To Comply or not to Comply ? – The Scottish Football Monitor

To Comply or not to Comply ?

UEFA Club Licensing. – To Comply or not to Comply ?

On 16 April 2018 The UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) adjudicatory chamber took decisions in the cases of four clubs that had been referred to it by the CFCB chief investigator, concerning the non-fulfilment of the club licensing criteria defined in the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.

Such criteria must be complied with by the clubs in order to be granted the licence required to enter the UEFA club competitions.

The cases of two clubs::

Olympique des Alpes SA (Sion Switzerland )

and

FC Irtysh  (Kazakhstan) 

are of particular interest to those following the events under which the SFA awarded a UEFA License to Rangers FC in 2011 currently under investigation by the SFA Compliance Officer because

  1. The case documentation tell us how UEFA wish national associations to apply UEFA FFP rules
  2. The cases  tell us what might have happened to Rangers  FC in 2012 had they not gone into liquidation and as a consequence avoided the same type of sanctions that UEFA applied to Sion and Irtysh.

 

FC Sion  (Olympique des Alpes SA)

Here we are told how the Swiss FL and then the UEFA CFCB acted in respect of FC Sion in 2017 where a misleading statement was made in the Sion UEFA licensing application.

Full details can be read at

http://tiny.cc/y6sxsy

 

but this is a summary.

In April 2017 the Swiss FL (SFL) granted a licence to Sion FC but indicated that a Disciplinary case was pending.

In July 2017 the CFCB, as part of their licence auditing programme,  carried out a compliance audit on 3 clubs to determine if licences had been properly awarded. Sion was one of those clubs.

The subsequent audit by Deloitte LLP discovered Sion had an overdue payable on a player, amounting to €950,000, owed to another football club (FC Sochaux ) at 31st March 2017 as a result of a transfer undertaken by Sion before 31st December 2016, although the €950,000 was paid in early June 2017.

Deloitte produced a draft report of their findings that was passed to SFL and Sion for comment on factual accuracy and comment on the findings. Sion responded quickly enabling Deloitte to present a final report to the CFCB Investigation Unit. In response to the Deloitte final report Sion stated:

“il apparaît aujourd’hui qu’il existait bel et bien un engagement impayé découlant d’une activité de transfert. Ce point est admis” translated as

“it now appears that there was indeed an outstanding commitment arising from transfer activity. This is admitted”

What emerged as the investigation proceeded was that the Swiss FL Licensing Committee, after granting the license in April and as a result of a Sochaux complaint of non-payment to FIFA, had reason to refer Sion’s application to their Disciplinary Commission in May 2017 with regard to the submission of potentially misleading information by FC Sion to the SFL on 7th April 2017 as part of its licensing documentation.

Sion had declared

“Written confirmation: no overdue payables arising from transfer activities”, signed by the Club’s president, stating that as at 31 March 2017 there were no overdue payables towards other football clubs. In particular, the Club indicated that the case between FC Sion and FC Sochaux regarding the transfer of the player Ishmael Yartey was still under dispute.

The SFL Disciplinary Commission came to the conclusion that FC Sion had no intention to mislead the SFL, but indeed submitted some incorrect licensing documentation; the SFL Disciplinary Commission further confirmed that the total amount of €950,000 had been paid by the Club to FC Sochaux on 7 June 2017. Because of the inaccurate information submitted, the SFL Disciplinary Commission decided to impose a fine of CHF 8,000 on the Club.

Whilst this satisfied the SFL Disciplinary process the CFCB deemed it not enough to justify the granting of the licence as UEFA intended their FFP rules to be applied.

Sion provided the CFCB with a number of reasons on the basis of which no sanction should be imposed. In particular, the Club admitted that there was an overdue payable as at 31 March 2017, but stated that the mistake in the document dated 7 April 2017 was the result of a misinterpretation by the club’s responsible person for dealing with the licence (the “Club’s licence manager”), who is not a lawyer. The Club affirmed that it never had the intention to conceal the information and had provisioned the amount due for payment and that, in any case, it has already been sanctioned by the SFL for providing the wrong information.

The CFCB Investigation Unit accepted that the Sion application, although inaccurate, was a one off misrepresentation and not a forgery, (as in intended to deceive ) but that nevertheless an overdue payable did exist at 31st March and a licence should not have been granted.

Based on their findings, the CFCB Chief Investigator decided to refer the case to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber and suggested a disciplinary measure to be imposed on FC Sion by the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber, such measure consisting of a fine of €235,000, corresponding to the UEFA Revenues the Club gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.

The CFCB Investigatory Chamber submitted that it was  appropriate to impose a fine corresponding to all the UEFA revenues the Club gained by participating in the competition considering the fact that FC Sion should not have been admitted to the competition for failing to meet one of its admission criteria.

 

The Adjudicatory Chambers took all the circumstances (see paras 91 to 120 at http://tiny.cc/i8sxsy ) into consideration and reached the following key decisions.

  1. FC Sion failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 49(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the SFL not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
  2. FC Sion breached Articles 13(1) and 43(1)(i) of the CL&FFP Regulations. (Documents complete and correct)
  3. To exclude FC Sion from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next two (2) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19 and 2019/20).
  4. To impose a fine of two hundred and thirty five thousand Euros (€235,000) on FC Sion.
  5. FC Sion is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings.

Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.

It is now public knowledge that an actual liability of tax due before 31stDecember 2010 towards HMRC, was admitted by Rangers FC before 31st March 2011.

This liability was described as “potential” in Rangers Interim accounts audited by Grant Thornton.

“Note 1: The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. A provision for interest of £0.9m has also been included within the interest charge.”

The English Oxford Dictionary definition of potential is:

Having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.

Which was not true as the liability had already been “developed” so could not be potential.

This was repeated by Chairman Alistair Johnson in his covering Interim Accounts statement

“The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. “  where he also added

“Discussions are continuing with HMRC to establish a resolution to the assessments raised.”

This could be taken as disputing the liability but In fact the resolution to the assessments raised would have been payment of the actual liability, something that never happened.

In the Sion case it was accepted the misleading statement was a one off misrepresentation, but at the monitoring stages at June 2011 in Ranger’s case the status of the liability continued to be misrepresented and in September the continuing discussions reason was repeated, along with a claim of an instalment paid whose veracity is highly questionable.

The Swiss FL Licensing Committee did at least refer the case to their Disciplinary Committee when they realised a misleading statement might have been made. The SFA however in August 2011, when Sherriff Officers called at Ibrox for payment of the overdue tax , did no such thing and pulled up the drawbridge for six years, one that the Compliance Officer is now finally charged with lowering.

 


 

The case of FC Irtysh of Kazakhstan is set out in full at http://tiny.cc/y9sxsy  and is a bit more straightforward but is nevertheless useful to compare with events in 2011 in Scotland.

