care about my country”) and as manager I would take it upon myself to decide whether he was fit enough to deserve another apparently meaningless cap in future games, rather than relying on self-certification.  

    View Comment

  6. John Clark 15th October 2018 at 17:20  

     

    If Celtic plc won't take action, I think that the Res 12 people ( or those who are shareholders)  as a group might themselves refer the alleged crime to the PF. with the facts on which the allegation is based, and ask for an investigation to be carried out.

     

    How confident can we be that such a case would be given due consideration? Think of who some of the people are that the Scottish establishment would have to seriously question over wrongdoing. They have shown zero willingness since 2012 to hold these people to account. 

    View Comment

  7. Ex Ludo 15th October 2018 at 20:14  

    'There’s a new PMGB blog up…….'

    Thanks for that heads up, Ex Ludo.

    The Albion car park is now (apparently) available for security (as redlichtie posted today at 15.46), but that would scarcely be security for more than what ? ( how much did Close brothers lend on the security of Albion car park?)

    Corporate bond holders in the market generally  can currently expect  a return at interest rates of 9% per quarter! What would TRFC Ltd/RIFC plc be paying in interest [to whoever loaned them the money to fund the bond] if they had to pay out at that rate of interest to subscribers to their bond?

    And wouldn't the TOP's interest in DCK not put any investor off the idea of buying into a 'Rangers' bond?

    So many questions……..

     

     

    View Comment

  8. There are a few ways of looking at today's MR04 notification of the satisfaction of a standard security.

    The first is that the club has been earning good money from their European run and, following the share issue, the club is actually cash rich at the moment and has paid off the Close loan voluntarily.

    However, the "floating charge" security which was taken out at the same time as the standard security in February, is still outstanding.  Now that could just be a timing issue in submitting forms to Companies House or, alternatively, there could have been a change to the loan facility that eliminates the need for the standard security.

    A different interpretation could be that Close has demanded their money back, which has now been done.

    Only the latter scenario would fit in with PMGB's claims of the club looking for further funding.

    On balance I would opt for my first scenario, that the club is presently in a financially better place, having successfully speculated to accumulate over the last few months.

    I don't think that it will be long before we find out the reality of the situation. RIFC/TRFC will publish their annual accounts at any time in the next few weeks.  The share issue and the secured loan situation should be referenced as post balance sheet events.  The forecast borrowing/fundraising requirement should also be mentioned in the directors and auditors reports.

    View Comment

  9. upthehoops 15th October 2018 at 22:30  

    '…..How confident can we be that such a case would be given due consideration? Think of who some of the people are that the Scottish establishment would have to seriously question over wrongdoing. '___________________________

    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

    I'm not sure what level of confidence to have, quite frankly.

    I suspect that if I as a citizen provided what I believe to be the facts in relation to the licence award to an unentitled club, the COPFS would give me either the kind of reply that we get from the Scottish Government – 'the affairs of the SFA have nothing to do with us-see them, it's a football matter'

    or  a reply which said something along the lines of it 'not being in the public interest' to investigate the circumstances in which the Governance body of Scottish football is alleged to have conspired with the Directors of the then Rangers Football Club plc to provide false information to UEFA in order to secure some millions of pounds for that club.

    I  fight against that suspicion, of course. 

    And I might, all else failing, be prepared to find out whether my suspicions are really unworthy of me!

    View Comment

  10. Jon Flanagan wasn't the only signing with a Liverpool connection. Ovi Ejaria was also on their books for three years as a youth and played a couple of competitive senior games for the club, before going on loan to Sunderland.

    View Comment

  11. Thanks to Guest Blogger.
    Wish i was brave enough to do a blog.
    ……………………………………
    easyJambo 15th October 2018 at 23:04
    On balance I would opt for my first scenario, that the club is presently in a financially better place, having successfully speculated to accumulate over the last few months.
    ………………………….
    On balance then a european run and a share issue pulled them out a hole, short term?

    View Comment

  12. More thanks to Guest Blogger.

    I like the idea of some short and sharp (and maybe more frequent?) blogs.

    There are so many things we could be commenting on as a community.

     

    I also think Stevie G (the legend and the man) has improved Rangers and had we wagered on his teams performance in Europe before the season started we'd have taken a few bob off the bookies. 

    View Comment

  13. easyJambo
    15th October 2018 at 23:04
    3 0 Rate This

    There are a few ways of looking at today’s MR04 notification of the satisfaction of a standard security.
    ….,…………….

    EJ
    If close brethren have ‘released’ the fixed charge, but the floating charge remains, I think we can say with some certainty that a debt or loan facility still exists.