Unlike Rangers FC , FC Irtysh properly disclosed that they had an overdue payable to the Kazakhstan tax authorities at the monitoring point at 30th June 2017. This caused the CFCB Investigatory Unit to seek further information with regard to the position at 31st March

It transpired that Irtysh had declared an overdue payable at 31st March but cited their financial position (awaiting sponsor money) as a reason for non payment to the Kazakhstan FA who accepted it and granted the licence. The outstanding tax was paid in September 2107.

The outcome of the CFCB Investigation was a case put to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber  who agreed with the CFCB Investigation Unit that a licence should not have been granted and recommended that Irtysh be fined the equivalent of the UEFA prize money, (that had been withheld in any case whilst CFCB investigated.)

The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber however decided that a fine was not sufficient in sporting deterrent terms and ruled that:

 

  1.  FC Irtysh failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 50bis(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the FFK not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
  2. To withhold four hundred and forty thousand Euros (€440,000) corresponding to the UEFA revenues FC Irtysh gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
  3. To exclude FC Irtysh from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next three (3) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19, 2019/20 and 2020/21 seasons). This sanction is deferred for a probationary period of (3) three years. This exclusion must be enforced in case the Club participates again in a UEFA club competition having not fulfilled the licence criteria required to obtain the UEFA licence in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
  4. FC Irtysh is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings. “

 

The deferral was because unlike Rangers FC,  FC Irtysh had properly disclosed to the licensor the correct & accurate financial information required, so the exclusion was deferred for a probationary period of (3) years.

 

Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.

From the foregoing it could be deduced that had Rangers FC qualified for the Champions League (or European League) and not gone bust as a result and so not entered liquidation BUT it became public knowledge by 2012 that a licence had been wrongly and possibly fraudulently granted then

  1. Rangers would have been fined the equivalent of their earnings from their participation in the UEFA competitions in 2011
  2. At least a two year ban from UEFA Competitions would have been imposed, but more likely three in view of repeated incorrect statements.
  3. The consequences of both would have been as damaging for Rangers survival as the real life consequences of losing to Malmo and Maribor in the qualifying rounds of the Champions and European Leagues.

Karma eh!

Interestingly in the UEFA COMPLIANCE AND INVESTIGATION ACTIVITY REPORT 2015 – 2017 , the CFCB investigatory chamber recommended that both the Kazakhstan FA and Swiss FA as licensors

“pay particular attention to the adequate disclosure of the outstanding amounts payable towards other football clubs, in respect of employees and towards social/tax authorities, which must be disclosed separately;

Would the same recommendation apply to the Scottish FA with regard to their performance in 2011 and will the  SFA responses thereafter to shareholders in a member club be examined for compliance with best governance practice by the SFA Compliance Officer investigating the processing of the UEFA Licence in 2011?

This would be a welcome step in fully restoring trust in the SFA.

Auldheid

Auldheid

Celtic fan from Glasgow living mostly in Spain. A contributor to several websites, discussion groups and blogs, and a member of the Resolution 12 Celtic shareholders' group. Committed to sporting integrity, good governance, and the idea that football is interdependent. We all need each other in the game.

4,355 Comments
  1. fan of football


    LM2

    Any thoughts on D murray yet

    View Comment
  2. TheLawMan2


    FOF. He took far too many gambles. He was all about the status and selfish. The EBT schemes were an incredibly poor business decision but without them he would have just borrowed more. 

    He 99.999 % knew about Whytes past but given the 3vidence at the trial I don’t believe he knew about Ticketus.

    Was all about the ego. 

    View Comment
  3. Cluster One

    Cluster One


    The EBT schemes were an incredibly poor business decision but without them he would have just borrowed more. 
    —————-
    Would borrowing more not also have been an incredibly poor business decision ?
    The interest alone would have crippled him/the club/company thing.

    View Comment
  4. bfbpuzzled


    Lawman
    Sorry I am not going into such details, no need.
    Bigboab, there is more openness than before but some things remain secrets available only to initiates.
    The connection to stone masons is bogus among the modern Masonic organisations despite their tools and initial degrees, it is a phenomenon of the enlightenment using old stories to give the impression of antiquity-something like a new football club in Glasgow.
    Mormomism is a manifestation of freemasonry with the secret signs it uses and more.
    Homunculus
    From what I used to hear from a member of the Speculative Society they seem more interested in gossiping and maintaining the right to burn coal and candles in their premises than other more sinister activities.

    View Comment
  5. Cluster One

    Cluster One


    Attachment

    Was all about the ego. 
    ———–
    From 6 years ago tomorrow.

    View Comment
  6. tony

    tony


    it’s like east kilbride on here recently,we keep going in circles

    View Comment
  7. Stan


    The old club new club debate is the same as flat earth versus round earth, The facts are obvious. This forum is not worth reading if the mods are going to allow all this continuous noise. If it must be debated, setup a new post . A few years ago, if you even tried to discuss this, the mods would remove your post. This forum may be short of RFC posters but that does not mean the forum should abandon moderation. It feels like an attempt to derail the site and its doing a good job.

    View Comment
  8. TheLawMan2


    STANJUNE 13, 2018 at 21:22
    The old club new club debate is the same as flat earth versus round earth, 
    ————-
    Where is this being debated Stan? 

    View Comment
  9. fan of football


    THELAWMAN2JUNE 13, 2018 at 20:54
    0
    1 Rate This
    FOF. He took far too many gambles. He was all about the status and selfish. The EBT schemes were an incredibly poor business decision but without them he would have just borrowed more. 
    He 99.999 % knew about Whytes past but given the 3vidence at the trial I don’t believe he knew about Ticketus.
    Was all about the ego. 
    =======================================================
    Thanks again 

    I must say I am a little surprised by your response to the two questions TBH 
    You state clearly your dislike for CW and what he did whilst in control of the club ,yet you seem very reserved ,even mitigating in your response of DMs control of the club .

    If I ever found myself in conversation with a ragers 1872 supporter about what went on in the past ,I always made it my point to ask if they thought EBTs were legitimate loans or payments to players for kicking a football around a football park .
    The answer of course is easy 
    they were payments to players for kicking a football around the park .simple and a very easy reply for someone who is not being biased towards their football team but able to take the emotion out of the situation and make a truthful and honest statement .

    If their reply was anything other than the above then I knew then and there that there was no point at all in continuing the conversation with them 

    Because I knew they were not being truthful not only to me but also to themselves .

    There may be legitimate EBTs as you state but for you to say you thought it was a legitimate ATTEMPT  at tax avoidance ,knowing as you surely do  of the existence of side letters beggars belief .

    If you find it so hard to be truthful about the cheating that took place at your club how do you expect people to listen to you when you make a point on any subject concerning this whole debacle .