    It is possible that there is a timing issue and the floating charge will also be shown as satisfied over the next few days. But, if not…

    It seems to me, that the likelihood is that the lender has ‘released’ the assets (covered by the fixed charge) so that they are available to be sold or used as security in a loan from someone else. In order that the brethren can be repaid.

    My money would be a loan or purchase from a source connected (in some way) with a recently returned director of RIFC.

    If I am correct, it suggests the source of ‘soft loans’ – used to keep the new club afloat thus far – has run dry.

    View Comment

  14. Keeping the floating charge in place would also be fairly typical of a situation where, whilst repaid (partly?) they thought they might need to return to that particular well at some point in the future.

    View Comment

  15. More speculation from me, coz it's fun

     

    Last week we saw a photo of some sort of testing rig on the iconic Albion Road car park. Then yesterday we see that the standard security over that same car park has been released. Hmmm…

     

    A sale, or partial sale, of an asset to repay part of an expensive loan, perhaps?

    View Comment

  16. Whether Steven Gerrard is the real deal or not is imo still not confirmed either way. The start that’s been made gives cause for optimism but it’s early days. The part Gary McAllister is playing in all of this is hardly referenced in the media and he is quite clearly playing a secondary role but he could be and I stress ‘could be’ the football brains of the outfit. 

    View Comment

  17. HirsutePursuit 16th October 2018 at 08:37

    Smugas 16th October 2018 at 09:31

    ==============================

    You both could be right, but I've also seen it suggested elsewhere that the Club's credit rating will have improved along with its balance sheet, because of the share issue.  That in itself may have led to the security being released.

    I've had a look at the original Standard Security which contained the following definition:

    Security Period means the period beginning on the date of this Standard Security and ending on the date on which:

    (a) all of the secured liabilities have been unconditionally and irrevocably paid and discharged in full and

    (b) the Lender has no further commitment, obligation or liability to the Borrower under or pursuant to any agreement or other document

    I think we have always had the tendency (with good reasons) to look for the negative slant on any financial dealings by RIFC/TRFC. However, I don't think we should close our eyes to the possibility that their finances have improved. I don't know it that is the case with this MR04, but I'm prepared to keep an open mind on it.

    View Comment

  18. I can't find any links but I remember at the time reading that the benefit of the CVA was it put an end to any uncertainty over the BTC. I'm sure it was a questions and answers session someplace that stated the CVA would cover any future liability regardless of the BTC outcome (which is likely why HMRC would never have accepted it). I understand that's how it works with an individual – i.e. if someone is under investigation from HMRC and goes for bankruptcy before the investigation is concluded, any penalties from the investigation are added to the creditor pot and not retrospectively applied to the individual after they exit bankruptcy.

    View Comment

  19. Just one word to be clear that I post on this blog not because it is a football blog (there are many such) but because I want a fundamental evil to be corrected.

    I do not subscribe to any suggestion that 'Rangers' are rehabilitated and can be discussed in purely football terms in the same way as other clubs. TRFC Ltd is still a cuckoo, dishonest club in claiming to be 'Rangers' of old. 

    Until that lie is officially recognised, I myself will not read about or discuss the merits/demerits of TRFC Ltd as a football team, or the merits/demerits of Gerrard as  a football manager.

    Others, of course, may do as they please.

    My only concern is that the rottenness of Scottish Football that allowed the 5-Way Agreement to take place and both

    allows a 6-year-old-club to masquerade as a much older now dead  club

    and allows that dead club's record to show football successes that were illicitly 'won'

    be rooted out, and that sporting realities and truth be once again given their proper place. 

    The liars must not be allowed win, and those who were the designers , and principal propagators , of the Big Lie must be held to account.

     

     

    View Comment

  20. easyJambo
    16th October 2018 at 09:58
    3 0 Rate This

    HirsutePursuit 16th October 2018 at 08:37

    Smugas 16th October 2018 at 09:31

    ==============================

    You both could be right, but I’ve also seen it suggested elsewhere that the Club’s credit rating will have improved along with its balance sheet, because of the share issue. That in itself may have led to the security being released.
    ,………………………..

    That could well be true – but only, I think, if the floating charge is also released in the next few days.

    If the floating charge remains in place, it means a debt still exists or new loan facility has been created.

    If a debt or loan facility exists, under what circumstances would the brethren release the fixed charges – especially given the (ahem!) unorthodox nature of the RIFC chair’s business methods?

    I can’t see how it would make sense to voluntarily release the fixed charges UNLESS it was to allow the new club to sell or use them as collateral against a loan with someone else.

    You then look to see the unexpected return of a former board member.