    I,m afraid that it seems to me that you are more concerned with trying to explain the ways ragers 1872 got around following the rules than you were of them actually playing by the rules .

      

    View Comment
  10. TheLawMan2


    You are entitled to your opinion. Back in the day it was a trade. Lots of pockets of tax advisors sprung up and told their prospective clients how to get round it.

    They convinced bigger business men than Murray.  I know it’s often forgotten but remember that irrespective of the end result 5 of the people who saw all the evidence agreed it was legitimate tax avoidance. 

    That suggests to me that it most certainly wasn’t black and white though I 100% agree it’s wrong.  I also stated before the first case we would lose it.  I was surprised as anyone when we won the first 2.  I wasn’t surprised with the final outcome.

    Is it not enough for me to say they were a huge gamble, a huge risk and a huge mistake.  

    As for Whyte. You’re right my hatred towards that rat of a man is far greater than Murray or King or any other board member.

    View Comment
  11. John Clark


    Higgy’s Shoes June 13, 2018 at 13:14 “As BPuzzled says, to be a mason one has to believe in one God (Monotheism).Therefore Christians (Of all sects), Jews and Muslims theoretically could join the Masons.Hindus inter alia could not.’
    _____________
    I give you this, Higgy’s Shoes, not in contradiction, but by way of dditional information:

    ” The first Hindu initiation was that of a Jain which took place on 1st December 1849 but the V.S.L [volumes of sacred law]used is not stated. ……..The first Hindu to attain the Eastern chair was Prosonno Coomar Dutt, in Lodge ‘Anchor and Hope’, No 234, Calcutta , in 1874.’
    ( 1967 year book of the ‘Grand Lodge of Antient Free and Accepted Masons of Scotland’, article by Brother W.G.Miller, Past District Grand Master,Eastern India) .

    Other than having purchased the cited year-book (second-hand, in a West Port book shop on 5th May 1981) I have no connection with the craft!  

    My eye, on re-reading the ‘year book’, was caught by a reference to the ‘antient penalty’ for revealing the Mason Word (namely, having ‘the tongue cut away’ )having been replaced by the moral punishment of being branded  ‘a wilfully perjured individual, void of all moral worth…’

    Made me think of one or two people in Scottish football , freemasons or not, who might deserve to suffer that penalty!08

    View Comment
  12. Bogs Dollox


    Lawman
    How can you hate Whyte more than Murray when it was DM who was responsible for the liquidation and death of your club? You’re not making sense but you are ruining this blog.

    View Comment
  13. Helpumoot


    FFS. The trouble with trolling is that you have to have a good memory. Lawman was on here last week making the (ludicrous) claim that he had a list of all masons in the world. Whit? How indiscreet of them! Now they are shadowy figures in the background, so secret that not even their own families know. Which is it?
    Im also loving all this glossy self-portrait stuff he’s coming out with. People who are respected, and who respect themselves, have no need to tell anyone how respected they are.
    Time for him to be kicked into touch.

    View Comment
  14. easyJambo


    TheLawMan2 June 13, 2018 at 21:58
    They convinced bigger business men than Murray. I know it’s often forgotten but remember that irrespective of the end result 5 of the people who saw all the evidence agreed it was legitimate tax avoidance.
    :
    :
    Is it not enough for me to say they were a huge gamble, a huge risk and a huge mistake.
    ==========================
    By my reckoning only 3 accepted RFC’s position, Mure, Rae and Doherty.

    You could go further by accepting that Murray/Murray group/RFC adopted a position of non cooperation, obfuscation, obstruction, delays, denials and lies throughout HMRC’s investigations (since January 2004) and the individuals involved in such actions deserved more severe sanctions.

    View Comment
  15. TheLawMan2


    HELPUMOOTJUNE 13, 2018 at 22:28
    FFS. The trouble with trolling is that you have to have a good memory. Lawman was on here last week making the (ludicrous) claim that he had a list of all masons in the world. 
    ———————-
    I guess sarcasm is lost on you. 10

    View Comment
  16. TheLawMan2


    EJ. I’m only commenting on the set up of EBTs as asked. Not the wider piece.

    View Comment
  17. bigboab1916

    bigboab1916


    I asked what i thought was a group of masons what the G stood for on the ring and ties they were wearing, they replied Gerrard, at that instance i knew king had them once again by the balls.
    04

    View Comment
  18. paddy malarkey

    paddy malarkey


    My tuppenceworth .
    I know 1 referee and know he is a mason – he doesn’t hide it . So 100% of the referees I know are masons . I know four policepersons personally , and 1 defo is , 1 is suspect , and the other two are definitely not masons . So between 25% an 50% of policepersons I know are masons . 
    How many refs are we talking about here , and does 26 make it a big percentage ?
    World Cup starts tomorrow and we’re not there (again) .

    View Comment
  19. bigboab1916

    bigboab1916


    As for Whyte. You’re right my hatred towards that rat of a man is far greater than Murray or King or any other board member.

    Thats amazing you would think murray had not intended the scam or that he was whiter than White, but i do not recalll White’s father or family ever been involved in tax scamming, unlike Mr Murray.
    And surely you would hate king more for insisting on a boycott of a CVA, White was setup and King saw an oppurtunity to take the club down in Admin to liquidation.
    Suppose all fans of the old club need a patsy to hide the shame of been duped.

    View Comment
  20. John Clark


    TheLawMan2June 13, 2018 at 21:58
    ‘…As for Whyte. You’re right my hatred towards that rat of a man is far greater than Murray or King or any other board member.’
    ___________________________
    Whatever about Whyte, the principal sporting cheat deserves much more censure from us as believers in football as a competitive sport to be played by all the rules.

    SDM , whether he cheated the taxman or not ( and it’s clear that he knew there was something dodgy because when he for a  falsified the returns to the SFA and the then SPFL to disguise the true level of remuneration he was paying players that he could not otherwise afford, he felt it necessary to hide the secret side-letters, which reassured players that what their official paycheque said was only pat of their pay!

    The intent to cheat and deceive was there.

    The man is a disgrace-and deserves the penalty referred to in my immediately previous post.

    And  the fact that that cheating under the rules of both the SFA and SPL was not punished as such a decade long, serial crime of fielding ineligible players ought to have been suggests to me that there are people in football governance who also deserve the penalty mentioned in my immediately previous post:

    as well as more tangible penalties, such as being hunted out of football governance entirely, and, possibly, in some cases, imprisonment!

    Your readiness to hate the monkey rather than  the organ grinder does you no credit.

    Whyte was, is, a nothing.

    SDM was Mr Billy Bigbaws, honoured with a knighthood, loaned money by the tens of millions without serious question by the star-struck/sycophantic Bank of Scotland, fawned over by succulent lamb eaters in the SMSM……..