    It is difficult not to add two and two and think that this is probably the only way Close Bros, can get out of Dodge.

    View Comment

  21. JC. I agree.

     

    Normally, I look forward to the injection of new information or ideas, but the current blog post seems slightly out of place here.

     

    Of course, it is valid, in the passing, to point out that SG's record as a coach and current performance has relevance to the financial stability (or otherwise) of the new club from Ibrox.

     

    And, I am certain if the Celtic or Aberdeen, Hearts or Hibs boards had staked their club's very existence on European income this season, it would be worthy of comment. So yes, I am sure we should be asking, does the coach have the wherewithal to pull it off?

     

    But, beyond that specific exception, there are many better suited message boards, blogs, etc. where the idea of Stevie G (the master's apprentice) – or the ability of any other football manager can be discussed and explored.

     

     

    View Comment

  22. HirsutePursuit 16th October 2018 at 12:26

    '..

    JC. I agree…..Of course, it is valid, in the passing, to point out that SG's record as a coach and current performance has relevance to the financial stability (or otherwise) of the new club from Ibrox…

    …And, I am certain if the Celtic or Aberdeen, Hearts or Hibs boards had staked their club's very existence on European income this season, it would be worthy of comment. So yes, I am sure we should be asking, does the coach have the wherewithal to pull it off?

    But, beyond that specific exception, there are many better suited message boards, blogs, etc. where the idea of Stevie G (the master's apprentice) – or the ability of any other football manager can be discussed and explored..'

    I think your post better expresses my thoughts than I did, HP!

    If the cuckoo club is not going to be recognised as such, and the truth be re-asserted, then I am interested in whether it can survive. I will not say that I hope it does not.  I would rather it was recognised as what it is, and that the illicit titles and honours be stripped from RFC 2012 (IL).

    But if that does not happen, then be damned to it, is my attitude, and be damned to incompetent, twisted, panic-stricken sods who had they done what was needed at the time, would have prevented all this incredibly destructive nonsense.

     

    1.  
    View Comment

  23. I'll go against the grain a bit here and say (whilst I don't necessarily agree with the content) I think it's good to sometimes see blogs that are not just going over old ground. SFM is a good place to debate Scottish football as a whole and a few more of these would be nice. It's not as if this is taking the place of other blogs on the wrongs of Scottish football, but in addition. The previous blog was over a month ago so if the intention is to get more people reading the website and contributing, new content can only be a good thing.

    How about a blog on a certain manager of a national team, who's method's were found to be old fashioned and inneffective circa 2002. A manager who managed to get Motherwell relegated? A manager who managed to finish third in a two horse race? A manager who left the national team before in their time of need? Who was found out at every club since including a humiliating 10 game reign in the EGYPTIAN league before becoming unemployable for 2 years?  

    View Comment

  24. What an odd and rather childish blog, not sure who's idea it was but it doesn't really fit with the ethos and stated aims of this website.

     

    To briefly address the key points raised:

    – For me the jury is still very much out on Gerrard as a manager given the inconsistent results in the league but it would be churlish not to acknowledge their performances in Europe which suggest he's improved the team from last year.  There is no way at all last year's side would have been decent sides like Maribor or held Villareal to a draw for example.

     

    – To criticise Gerrard as a player and suggest he was poor tactically is laughable and just suggests bitterness.  He performed for many years at the very highest levels of the game and was raved about by a variety of world class managers who trusted him as their captain.  It's odd that succession of managers never spotted this lack of tactical awareness but today's ranting blogger has.  That said tactical awareness as a player does not necessarily equal tactical nous as a manager.

     

    – Kent and Ejaria are Liverpool loanees (if we're going to do rambling, tribal football blogs can we at least fact check them)

     

    In my view Gerrard's cleverest move was to bring in Michael Beale who's a very highly regarded coach with a fascinating background having had a stint working with Sao Paulo amongst other teams and should be able to take on a lot of the day to day responsibilities.

     

    The fact is Gerrard has a budget considerably higher than any team other than Celtic in the league so his side should finish above every team other than Celtic in the league.  If he can't do that then he's failed, if he can somehow do more than that then he's clearly a very talented manager.

    View Comment

  25. Darkbeforedawn 16th October 2018 at 10:28 I can't find any links but I remember at the time reading that the benefit of the CVA was it put an end to any uncertainty over the BTC. I'm sure it was a questions and answers session someplace that stated the CVA would cover any future liability regardless of the BTC outcome (which is likely why HMRC would never have accepted it). I understand that's how it works with an individual – i.e. if someone is under investigation from HMRC and goes for bankruptcy before the investigation is concluded, any penalties from the investigation are added to the creditor pot and not retrospectively applied to the individual after they exit bankruptcy.