    If you were to hate any man, he is the one you should rationally target.

    For us on this blog, even he is a side-issue: our target is the very Governance body (or, indeed, bodies) which allowed such monumental cheating to go virtually unpunished: and which allows a lie to lie at the very heart of Scottish Football, as if to rub in their support for the cheating.

    Even bi-polar Burns ( helpfully kept in a job by his Mason patron!) might have had something scathing to say of the SFA.

    And he would certainly have written powerfully about the little men of the SMSM ( except, maybe, he wouldn’t mention any Level of a PR outfit).

    View Comment
  21. easyJambo


    TheLawMan2 June 13, 2018 at 22:35
    EJ. I’m only commenting on the set up of EBTs as asked. Not the wider piece.
    ===========================
    That’s an odd claim when your previous sentence covered the whole EBT period.

    I 100% agree it’s wrong. I also stated before the first case we would lose it. I was surprised as anyone when we won the first 2. I wasn’t surprised with the final outcome.

    View Comment
  22. JustTheFacts


    Anyone who joins a Secret Society should not be trusted with a role which has influence.
    They are inherently selfish,morally corrupt individuals in my opinion.
    Real men stand alone,seek open,honest relationships and pursuits.

    Fuqtards.

    View Comment
  23. Haywire


    I am stunned that most of the normal bloggers on here are actually engaging with the bad guys, such as Steepike (Lawman2) or Slimjim (possibly alternative Steerpike).  Despite these paid charlatans posing as defending the (not quite) just, they are only struggling to excuse the indefensible.
    Don’t engage!

    View Comment
  24. JustTheFacts


    Rangers did not operate these schemes as they were intended.
    How many of these “Loans” to date have been paid back?
    Trying to justify their use at Rangers is like trying to justify taking out a savings plan for your new born child then proceeding to blow the money on Cocaine at the weekends.
    Either way you are defo off your thrupny bits in attempting to do so.

    View Comment
  25. jimbo

    jimbo


    The Vatican has stated quite clearly, you cannot be a Catholic Mason.  It is mutually exclusive.  You can only be one or the other.   Other Christian faiths should take heed.  The Pope does not say that lightly.

    View Comment
  26. jimbo

    jimbo


    This is what love is.  Brotherhood.

    To send donations abroad, to people you will never meet.  For medical help.  For food.  For shelter. 

    Even more, like Brogan Rogan,  to actually go out there and phsycally help build kitchens.

    Closer to home,  to help fill the gaps where the State cant provide to our needy.

    What Brotherhood isn’t :  is cheating , colluding to help each other along for the worst of reasons.  Fixing results.  Having a fixation with one disgusting football club.  Feeling proud of it and shaking each others hands.  Pats on the back.  Superiority delussions.

    The later makes me sick.

    View Comment
  27. jimbo

    jimbo


    And just in case any of you think I’m a hypocrite because I defend Lawman and the other bears on here, this:

    Love the sinner.  Hate the sin.

    View Comment
  28. John Clark


    HaywireJune 13, 2018 at 22:49
    ‘….Despite these paid charlatans posing as defending the (not quite) just, they are only struggling to excuse the indefensible.’
    ______________
    The trouble is, Haywire, is that, as has been clear to me at least, there still are people reading this blog now, who were not reading it before- and who have not the background knowledge that we have!

    What we ( i.e. readers of everything since RTC days) have to be aware of is that anytime a falsehood, or a misleading half-argument, or a diversionary tactic, [I think of one professor at Edinburgh University who tried to get Regan off the hook by telling the audience that 'this is just a west of Scotland inter-fan rivalry, banter kind of thing'] it has to be nailed for what it is, endlessly if need be.  

    History has shown that every element of a lie, every specious argument justifying that lie, has got to be demolished by truthful evidence, right from the off, if the lie is not to be accepted as truth by the casual listener.

    For example, for the benefit of new readers:
    Rangers Football Club , founded in 1872, is in Liquidation. It lost its entitlement to participate in Scottish professional Football, ipso facto.

    A new club was created. It applied for membership of a league, as a precondition of membership of the SFA.

    It was denied membership of the then SPL. And of the then SFL Divisions One and Two.

    It started its football playing life as some kind of ‘conditional’ member of the SFA, having to ask the permission of the Administrators of the Rangers Football Club of 1872 for permission to use some of the players whose registrations were still with that club.

    That ‘conditional member’, otherwise known as ‘Club 12’ in the fixtures list, changed its name to ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’. 

    It is not, and cannot be legally, commercially, or under football governance rules, Rangers Football Club of 1872.

    The assertion by the Football authorities that it is, is a lie. An intentional lie, just as SDM’s lies about what he was paying his players was intentional.

    So, if we don’t nail the trolls, and the deniers, and those who are quite happy to defend a monstrous lie, they might win the battle. 

    We have actual truth on our side. 

    We will win, because the general run of football club owners, directors, and supporters know the truth.

    And know the longer term price of disregarding truth. 

    A price that SDM still has to pay in full, bad cess to him.

    View Comment
  29. PLGlen

    PLGlen


    HAYWIREJUNE 13, 2018 at 22:49 10 0 Rate This
    I am stunned that most of the normal bloggers on here are actually engaging with the bad guys, such as Steepike (Lawman2) or Slimjim (possibly alternative Steerpike). Despite these paid charlatans posing as defending the (not quite) just, they are only struggling to excuse the indefensible.Don’t engage!
    ———-
    Other than not liking what they say, do you have any evidence that these posters are being paid for their contributions on this blog?

    View Comment
  30. John Clark


    PLGlenJune 13, 2018 at 23:38
    _______
    You were posting your post more or less at the same time as I posted mine of 23.37.

    You will by now have seen mine. 

    I have not seen any previous post from you. Are you new on the scene?

    Would you be a ‘denier’, or a supporter of football integrity, or just acting the quasi-legal goat?

    Unless the PR people of the RIFC plc are even more stupid than I think they are, they will be trolling on any blog that that exposes the big lie!

    And trolling as ineffectively as  they handle their pressers!08
    And being paid nevertheless for their ineffectiveness!

    View Comment
  31. Billydug

    Billydug


    PLGLENJUNE 13, 2018 at 23:38
    One poster on here stated he was away on business for 2 weeks but he’s been posting on here and Twitter non stop.

    View Comment
  32. PLGlen

    PLGlen


    JOHN CLARKJUNE 14, 2018 at 00:08—
    I’m sure BP and Auldheid would be able to confirm that they have PM’s from me going back some time (from memory they may have been when my log in was simply TheGlen. The one with BP was in respect of a Standard Security over a football stadium, the one with Auldheid was about a football discussion in Edinburgh, which I was unable to attend, unfortunately – a few years ago).