    _____________

     

    Don't know whether you are right or wrong that administration, alone, would have cleared the BTC liability for Rangers, but you are wrong if you are thinking administration and bankruptcy are the same thing. Also, reading anything positive for Rangers 'at the time' has to bear in mind that there was an awful lot of stuff written about Rangers 'at the time' that was total nonsense. Especially if it was written by the same people that brought us the idea that liquidation is not the same as death. It also has to be remembered that administration is not always about achieving a CVA, as the aim is often just to sort out and restructure the business to continue as a going concern, which, not giving any creditor a vote, could hardly wipe out any debt.

    View Comment

  26. Re: Close Brothers “Overdraft”

     

    By my reckoning TRFC Ltd have paid ca. £1.15m to release the charge over Edmiston House (cost: £800k to buy from David Murray) / Car Park (cost: £1.5m from BoS). This calculated on the basis that the original loan was mooted at £3m over £5.3m of assets (2nd floating charge has the breakdown by item of their cost). Proportionally these two assets are ca.38% of the overall charged.

     

    Whether this is as a consequence of an upturn in finances through Europa participation or a plate spinning exercise to progress the accounts* with the intention of going back to the well later as others have suggested, remains to be seen.

    Interesting seeing the picture of the auger boring away in the car park the other week.

    Makes you wonder if the intention would be to sell that off to a developer although I’ve also noticed that the land adjacent to the car park and immediately before the police station has been getting cleared of vegetation over the last year or so.

    *Any guesses to the year ending June 18 results? On a quick analysis I’m plumping for somewhere between £5-£7m loss to give a cumulative loss I would reckon of: £17m soft loans + £3m Close + say, £5m for 17-18 = £25m which will be massaged by post balance sheet debt/equity swap.

    View Comment

  27. Darkbeforedawn
    16th October 2018 at 10:28
    5 0 Rate This

    I can’t find any links but I remember at the time reading that the benefit of the CVA was it put an end to any uncertainty over the BTC. I’m sure it was a questions and answers session someplace that stated the CVA would cover any future liability regardless of the BTC outcome (which is likely why HMRC would never have accepted it). I understand that’s how it works with an individual – i.e. if someone is under investigation from HMRC and goes for bankruptcy before the investigation is concluded, any penalties from the investigation are added to the creditor pot and not retrospectively applied to the individual after they exit bankruptcy.

    ,………………..
    I think you are broadly correct – as the events which led to the HMRC debts had occurred prior to the insolvency event.

    However, I believe the majority of the Ticketus contract could have continued after a CVA.

    In that case the debts would only have crystallised after the season books were sold in each of the relevant years.

    Duff and Duffer tried, but failed to have the Ticketus contract made void. It was left to Octopus to decide if it wished to resile from the contract due to a breach – in not paying for the 1st year’s tickets.

    The contract for the remaining years’ ticket sales could have remained after a CVA was settled.

    In the end, they may have done so, but it is not clear if Octopus did claim breach of the full contract prior to the CVA.

    View Comment

  28. Just catching up with the Close Brothers standing charge being satisfied.

     

    We all have limited knowledge on the structure of that deal but given the timing coinciding with the rights issue bringing their debt down to a more sustainable level the standing charge will likely have been removed due to the reduction in risk related to the borrowing.  The floating charge will remain for as long as there is a borrowing facility in place, if I recall correctly when the borrowing was announced it was stated that it was a revolving credit facility so theoretically the floating charge could remain in place permanently.

     

    My guess is that the medium term plan for Rangers will be to get a couple of years under their belt of around break even or modest profits, clear the rest of the internal debt with further rights issues and then look to obtain some sort of overdraft facility with Metro Bank and move toward a more normalised mainstream setup.

     

    That seems a pretty achievable and sensible plan but it's very much contingent on them not getting carried away with fan demands for spending if as most expect Celtic edge closer to 10 in a row.

    View Comment

  29. John Clark 15th October 2018 at 23:20

     

    21

     

    3

     

    Rate This

     

     

    upthehoops 15th October 2018 at 22:30  

    '…..How confident can we be that such a case would be given due consideration? Think of who some of the people are that the Scottish establishment would have to seriously question over wrongdoing. '___________________________

    ———————

    There is are a number of  underlying questions that will need legal advice to obtain an answer to (which will cost)  which is who will be held to account for any loss?

    Rangers FC and the individuals in post at the time?

    The SFA for covering up what took place from Sept 2011?

    UEFA for any part they might have played at that time?

    Celtic Board for not pursuing with due vigour?

    Then who has the right to pursue a claim?

    Celtic as a member club? Do the rules allow it? Did the rules stop Fergus McCann?

    Celtic shareholders? How many would want to? Enough to vote for Res12 or against it remembering who has the most shares?

    What rights do small shareholders have? Here we come to the crux of the matter. 

    If it can be shown that small shareholders in a club that is an SFA member have subordinate rights to establish the truth  then the accountability battle is won (even if RFC were found to have acted properly).

    Now it would be much better if clubs and SFA recognised shareholders rights by giving them a much more speedy machinery to table concerns than the AGM route but the principle established would be any 5 Way Agreement would have to be 6 Way in future with shareholder/supporter representatives being the 6th party.

    Now that would be a game changer.

    View Comment

  30. Re: Close Bros.

     

    So in terms of the splitting out of the charges:

     

    Charge 1: Standard Security over Edmiston House/Albion Car Park and now discharged was in return for a loan from Close. This is now "satisfied" and the loan paid back. Was this the £3m?

     

    Charge 2: Floating Charge over Albion/Edmiston and Wifi/Screens/PA etc. covers a lending ("overdraft")  facility from Close.

    View Comment

  31. Darkbeforedawn
    16th October 2018 at 10:28
    5 0 Rate This

    I can’t find any links but I remember at the time reading that the benefit of the CVA was it put an end to any uncertainty over the BTC. I’m sure it was a questions and answers session someplace that stated the CVA would cover any future liability regardless of the BTC outcome (which is likely why HMRC would never have accepted it).
    …………………..
    From what i can find of the time on how it was reported QaA.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1005184202558623744?p=v
    jUNE 8, 2012.
    And
    https://mobile.twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1006776166450155521?p=v
    june 13, 2012

    View Comment

  32. About the blog, as i said earlier i wish i could write one.

    The fact a guest blogger took the time to do one must be congratulated. It may not be to everyone's taste, but he had a go and on that aspect  good for him. wish i had the courage.

    View Comment

  33. Cluster One 16th October 2018 at 18:23

    _________________________________________

    Same here CO. I have many thoughts/points I'd like to air and have discussed but I don't have the courage/confidence to do so. I may make the occasional comment but that is it from me.

    View Comment

  34. On the new blog. It was written by a Liverpool fan who has a keen interest in SG's progress as a manager. There may be a bit of mischievous pond-rippling going on, but I am saddened – though not surprised – that we have been offered the knee-jerk response of a parochial mentality.

    Since SFM's inception we have been more than encouraging in our efforts to widen the authorship.

    DbD, why don't you do a piece on the manager to whom you refer? More than happy to publish.

    That goes for all of us.

    There are more than enough intelligent and literate thinkers who visit these pages each day and contribute to discussion. We have always considered SFM to belong to us all. Access is open to all of you, and I hope that at least some will see this as an opportunity.

     

    View Comment

  35. Auldheid 16th October 2018 at 15:52

    '..There is are a number of  underlying questions that will need legal advice to obtain an answer to (which will cost)  which is who will be held to account for any loss?….'

    Yes, indeed, Auldheid, there would be lots of questions about  liability for restitution/compensation: but that would come after a criminal trial had found the alleged conspirators guilty of the alleged crime.

    We are told that the Police and procurator fiscal have a duty to look attentively at reports that a crime (any crime) may have been committed.

    If there is enough prima facie evidence that appears to support the report, the Police have a duty to investigate and pass their findings to the PF for consideration of prosecution. [ I would imagine that it would be  a brave desk sergeant who dismissed out-of-hand the information that the Res 12 chaps have obtained!]

    There is no financial cost to whoever 'reports' the alleged crime! ( although, I suspect, there might be hostile stares and a decided reluctance to call one ‘sir’ when one went to a police station to make such a report)

    For me, securing a conviction of any alleged  baddies would be the most important thing. 

    Whether Celtic plc on behalf of its shareholders then pursued financial compensation or from whom would be up to them! broken heart

    View Comment

  36. Cluster One16th October 2018 at 20:45

    shug 16th October 2018 at 20:07
    2 0 Rate This

    https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/10/16/close-brothers-and-the-new-golden-age-at-ibrox/

    Phil latest.

    It does seem a bit strange that one minute they were going to be struggling to pay the loan on time, which would have been bad news but, now the loan appears to have been paid off early, that’s bad news as well.

    We do live in strange times though, but we’ll find out in the end.