    I also posted on RTC.

    Why would any of that matter though?

    I must admit that I’m surprised that seemingly new posters have to express their beliefs regards Scottish football matters before their posts are considered. I don’t see that happening to any of the “long time lurkers” that occasionally turn up here.

    My understanding was that it’s an open forum, open to fans of all clubs. Therefore any limited contribution I make should be based on its own merit, not judged by any preconceptions based and answers to your questions?

    View Comment
  33. Cluster One

    Cluster One


    JOHN CLARKJUNE 13, 2018 at 23:37
    The trouble is, Haywire, is that, as has been clear to me at least, there still are people reading this blog now, who were not reading it before- and who have not the background knowledge that we have!
    ——————–
    Speaking to an ibrox supporter friend the other day.
    About the compliance officer stepping down i got a “Yes king has won another court case”
    My reply.This was not a court case and king has not won many cases in the courts he has been it.
    “Aye he has his sights on all of Lawwell’s lacey’s and is picking them off one by one”
    ———
    With that kind of level5 brain numbing effect on the ibrox support i don’t hold out much hope for them.

    View Comment
  34. fan of football


    THELAWMAN2JUNE 13, 2018 at 21:58
    I certainly am entitled to my opinion and you ,yours .
    I see I seemed to have touched a nerve regards CW ,so much so that you call him a rat for what he did to your club .

    What exactly did he do to your club that creates such a reaction from you and your fellow bears .

    Surely D Murray did far more damage than CW ever did .

    it can’t be that he killed your club as every  sevco 2012 supporters I  know tells me the club never died

    In fact should he not be honoured by you and your fellow bears for being the man who made all that bad debt and tax stuff disappear  leaving you as the only club in britain that was debt free as boasted by charles green .

    Or maybe it,s because he never won you any cups or leagues as it seems that no matter what serious damage you do to a clubs long term health as long as it ends in titles and cups then WATP and your the head RRM.

    For a man who claims to not be swayed and gives an honest opinion even if it upsets his fellow supporters .I m afraid your reaction to the two simple questions posed leads me to believe the very opposite .

    You are pushing against the wind in trying to find any way possible to try and condone the actions of D murray at ragers 1872 but never fear you have the full might of the SFA and MSM behind you giving it their all so keep up the good work .

    Myself and a few others will be pushing the other way clean the game up 

    May the best man win 

    View Comment
  35. Cluster One

    Cluster One


    Or maybe it,s because he never won you any cups or leagues
    I may be wrong but did they not win the league when he was there.Kind of remember some grumbles about him raising the flag when it should have been JG.
    Not had coffee yet so could be wrong

    View Comment
  36. fan of football


    cluster 
    I believe CW took over 6 may 2011 and the season finished on the 15th so may be a bit of a stretch to say he won them the league but you are of course correct 

    View Comment
  37. Homunculus

    Homunculus


    Cluster One
    June 14, 2018 at 06:54
    ==================================

    It would be interesting to compare the battles Dave King has won to those he has lost.

    I think the most lauded “victory” is that which was claimed against Mike Ashley. For people only to discover via amongst other things the audited accounts that the club had to pay Ashley £3m to “normalise” the merchandising arrangement, Club 1872 (if I remember correctly) had to buy Ashley out of a loss making business, Ashley is still connected to the merchandising and still controls the online megastore.

    It kind of reminds me of the Nimmo Smith “victory” when the former club were found guilty on all charges. Or King’s own victory against SARS, when he pled guilty to 42 criminal charges.

    I think I understand it actually. Victory is not based on winning or losing, it is based on the severity of the sentence, or loss.

    Can anyone bring up an instance where Dave King has had what other people may consider a victory. I would be interested to have a look behind the propaganda to see what actual victories he has had and what positive effect they have had on the club.

    View Comment
  38. Homunculus

    Homunculus


    On Craig Whyte, I think they have to demonise him as a great deal of the argument is that it wasn’t Rangers who stole the Tax, NI and VAT leading to adminsitration and liquidation. It was in fact Craig Whyte who did it. In spite of the fact that the amounts were due from Rangers, not him personally.

    In doing that you can stop seeing the club as being involved in stealing tax on a massive scale and instead play the role of the victim. Woe is me, the devil incarnate stole our club, stole the tax we collected and led to the club being put down.

    So much easier to believe you are a victim than that you followed an institution that stole and cheated for years, and that all of the “success” you based your self-worth on was built on lies.

    In order to be a victim there has to be a villain. Whyte could almost have been designed to play that part. If you were having auditions to fill the role of Craig Whyte you would pick Craig Whyte.

    Better to ignore everything which happened before Whyte, inconvenient truths and so forth. Blame it all on him and move on.

    View Comment
  39. Darkbeforedawn


    I’ve been so busy with home and work life recently I’ve barely had time to come on here, but by scrolling through this morning it does not appear I have missed much! Slow news month, and lot of going in circles appear to have affected the blog a bit.
    A few points I would add to the various topics above. Firstly on EBT’s, there can be no doubt Murray used those as an aggressive tax avoidance strategy (he used it across his whole business). I think it is less a case of did he think they were illegal, but could he get away with it. Of course any scheme that requires secret side letters is going to be at odds with HMRC. The question asked would not have been ‘are these legal’, but ‘will I get away with it?’. He gambled with Rangers for the sake of his ego. Where I disagree with a lot on here, I think it should be Murray personally who has to pay the fines that the players are due to recieve. I know there is no provision of this in British law, but I feel he is far more responsible than the players who would have taken advice from their accountants.

    Would Rangers have had the same success without the EBT’s? Personally I feel we would have, as Murray would have borrowed even more from the banks or from other people. We may have gone under a year or so sooner, but at the end of the day the ego was too big to watch Celtic continue to win so Murray would have begged, borrowed or stole money from elsewhere.

    Craig Whyte and David Murray are two sides of the same coin. Both have huge ego’s, both wanted to be seen as a celebrity chairman who could bring success, and both were reckless in the quest for it. I have no more dislike for one over the other.

    I feel unfortunately we are sleepwalking into the same scenario yet again under King who appears to have every single one of the traits of his predecessors. It would appear the season ticket money has already been spent and we aren’t even into pre-season!

    Finally, to the posters above complaining about the NC/OC debate, I have been the fiercest critic for going over and over this topic but to be fair I havent seen it discussed much of late (thankfully). But I have always championed a separate forum for this. Lawman, myself and the likes can make our points clear a final time and can be challenged by anyone else. At least that way when I get asked the same continuous questions that I feel I have answered time and time before I can just direct it back to that forum.
    Hope everyone else is doing well, and a shout out to Jimbo 02

    View Comment
  40. joes11


    DarkbeforedawnJune 14, 2018 at 08:47
    Would Rangers have had the same success without the EBT’s? Personally I feel we would have, as…………..
    ………….………………………………………………..
    Oh, for goodness sake! 
    Totally irrelevant!
    Would Lance Armstrong have had the same success without the drugs? Personally I feel he would have, as……..
    Lance Armstrong DID use drugs – Rangers DID use EBTs.