    View Comment

  37. John Clark and Auldheid

    =========================

    Call me sceptical or simply paranoid if you choose but I have zero faith in the system to make me think this could ever proceed to a criminal trial. Certain people and organisations appear to be under the protection of the establishment as we have witnessed since 2012. They can't nail it all on Craig Whyte now and that would mean having to ask questions of those who went before him, and of those who may have conspired to award a licence when they know they shouldn't have. If ever a house of cards would collapse it would be a finding in court that Rangers and the SFA conspired for a European licence to be awarded against the rules, disadvantaging other clubs in the process. The unwritten rule is there can NEVER be a formal admission that decisions were EVER made in favour of Rangers out of bias. I have no idea whether there actually was a conspiracy but I think there is enough evidence for a truly independent body to take a view on it. A court of law would be the ideal place, but no chance of that in Scotland. It would be like expecting an English court to prosecute a member of the Royal family for the type of crime a layperson would get prosecuted for – it just wouldn't proceed. The establishment look after their own.

    View Comment

  38. Applying Occam’s razor to the latest twist in the TRFC tale then it would appear that nothing much has changed. Yes, Close bros have been paid via the share issue receipts but the net result is that the TRFC organisation remains a loss making business without a credit line etc. The accounts, when these are published, will make interesting reading. 

    So far as reporting the European Licence issue to the Police then there would have to be a “reporter”. A person or persons who have been materially disadvantaged by RFC not declaring overdue payables. A scenario might then unfold whereby all of the member clubs would be reporting their governing body  and alleging a crime having been committed by past and perhaps present office bearers. If it only involved Celtic shareholders then it would be presented by the media as sour grapes. 

    View Comment

  39. “The Scottish Professional Football League has written to Aberdeen to voice anger at the club's refusal to sell League Cup semi-final tickets block by block, which would have allowed unsold tickets to be offered to Rangers fans. The Dons have sold 10,000 tickets from their allocation of 20,300 amid fears that unsold tickets could cost the four semi-finalists a cut of an additional six-figure sum. (Daily Record)”

    From the BBC quoting the DR. Aberdeen playing hardball, and why not?

    View Comment

  40. Ex Ludo 17th October 2018 at 08:37

    "So far as reporting the European Licence issue to the Police then there would have to be a “reporter”. A person or persons who have been materially disadvantaged by RFC not declaring overdue payables."

    _________________________

    With the utmost respect and readiness to defer to greater knowledge, Ex Ludo, I am not sure this can be correct.

    I have sent an email to the PF's office here just to ask for clarity- the COPFS web-site doesn't seem to cover the point!

    I wouldn't  want to go to the bother of making a 'report' only to find that I legally cannot, and got the bum's rush out of the door!angry

    View Comment

  41. Big Pink 16th October 2018 at 18:43

     

    "On the new blog. It was written by a Liverpool fan who has a keen interest in SG's progress as a manager. There may be a bit of mischievous pond-rippling going on, but I am saddened – though not surprised – that we have been offered the knee-jerk response of a parochial mentality."

     

    If I were a cynic I would find the idea "a Liverpool fan who has a keen interest in SG's progress" was completely unaware that Ryan Kent and Ovie Ejaria were Liverpool loanees, obviously I don't have a cynical bone in my body so fair enough.

     

    As for the "parochial" comment, if fact checking articles and speaking up for the stated purpose of this blog makes myself or others parochial then I'll wear that tag as a badge of honour.

     

    Perhaps to end with some constructive feedback I could suggest that while the idea of opening up to new bloggers is a nice one perhaps there should be some more editorial control exercised when it comes to the checking of basic facts?  I'd prefer the topics to stay away from tribal football stuff like the one being discussed as well but I appreciate that's just my personal preference and may not be in line with the mood of the blog.

    View Comment

  42. upthehoops 17th October 2018 at 07:21

    '…A court of law would be the ideal place, but no chance of that in Scotland.'

    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

    Possibly a wee shade too pessimistic, uth.

    There comes a time when even the strongest corrupt element in each of the separate 'silos' of the  political, economic, social, academic,  artistic, life of a country, or even across all the silos simultaneously, can be challenged and exposed.

    Traditionally, the move to expose has come from the  "Press".

    We are handicapped in this regard by the fact that our wee Scottish "Press' is , to its shame, singularly partisan in the matter of the 5-Way Agreement and the Res 12 issues to the extent at least of not investigating them.

    We have no Woodwards or Bernsteins- or even Ian Archers among our pressmen/women. And nothing like journalistic/editorial investigative impartiality in BBC Radio Scotland!

    Never fear: the Truth will ultimately 'out'!