    View Comment
  41. Helpumoot


    Homunculus, the noticeable thing about King’s ‘victory’ over Ashley was that after all the sycophantic drivel in the Press, as you say, it came out that he had paid £3m to Ashley (and that parts of the original deal remained unchanged.)
    Now we are told that they have sold the naming rights of their training ground to Hummel but a deafening silence with the – how much? My guess is, not much. Otherwise why hide the information? Again.
    In answer to your question about King’s victories, a good rule of thumb would be: if the enquiry/investigation/hearing/court case takes place outside of Scotland – he loses. If it’s in Scotland – he wins.
    The exception that proves the rule would be the USA issuing him with a visa. Because how the corrupt criminal pulled that one off, beats me. Perhaps he told a few porkies on his application form.

    View Comment
  42. Helpumoot


    The whole Hummel deal seems a bit bizarre. Sevco were quick to respond to shrieks of, “Is that the new tap?!” when one of their latest acquisitions was photographed in a Hummel Rangers strip. They claimed it wasn’t the new strip, it was just a training top. Hummel sent them a box of training strips? I wonder what the chances are that when the new top is unveiled, it will be that one?
    And the tops won’t be available to purchase until when? Why? Does Ashley make anything out of this?

    View Comment
  43. Ex Ludo

    Ex Ludo


    Homunculus, I’ve always thought that Steve Buscemi would play Craig Whyte in the biopic.

    View Comment
  44. Homunculus

    Homunculus


    Helpumoot
    June 14, 2018 at 09:32
    In answer to your question about King’s victories, a good rule of thumb would be: if the enquiry/investigation/hearing/court case takes place outside of Scotland – he loses. If it’s in Scotland – he wins.
    ==============================

    Forgive me, the memory is going, what victories has he had in Scotland.

    I know he called for a CVA to be rejected and that happened, leading to the club being liquidated. I know he called for people to hold back season ticket money (even offered to have it rest in his account if memory serves) and that led to the shares dropping to such a level that he and his concert party could buy 34% of the PLC.

    However actual victories, against people other than Rangers (old club and new), I really can’t think of any.

    View Comment
  45. Bogs Dollox


    Firstly on EBT’s, there can be no doubt Murray used those as an aggressive tax avoidance strategy (he used it across his whole business). I think it is less a case of did he think they were illegal, but could he get away with it. Of course any scheme that requires secret side letters is going to be at odds with HMRC. The question asked would not have been ‘are these legal’, but ‘will I get away with it?’. He gambled with Rangers for the sake of his ego==========

    SDM would have had a clear warning from the scheme provider backed up by tax counsels opinion that the scheme would be challenged by HMRC and it was therefore important that they followed instructions to the letter when implementing and administering the scheme. The use of side letters was a big no no but he recklessly used them which is why the scheme failed. He knew full well they weren’t legal.
    The scheme was required to finance a better standard of player to win things. It did but in doing so the need to keep the side letters secret broke football registration rules. I seriously doubt Murray was willing to fund success with his own money or the banks because at that time there were easy and better returns to be had from property investments etc

    View Comment
  46. Helpumoot


    Homunculus, King won a rather major victory when he paid Hampden a visit, secretly, but when outed claimed it was just a courtesy visit since he happened to be in town.
    With the help of his courtesy visits to his friends at Hampden he has managed to act as a chairman of a football club while being utterly unfit and unproper to do so. None of what he has been doing would have been possible had the SFA done their job.

    View Comment
  47. bfbpuzzled


    Wee subtext from the Lawman there along the lines of we only lost the EBT case on away goals after winning it at the earlier rounds
    King has lost at the Court of Session -twice. The Spec boys must have been away on a Charabanc tour of the 18th Century that week (if that conspiracy theory is correct)

    Ps Russell Hunter should play Craig Whyte in the bio pic reprising his Callan character (albeit he is no longer with us as per RFC)

    View Comment
  48. slimjim


    HELPUMOOT 09.53
    It’s clearly a training top with a space on the right side of the chest for the players initials/number
    Contract with SD runs to 31/07 iirc so unlikely to be out before then.
    Apparently JD Sports will be the new retail partner replacing SD.

    View Comment
  49. Ex Ludo

    Ex Ludo


    Craig Whyte played by “Lonely” ?, works for me. Yes, I do still remember watching Callan in black and white.

    View Comment
  50. Jingso.Jimsie

    Jingso.Jimsie


    The last time we had a go at ‘Who could play Whyte’?, I suggested James McPherson from Taggart.

    What about:

    Alex Norton as Jim Traynor.

    John Michie as Walter Smith.

    Colin McRedie as Dave King.

    …and, of course, Blythe Duff as Ally McCoist 061015 

    View Comment
  51. JustTheFacts


    JINGSO.JIMSIEJUNE 14, 2018 at 11:39
    The last time we had a go at ‘Who could play Whyte’?, I suggested James McPherson from Taggart.
    What about:
    Alex Norton as Jim Traynor.
    John Michie as Walter Smith.
    Colin McRedie as Dave King.
    …and, of course, Blythe Duff as Ally McCoist   
    =================================
    Such a shame Marty Feldman has passed he would have made a fantastic Dave King.
    ”Abi Normal”

    View Comment
  52. Higgy's Shoes


    JOHN CLARKJUNE 13, 2018 at 22:06
    Higgy’s Shoes June 13, 2018 at 13:14 “As BPuzzled says, to be a mason one has to believe in one God (Monotheism).Therefore Christians (Of all sects), Jews and Muslims theoretically could join the Masons.Hindus inter alia could not.’_____________I give you this, Higgy’s Shoes, not in contradiction, but by way of dditional information:……….

    Thanks for that John.

    I must admit I assumed Hindus would be barred as they are not of a Monotheistic faith.
    It was my father, himself a mason, who told me that the overriding qualification for entry was a belief in a singular Almighty. So that was me out (or more correctly, not in). Not that that was the only reason for not joining.
    HS

    View Comment
  53. torrejohnbhoy


    bfbpuzzledJune 14, 2018 at 11:17
    Wee subtext from the Lawman there along the lines of we only lost the EBT case on away goals after winning it at the earlier rounds
    ——————————
    Maybe wrong,I’m in Bus Pass territory so powers of recall are not what they once were but here goes.
    At the 1st EBT hearing RFC(IL) pled guilty to at least 5 charges.They admitted guilt but the MSM called this a victory as it was only 5 out of 80 odd.How many times do you need to cheat before you become a cheat,In my world,it’s once.
    At the 1st appeal,IIRC the judges found RFC(IL) guilty of at least another 13 charges.So RFC(IL) were now guilty on 18 charges,not 5.However,as the judgement didn’t cover all EBTs,RFC(IL) through their friends in the MSM claimed another victory,although guilty verdicts were now 18 against 5.I’m pretty sure that most would agree that if you go to into court guilty on 5 counts & leave guilty on 18,it’s not been a good day!.
    Although RFC(IL) claimed this as a victory,HMRC also claimed it as a win but in their statement called it a partial victory & would be appealing again.We know how the story ended.

    View Comment
  54. Ex Ludo

    Ex Ludo


    https://www.lastditchtackle.com/blog/rangers-fans-splash-the-cash-on-agent-of-pope-t-shirt
    You wait 6 years for an orange top to be revealed and then all your dreams come true. Fair warning, it’s not by Hummel.

    View Comment
  55. jockybhoy


    JOES11 JUNE 14, 2018 at 09:32

    Would Lance Armstrong have had the same success without the drugs? Personally I feel he would have, as……..Lance Armstrong DID use drugs – Rangers DID use EBTs

    and they BOTH did it for sporting advantage….

    View Comment
  56. ThomTheThim

    ThomTheThim


    I do believe that continued discussion of EBTs is a deflection from the current issue arising from it.
    Storm Hector the First, which hit six years ago, and the Supreme Court answered the question of their legality, and is currently pursuing retribution.
    The issue now is that the non declaration of the side contracts and the side letters which underpinned them, is, possibly, the greatest example of cheating in world sport.
    This scandal envelops the 1872 club and the SFA and is the reason for the epidemic of trollery which is swamping the blogs.
    I see that the cavalry, in the form of disingenuous DBD, has been called in.
    It seems strange that when one deflector is exposed, another pops back on the scene.
    I would imagine that by now their puppet masters would be alive to the reality that they have shot their bolt and are more of a hindrance than a help to The Cause.
    I’m off to watch the opening ceremony of a totally honest celebration of football, under the auspices of the shining light of probity, FIFA’s World Cup.
       

    View Comment
  57. wottpi


    JOES11JUNE 14, 2018 at 09:32
    48   1 Rate This
    DarkbeforedawnJune 14, 2018 at 08:47Would Rangers have had the same success without the EBT’s? Personally I feel we would have, as…………..………….………………………………………………..Oh, for goodness sake! Totally irrelevant!Would Lance Armstrong have had the same success without the drugs? Personally I feel he would have, as……..Lance Armstrong DID use drugs – Rangers DID use EBTs.

    ——————————————————————————————

    I must admit it is posts like this that give me difficulties with the site from time to time.

    To me DBD makes some reasonable points with regards to SDM, Whyte and King and where the new club is heading. The only real controversy in his post is regarding the olcd/co/newco issue which he has always made clear his emotional view of it being the same club but he goes on to support a separate forum, which many have been calling for.

    For this he ends up with 10 thumbs up but 32 down.

    Along comes Joes11 who only partially quotes DBD’s post  and its all 48 thumbs up for putting the boot in.

    DBD clearly says that he believes Rangers would have had the same success because he thinks SDM would simply have borrowed more money to make up the cash he was trying to save using EBTs.

    He then acknowledges that the club would have then most probably hit the skids earlier than 2012 due to such borrowing, but by that time he implies the trophies would have been in the bag, regardless. 
     
    If SDM had borrowed the money and, IIRC, there was no FFP protocols at that time to stop him, then nothing would have been illegal or untoward. Players would have been perfectly registered and no-one could have done a thing about it.

    Personally I think SDM would have had difficulty with getting access to additional borrowing but given all the ‘masonic conspiracies’ discussed in the last few days who knows what mates might have helped him out.

    Regardless of whether additional monies could have been accessed or not, the comparison of zealous and over-extended, but legitimate, borrowing of finance with drug dealing doesn’t really wash with me.

    Over extending borrowing = poor financial planning and corporate governance but not cheating, unless there is a breach of FFP rules (if they are in place).

    View Comment
  58. bigboab1916

    bigboab1916


    DarkbeforedawnJune 14, 2018 at 08:47″Craig Whyte and David Murray are two sides of the same coin. Both have huge ego’s,”

    Thats amazing sort of sums up the same blogger in here with the multiple names, i was also away for a while also but i am still me when i return.

    Craig White was brought in by Murray and thre rests the case, he was shown given the key to the kitty to pay the bank this kept the banks action legal.
    New owner pays debt bank out the loop and the creditors bumped, restart attempt CVA lose it liquidate rename companies and badge club as same and bump the creditors and fans , end off, gullible barstweards deserve evertyhing that comes their way.

    View Comment
  59. John Clark


    wottpiJune 14, 2018 at 15:07
    ‘…The only real controversy in his post is regarding the olcd/co/newco issue which he has always made clear his emotional view of it being the same club but he goes on to support a separate forum, which many have been calling for.’
    ___________________

    No, with respect, wottpi, what he is in effect calling for is that we should all accept that somehow Scottish Football is free to move on from the most disgraceful episode of a S[ports governance body creating a lie that destroys the very point and purpose of competitive sport. 

    To give the supporters of  liquidated football club some kind of belief that their club, unlike other clubs that have been liquidated is somehow  the same club as a six-year creation which is a wholly different legal and commercial entity, and to encourage the belief that the new creation has won all the honours and titles of the liquidated club is NOT something from which one can blithely move on.

    Sporting justice as well as criminal justice has to be done.
    Cheats must be penalised if sport is to mean anything, and the false claims of the new club to the record of achievement made by the liquidated club have to be dismissed as the wicked fabrication (possibly fraudulent!) that they are.

    Let DBD and others sign on to  different part of the forum if they wish to live in fantasy land.

    As far as I am concerned this blog I for nailing the liars and deceivers in both RIFC plc and the SFA at every twist and turn.

    View Comment
  60. bigboab1916

    bigboab1916


    Editor ran out whilst spell checking still you get the idea.

    View Comment
  61. joes11


    wottpiJune 14, 2018 at 15:07
    Along comes Joes11 who only partially quotes DBD’s post  and its all 48 thumbs up for putting the boot in.
    ………….………………………………………………………………………….
    I was not ‘putting the boot in’.
    I was expressing my exasperation at something said in a post that I believe to be totally missing the point; and the Lance Armstrong analogy was an attempt to make the point that I thought was missed.