     

    View Comment

  43. John Clark 17th October 2018 at 11:10

    We have no Woodwards or Bernsteins- or even Ian Archers among our pressmen/women. And nothing like journalistic/editorial investigative impartiality in BBC Radio Scotland!

    Never fear: the Truth will ultimately 'out'!

    —————————————————————————–

    John can you tell me where I can buy a bottle of that fine 18 year old single malt "Glen Optimist" ?

    View Comment

  44. John Clark 17th October 2018 at 10:50

    I wouldn't  want to go to the bother of making a 'report' only to find that I legally cannot, and got the bum's rush out of the door!angry

    ================================

    Surely even you haven't been put off campaigning for the truth, following Stewart Regan's response that he would do "nothing", should you be able to provide incontrovertible evidence that Rangers had lied in their 2011/12 UEFA Licence application.

    View Comment

  45. easyJambo 17th October 2018 at 11:38

    '..Surely even you haven't been put off campaigning for the truth…incontrovertible evidence that Rangers had lied in their 2011/12 UEFA Licence application…'

    ________________________

    Ha, ha! and look what happened to Regan!angry

    Seriously, though, there were and are hard questions to be asked about the circumstances in which that UEFA licence was granted. These have been asked by the Res12 people, and the considered view is that the licence was granted on the basis of an untruth. There appears to be some documentary evidence for this. The SFA steadfastly refuses even to investigate. And that in  itself is suspicious.

    I myself had never even heard of any question about the granting of that licence until long after the event.

    By that time, the whole sorry EBT saga had developed, in which it became clear that  those responsible at the SFA( under the control of a former director of, and recipient of an EBT from, 'Rangers') for monitoring the financial statements involving payments to players were at best negligent in their duties, or thick as two short planks not to notice the ridiculously small salaries reported as being paid to mega-stars of European football!, or worse, complicit by their silence.

    Subsequently,looking at how the SFA were prepared to accommodate Charles Green's new club by the dishonest and dishonourable 5-Way Agreement, it is easy to believe that that deceitful mentality might have been present when it came to trying to save an endangered, financially straitened club by sliding unentitled monies to them by lying.

    I think there is room for investigation, not as an internal football matter. 

    I haven't that many more years to live, of course,[statistically speaking-as far as I know I am perfectly healthy, and my mammy lived to age 99!] and am not gifted enough as any kind of 'campaigner', but,…..

     

     

     

    View Comment

  46. JohnClark@10.50

    In the normal course of events a complainer would make the complaint to the Police. An investigation would then be undertaken and should there be sufficient evidence a Police report submitted to the Procurator Fiscal. The PF then would consider the report and may direct further investigation. The problem is that none of the saga has followed a normal path but it remains that someone or some persons still have to start the ball rolling.

    (In case anyone was wondering in the case of homocide the PF is the Complainer.)

    View Comment

  47. John Clark

    UptheHoops

    Almost from the beginning, taking the matter to the Serious Fraud Office (before it was "reorganised" ) was a major consideration by the Res12 originator, but the lack of proof and knowledge of how UEFA intended Articles 50, 66 and 67 to be applied put that on hold. 

    That is no longer the case and a criminal investigation is the ultimate option if the matter cannot be settled within football jurisprudence. The loss to shareholder value would have to be estimated but at the very least Celtic were deprived of around £300K, which is the award for playing in a qualifying round, but its not the money, its the principle that decisions taken by the SFA in future had better take into account club's shareholders are stakeholders in the SFA via their clubs and long and tortuous as that might be, they are accountable..

    Ex Ludo

    The SFA have consistently tried to make it a Celtic v Rangers issue rather than one of their governance. As an example: in June 2016 when an agreement had been reached with Celtic and SFA that allowed shareholders lawyers to approach Traverso at UEFA, Regan announced the event at the SFA AGM to the surprise of the Celtic official representative present.

    He was then pursued along the street on exit by STV reporter Grant Russell and a camera man asking the Celtic official if Celtic had approached UEFA. Who tipped STV off and why a cameraman to identify the Celtic Official?

    Then when UEFA replied with the now famous  letter explaining that UEFA could not take action against the new club/company (TRFC/RIFC), the same STV reporter independently asked UEFA Media for a response that he  published but omitted mentioning the new club/company phrase.

    Why he approached UEFA and not SFA Head of Communications Darryl Broadfoot, who would have access to UEFA's reply as it was copied to SFA in the first place, has never been answered. Nor has why Broadfoot did not subsequently correct.

    A suspicious mind would think  that there was a deliberate attempt by SFA to bury Res 12 in 2016  however far from burying it as  the SFA might have hoped, the reply provided further information that helped build the case.