    View Comment
  62. fan of football


    HOMUNCULUSJUNE 14, 2018 at 08:09
    IMO that is the very reason he was brought in 

    View Comment
  63. fan of football


    DBD
    A few points I would add to the various topics above. Firstly on EBT’s, there can be no doubt Murray used those as an aggressive tax avoidance strategy (he used it across his whole business). I think it is less a case of did he think they were illegal, but could he get away with it. Of course any scheme that requires secret side letters is going to be at odds with HMRC. The question asked would not have been ‘are these legal’, but ‘will I get away with it?’. He gambled with Rangers for the sake of his ego. Where I disagree with a lot on here, I think it should be Murray personally who has to pay the fines that the players are due to recieve. I know there is no provision of this in British law, but I feel he is far more responsible than the players who would have taken advice from their accountants.

    That is two posters that follow the teams from Ibrokes that have used practically the same phrase to attempt to mitigate what D Murray did at ragers 1872 

    an aggressive tax avoidance strategy , I,m sorry but IMO  the moment that the first side letter was issued this could never be described as such .

    The EBTs commenced in 2000 and the according to the BBC Christian Nerlinger received one in 2001 and they had proof he had a side letter .

    If true then can we dispense with the pretence of loans once and for all ,this was what it was ,why can’t you just accept it and deal with it .

    Can I hazard a guess as to why ,because to do so would mean that you would have to accept that the old club cheated and as someone earlier so aptly put it that would not fit the CW narrative one wee bit 

    The thing is as I see it this cheating could not have succeeded without the peepil running our game turning a blind eye to it all and that my friends is why we are all on blogs like this years later trying to prevent blind eyes being turned now and in the future .  

    View Comment
  64. fan of football


    BOGS DOLLOXJUNE 14, 2018 at 10:43
    SPOT ON 

    View Comment
  65. finnmccool

    finnmccool


    You have to laugh at the idea that Murray would just have borrowed the money if he had not used EBT’s.
    June 2004 the debt was £74 million.
    December 2004 £51 million is raised by a rights issue. The only trouble is, Murray paid for that. And where did the money come from?
    RBoS of course!
    So he borrowed and used EBT’s at the same time.
    That’s like Lance Armstrong not only cheating with drugs, but also using a motorbike.

    View Comment
  66. Cluster One

    Cluster One


    Attachment

    FAN OF FOOTBALLJUNE 14, 2018 at 17:21Of  Can I hazard a guess as to why ,because to do so would mean that you would have to accept that the old club cheated and as someone earlier so aptly put it that would not fit the CW narrative one wee bit.
    ——————————–
    Cheats or cheated June 13,2012.                                                                                              Of course they could let them back i while insisting the new club has to accept penalties for the behaviour of the old,especially if the SPL enquiry finds rangers guilty of issuing players dual contracts with their EBT’s
    ———
    Anyone remember how this SPL enquiry turned out?
    This article also has the famous jim traynor quote.
    The, no matter how charles Green attempts to dress it up,a newco equals a new club.
    Wonder if jim feels they still have to be punished for the cheating?

    View Comment
  67. fan of football


    SHUGJUNE 14, 2018 at 16:18
    WOW 
    Now if that is true ,we now get back into the realms of 2011/12  .

    There is an ongoing case to establish if ragers 1872 were given a chance to gain up to £20m from European football ,money it now seems that would have kept the very club alive .

    Now we have a situation were a new club run by people who were involved in the episode above seemingly gambling with the very existence of the club in the hope of earning millions from European football .

    The reason we find ourselves in this situation is because the peepil running our game didn’t bother to put rules in place to prevent something similar happening again .

    How many times have we heard that Scottish football needs a strong sevco 

    With that in mind ,would it be good for Scottish football if sevco 

    Finish in the top or bottom 6 
    Finish as high up the league as possible 
    get a long run in the LC 
    get a long run in the SC 
    Sound stupid ,of course it does  but there seems to be one club spending way beyond their means to achieve just that .

    What if they can’t achieve the above on their own steam ,what action would  the peepil running our game be prepared to take 
    FOR THE GOOD OF SCOTTISH FOOTBALL .
    by the way this should not even be a concern  

    View Comment
  68. fan of football


    CLUSTER ONEJUNE 14, 2018 at 17:43
    Oh the beauty of the tinternet 

    View Comment
  69. Cluster One

    Cluster One


    FAN OF FOOTBALLJUNE 14, 2018 at 18:00

    CLUSTER ONEJUNE 14, 2018 at 17:43Oh the beauty of the tinternet 
    ———–
    Or my own personal files02

    View Comment
  70. Highlander

    Highlander


    There’s been a fair bit of comment on here recently about the attribution of blame for the cheating and subsequent demise of Rangers.

    So, who was to blame? David Murray? Craig Whyte? Charles Green? Dave King? Oldco? Newco? Old club? New club? The SFA? The SPL? The SFL? Other clubs?

    The fact is, Rangers Football Club was to blameRangers cheatedRangers died a self-inflicted death. All the pontificating in the world won’t change that fact.

    But the Ibrox club and its fans don’t accept blame for anything. They never have and they never will. Everything is always someone else’s fault. Going through a list of potential guilty parties provides them with succour because it distances the football club, the villain of the piece, from the crime.

    In every other corner of planet football, a club lives and dies by the actions of its custodians and office bearers. Only in Govan does the arrogant and warped sense of entitlement lead to apportioning blame in their time-honoured tradition – a big boy did it and ran away.

    View Comment
  71. Portbhoy


    Jeezo, King is def. scraping the bottom o’ the barrel now, … 
    99p to watch the SG interview, an’ £18.72 for a cardboard cutout, …

    View Comment
  72. realshocks


    EX LUDOJUNE 14, 2018 at 11:33
    Callan seems a good call, but it has to be Rik Mayall. 

    View Comment
  73. Darkbeforedawn


    The idea of a separate forum is not to “move on” from the subject. I accept that most on here would not, and if I’m honest I’d probably be the same if the tables were turned and it was not my club! The idea of the separate board/forum whatever, is so that I can make my points in one place and any time the discussion comes up I can easily direct someone to that place instead of constantly repeating myself. And it could work out also, anytime that the likes of LM constantly repeats the same mantras and “facts” ad-infinite, they could be deleted from the main board to save us getting bogged down with them. 

    And i I do genuinely believe that Murray would have somehow found a way, either through friends from high places, or through fraudulent means to borrow the additional money that EBTs saved. The figure of tax found due (minus interest and fines) was actually not too high in comparison to the rediculous money he spent over the years. I think when he started feeling the pinch circa 2010/11 it may have expedited admin a season earlier at most. 

    And to the poster who made the point of multiple personalities/accounts, I hope that was in jest! 10. I like to think I have been fairly consistent and have my own style, and could never be accused of being on the wind up, like I personally feel a few of the “Rangers” supporting fans on here are. 

    View Comment

Leave a Reply

SSL Certificates