     Both individuals named above are now with new employers. I wont bother to mention what David Conn was told by SFA as its already been covered in a previous SFM blog. https://www.sfm.scot/who-is-conning-whom/ 

    My point in all this is if the media try and turn the issue into one of sour grapes there is a load of evidence that they and the SFA are far far far from clean.

    View Comment

  48. Ex Ludo 17th October 2018 at 13:38

     

    0

     

    0

     

    Rate This

     

     

    JohnClark@10.50

    In the normal course of events a complainer would make the complaint to the Police. An investigation would then be undertaken and should there be sufficient evidence a Police report submitted to the Procurator Fiscal. The PF then would consider the report and may direct further investigation. The problem is that none of the saga has followed a normal path but it remains that someone or some persons still have to start the ball rolling.

    (In case anyone was wondering in the case of homocide the PF is the Complainer.)

    ================================

    That someone is champing at the bit.

    View Comment

  49. Ex Ludo 17th October 2018 at 08:37

    "So far as reporting the European Licence issue to the Police then there would have to be a “reporter”. A person or persons who have been materially disadvantaged by RFC not declaring overdue payables."

     

    John Clarke 17 October 2018 at 10:50

    "With the utmost respect and readiness to defer to greater knowledge, Ex Ludo, I am not sure this can be correct.

    I have sent an email to the PF's office here just to ask for clarity- the COPFS web-site doesn't seem to cover the point!

    I wouldn't  want to go to the bother of making a 'report' only to find that I legally cannot, and got the bum's rush out of the door!angry"

    Unless I am mistaken, the differentiation to be made is that between "complainer", ie some person or body who has ben adversely affected by the alleged conduct of another person or body, and the "reporter", ie, the person who brings the matter to the attention of the authorities.  In many instances, the complainer and reporter will be one and the same person but not always.  For instance, a child might be the "complainer" and his/her parent the "reporter" depending on the age of the child.  (If the child is very young the parent may actually be the complainer.)

    In cases where the "complainer" might not be immediately apparent, e.g. a person accused of drink driving, the "complainer" is generally the Procurator Fiscal and the reporter, usually, the "police" hence the old form of police charge, "You are charged at the instance of the complainer that on <date> at <locus> YOU DID ……etc"

    A reporter might also bring the alleged conduct to the attention of the police even although the complainer might be unaware or even interested in reporting the matter.  In those instances, the police should investigate and may report the circumstances to the PF even if the "complainer" is making no complaint.  In my experience, it is unusual for the PF to take proceedings in these circumstances but it is still competent for the police to report the circumstances. I feel sure the COPFS though will give John the definitive answer in response to his email.

    View Comment

  50. Auldheid 17 October 2018 at 13:42

    I forgot to press "Post Comment" before going out for a couple of hours.  I wish I had scrolled up a bit to see your post which has summarised the situation far more succinctly that I could.

    View Comment

  51. Higgy's Shoes 17th October 2018 at 16:47

    As a Thistle and Scotland supporter , still in the dark . I included the emoji to denote humour . Missed again .

    View Comment

  52. Here is the (commendably prompt, short and sweet) reply I received to my email to the PF's office.

    I should perhaps explain that I emailed about 'white-collar' crime suspected by a person who is neither a first-hand witness nor an immediate 'victim' but who thinks he may have good grounds for believing a crime has been committed. No names, no pack drill, at this stage.

    "PFO Edinburgh <PFOEdinburgh@copfs.gsi.gov.uk>

    To:

    ‎17‎ ‎Oct at ‎16‎:‎48

    Thank you for your email. Any crime has to be reported to the Police, who are responsible for investigating. I would suggest you check the Police Scotland website which may have further guidance.

    View Comment

  53.  TRFC Ltd claim ( and fair play to them for the initiative, in so far as it goes) to have an agreement with 'Montreal Rangers'.

    "Gary Gaul from Montreal Rangers FC said: “It’s a great feat to have come to this agreement with Rangers Soccer Schools. Academy players will have the opportunity to travel to Scotland for Rangers Academy training and exhibition games."( from the RFC website)

    This is a very peripheral matter I am not criticising anybody or anything, but a newspaper acquaintance who writes for a Canadian newspaper could not find any actual professional Football Club called 'Montreal Rangers.'

    And I idly wonder whether some Sportscotland -via- the-SFA monies might be  behind this generous gesture?  It would be idle speculation, of course, because Sportscotland does not tell us where any public money grants go and how they are monitored.

    Is Montreal Rangers a school/college team? 

    View Comment
1 2 3 16
 

Comments are closed.